Archive By Date | Today's Links to Search By
-------- china
China against amending ABM
The Hindu
06/10/00
BEIJING, JUNE 9. China has warned the United States against seeking absolute military advantage over the rest of the world by attempting to amend the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) treaty of 1972, the official media reported today.
Though the U.S. has said it wants to revise the ABM treaty to protect itself from "missile threats" of the so-called rogue states, the real reason for the U.S. insistence is to seek an absolute military advantage over the rest of the world, China's top disarmament official, Mr. Sha Zukang, said.
Mr. Sha, director-general of the Chinese Foreign Ministry's Department of Disarmament and Arms Control, told Xinhua news agency that China opposed any revision of the ABM treaty.
"It is a clear and steadfast stand,'' he stressed while accusing Washington of selfishness in pressing Russia to agree to amend the ABM treaty.
The National Missile Defence (NMD) system would also serve as a kind of ``amplifier'' to the U.S. offensive forces and nullify the progress made in U.S.-Russia bilateral nuclear disarmament, Mr. Sha said. If the U.S. succeeded in its attempt to revise the treaty, an arms race in space would be inevitable, Mr. Sha said, stressing that the U.S. views the missile defence system as an important part of its plan to control space.
Under the U.S. plan, part of its missile defence system would be deployed in space and be targeted at space objects; and the other part of the system would be based in space for providing target and navigational information for ground weapons systems, he said.
If the plan was carried out, space would become a new weapons base and battlefield, he said.
Pointing out that the ABM treaty remained the cornerstone for global strategic balance and stability, Mr. Sha said revisions of treaty would undermine the global strategic balance and stability and seriously affect international peace and security.He said the ABM treaty between the U.S. and Russia, which restricted development and deployment of any national ballistic missile defence system, safeguarded the relative strategic balance and stability among the U.S., Russia and other nuclear weapons states.
- PTI
-------- depleted uranium
Comments on the History of Permissable Dose Standards
by Dr. Rosalie Bertell,
June 10, 2000
http://www.geocities.com/mothersalert/bertell2.html
In October 1945, after the US Occupation Force had taken over Japan, it was officially announced that there would be no more deaths at Hiroshima and Nagasaki due to the atomic bombs. Under the Occupation Force direction, no Japanese physicians or scientists were allowed to study the atomic bomb survivors, and no reporting about the survivors was allowed until the 1951 treaty was drawn up and signed in Tokyo.
In spite of these prohibitions and difficult circumstances, a Japanese Haematologist discovered the increase in leukemia among the survivors. It began within a year of the bombing. He reported this at a professional meeting and was roundly denounced by the US researchers in Hiroshima and Atomic Bomb Casualty Commissiion (now called the Radiation Effects Research Foundation).
The physician was sure he was right, and he persuaded a medical student to take two years off from his studies and document all of the atomic bomb victims with leukemia. This was a difficult job since they were being treated at many different hospitals. The student obtained blood slides for each patient and also verified where they were when the bombs were dropped. After two years of study, it was about five years after the boming at that time, the results of this study were released. The US researchers could no longer deny the fact, and they turned around and claimed credit for the research.
When the atomic bomb studies were actually set up, using persons identified in the1950 Japanese census, they omitted counting these early, significantly increased number of cases. The Atomic bomb studies were not actually published with dose information until after the1965 doses were devised by John Auxier of Oak Ridge Labs. These doses were, in 1980, denounced as wrong, and a new set of doses constructed in 1986. Although the justification for the new doses was improvement of the science, the journal Science gave a wonderful description of John Auxier's inability to produce the worksheets which showed the derivation of the dose estimates he had assigned. It seems that he lost these work sheets accidently to a shredder when he moved offices. This lead to the unanimous recommendation to lower permissible doses of radiation by the ICRP in 1990.
The US has still not lowered the permissible doses, and it also claims wrongly that its radiation protection standards, set in 1952, were based on Atomic bomb studies. This is, of couse absurd. Most people in the nuclear industry equate "legal" with "safe", and if you try to explain that even within permissible levels of exposure there is significant risk of radiation damage, they think you are "emotional" and "unscientific".
The US appears to have used its 1952 estimates of permissible doses for nuclear workers for the DU exposure in the Gulf War.
More about this history can be found in my book: "No Immediate Danger: Prognosis for a Radioactive Earth". The Women's Press, London UK, 1985. There are still copies around in libraries, but it was taken off of seller's shelves in 1995 because I hope to update it. I have copies available for $12.50 US if anyone would like one.
Dr. Rosalie Bertell
-------- europe
WAR CRIMES TRIBUNAL FINDS U.S. AND NATO GUILTY
THE COMMISSION OF INQUIRY TO INVESTIGATE U.S./NATO WAR CRIMES AGAINST THE PEOPLE OF YUGOSLAVIA
INTERNATIONAL ACTION CENTER,
JUNE 10th 2000
http://www.iacenter.org/warcrime/wct2000.htm
1] INTRODUCTION
A panel of 16 judges from 11 countries at a people's tribunal meeting in New York June 10 before 500 people found U.S. and NATO political and military leaders guilty of war crimes against Yugoslavia in the March 24-June 10, 1999 assault on that country.
Former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark, the lead prosecutor at the International Tribunal on U.S./NATO War Crimes Against Yugoslavia, urged those present and those they represented from the 21 countries participating to carry out a sentence of organizing a campaign to abolish the NATO military pact.
Ben Dupuy, former ambassador from Haiti, Rev. Kiyul Chung of Korea, and auto worker Martha Grevatt, who heads the AFL-CIO's organization Pride at Work, read the three parts of the verdict (included with this release).
Participants taking the witness stand included eye-witnesses, researchers who visited Yugoslavia, renowned political and economics analysts, historians, physicists, biologists, military experts, journalists and lay researchers. (A list of all the judges, and the witnesses and their topics is included with this release.)
Many of these witnesses have in the past 15 months presented to audiences worldwide a complete picture of the war NATO waged against Yugoslavia. For the tribunal, however, all limited themselves to a single area of expertise that made up a single part of the evidence against the political and military leaders of the United States and the other NATO countries.
Taken together, the judges decided, each single part contributed to construct a proof that beyond a reasonable doubt proved the guilt of the accused, just as the proper placing of single tiles can build a mosaic.
The witnesses described how NATO forces used the media to spread lies to demonize the Serbs and their leadership, showed the real economic and geopolitical interests of the western powers, and showed how Washington rigged the "Racak incident" and the Rambouillet ultimatum to provoke the war. This proved a crime against peace.
They also showed the use of illegal weapons, the purposeful choice of civilian targets and the destruction of the environment and the civilian infrastructure that add up to war crimes. And the expulsion of hundreds of thousands of people from Kosovo and Metohija that prove crimes against humanity.
The witnesses' presentations were accompanied in many cases by slides and videos displayed on a large screen on the stage of the auditorium at Martin Luther King Jr. High School in Manhattan. This screen was easily visible both to the judges, who sat on the stage, and to the hundreds in the audience, many of whom stayed throughout the nine-hour day.
In addition, pictures and videos were on display in the hall outside the auditorium, and documentary evidence was offered in books or in research papers.
The International Action Center, founded by Clark in 1992, organized this final session of the tribunal. There was also participation by those who had organized similar tribunal hearings in Germany, Italy, Austria, Russia, Ukraine, Yugoslavia and Greece, where thousands declared U.S. President Clinton a war criminal last November in Athens.
In addition to the witnesses, there were also important guest presentations from representatives of the governments Yugoslavia and Cuba. In addition, Ismael Guadalupe from Vieques, Puerto Rico showed in a powerful speech how the practice runs against his small island laid the basis for U.S./NATO aggression around the world.
According to the IAC organizers, total registration, including justices, witnesses and staff was 511. Invited speakers, witnesses and judges came from Haiti, Spain, Turkey, Korea, Roma, Puerto Rico, India, Germany, United States, Canada, Italy, Yugoslavia, Russia, Britain, Belgium, Iraq, Greece, Austria, France, and Portugal. The U.S. government refused visas to four people from Ukraine, whose message was read from the stage.
There were also representatives of the Roma people, called gypsies, and the verdict took note that the persecution of Roma people has never before been made an issue before an international tribunal.
Five different television crews taped the entire proceedings, including Serbian television and a three-camera crew from Australia, as well as alternate media sources in the U.S. like the Peoples Video Network.
2] FINAL JUDGEMENT OF THE COMMISSION OF INQUIRY TO INVESTIGATE U.S./NATO WAR CRIMES AGAINST THE PEOPLE OF YUGOSLAVIA
The Members of the Independent Commission of Inquiry to Investigate U.S./NATO War Crimes Against the People of Yugoslavia, meeting in New York, having considered the Initial Charges and Complaint of the Commission dated July 31, 1999 against President William J. Clinton, Gen. Wesley Clark, Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, Prime Minister Tony Blair, Chancellor Gerhard Schroder, President Jacques Chirac, Prime Minister Massimo D'Alema, Prime Minister Jose Maria Azmar, the Governments of the United States and the other NATO member states, former Secretary General Javier Solana and other NATO leaders, and Others with nineteen separate Crimes Against Peace, War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity in violation of the Charter of the United Nations, the 1949 Geneva Conventions, other international agreements and customary international law;
Having the right and obligation as citizens of the world to sit in judgement regarding violations of international humanitarian law;
Having heard the testimony from Commissions of Inquiry and Tribunals held within their own countries during the past year and having received reports from numerous other Commission hearings which recite the evidence there gathered;
Having been provided with documentary evidence, eyewitness statements, photos, videotapes, special reports, expert analyses and summaries of evidence available to the Commission;
Having access to all evidence, knowledge and expert opinion in the Commission files or available to the Commission staff;
Having been provided by the Commission, or otherwise obtained, various books, articles and other written materials on various aspects of events and conditions in Yugoslavia and other countries in the Balkans, and in the military and arms establishments;
Having considered newspaper coverage, magazine and periodical reports, special publications, TV, radio and other media coverage and public statements by the accused, other public officials and public materials;
Having heard the presentations of the Commission of Inquiry in public hearing on June 10, 2000, and the testimony, evidence and summaries there presented;
And having met, considered and deliberated with each other and with Commission staff and having considered all the evidence that is relevant to the nineteen charges of criminal conduct alleged in the Initial Complaint, make the following findings:
3] FINDINGS
The Members of the International War Crimes Tribunal find the accused Guilty on the basis of the evidence against them and that each of the nineteen separate crimes alleged in the Initial Complaint has been established to have been committed beyond a reasonable doubt. These are:
1. Planning and Executing the Dismemberment, Segregation and Impoverishment of Yugoslavia.
2. Inflicting, Inciting and Enhancing Violence Between and Among Muslims and Slavs.
3. Disrupting Efforts to Maintain Unity, Peace and Stability in Yugoslavia.
4. Destroying the Peace-Making Role of the United Nations.
5. Using NATO for Military Aggression Against, and Occupation of, Non-Compliant Poor Countries.
6. Killing and Injuring a Defenseless Population throughout Yugoslavia.
7. Planning, Announcing and Executing Attacks Intended to Assassinate the Head of Government, Other Government Leaders and Selected Civilians in Yugoslavia.
8. Destroying and Damaging Economic, Social, Cultural, Medical, Diplomatic -- including the Embassy of the People's Republic of China and other embassies -- and Religious Resources, Properties and Facilities throughout Yugoslavia. 9 Attacking Objects Indispensable to the Survival of the Population of Yugoslavia.
10. Attacking Facilities Containing Dangerous Substances and Forces.
11. Using Depleted Uranium, Cluster Bombs and Other Prohibited Weapons.
12. Waging War on the Environment.
13. Imposing Sanctions through the United Nations that are a Genocidal Crime Against Humanity.
14. Creating an Illegal Ad-Hoc Criminal Tribunal to Destroy and Demonize the Serbian Leadership. The Illegitimacy of this Tribunal is Further Demonstrated by Its Failure to Bring Any Case Regarding the Oppression of the Romani People, Who Have Suffered the Highest Rate of Casualties of Any People in the Region.
15. Using Controlled International Media to Create and Maintain Support for the U.S. Assault and to Demonize Yugoslavia, Slavs, Serbs and Muslims as Genocidal Murderers.
16. Establishing the Long-Term Military Occupation of Strategic Parts of Yugoslavia by NATO Forces.
17. Attempting to Destroy the Sovereignty, Right to Self-Determination, Democracy and Culture of the Slavic, Muslim, Roma and Other People's of Yugoslavia.
18. Seeking to Establish U.S. Domination and Control of Yugoslavia and to Exploit Its People and Resources.
19. Using the Means of Military Force and Economic Coercion in Order to Achieve U.S. Domination.
The Members hold NATO, the NATO states and their leaders accountable for their criminal acts and condemn those found guilty in the strongest possible terms. The Members condemn the NATO bombardments, denounce the international crimes and violations of international humanitarian law committed by the armed attack and through other means such as economic sanctions. NATO has acted lawlessly and has attempted to abolish international law.
4] RECOMMENDATIONS
The Members urge the immediate revocation of all embargoes, sanctions and penalties against Yugoslavia because they constitute a continuing crime against humanity. The Members call for the immediate end to the NATO occupation of all Yugoslav territory, the removal of all NATO and U.S. bases and forces from the Balkans region, and the cessation of overt and covert operations, including the "International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia" in the Hague, aimed at overthrowing the government of Yugoslavia.
The Members further call for full reparations to be paid to the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia for death, injury, economic and environmental damage resulting from the NATO bombing, economic sanctions and blockades. Further, other states in the region which have suffered economic and environmental damage due to the NATO bombing and economic sanctions on Yugoslavia must also be awarded reparations. The Members condemn the threat or use of military technology against life, both civilian and military, as was used by the NATO powers against the people of Yugoslavia.
The Members urge public action and mobilization to stop new and continued sanctions and aggressions by the U.S. and other NATO powers against Iraq, Cuba, North Korea, the countries of Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, Puerto Rico, Asia, Sudan, Colombia and other countries. We ask for the immediate cessation of overt/covert activities by the U.S. and NATO in such countries.
The Members believe that the interests of peace, justice and human progress require the abolition of NATO, which has proved itself beyond any doubt to be an instrument of aggression for the dominant, colonizing powers, particularly the United States. The Pentagon, the central and key element of NATO and the greatest single threat to the people of the world, must be disbanded.
The Members urge the Commission to provide for the permanent preservation of the reports, evidence and materials gathered to make them available to others, and to seek ways to provide the widest possible distribution of the truth about the U.S./NATO war on Yugoslavia.
We urge all people of the world to act on recommendations developed by the Commission to hold power accountable and to secure social justice on which lasting peace must be based.
Done in New York this 10th day of June, 2000
5] LIST OF 16 JUDGES
1. Ben Dupuy--Haiti--Former Ambassador at Large for Haiti under the first government of Jean-Bertrand Aristide and currently secretary general of the Popular National Party (PPN) of Haiti.
2. Angeles Maestro Martin--Spain--Elected member of Spanish parliament from Madrid and a leader in the movement to end sanctions against Iraq.
3. Cimile Cakir --Turkey-journalist for newspaper serving Kurdish community and member of Turkish Human Rights Association. Imprisoned four years in Turkey for human rights activity.
4. Rev. Kiyul Chung--Korea--Rev. Ki Yul Chung, chairperson of the Executive Committee of the Congress for Korean Unification inNorth America.
5. John Nickels--Roma--U.S. representative of the International Romani Union and also a judge in the Romani community in the U.S.
6. Jorge Farinacci--Puerto Rico--leader of the Socialist Front of Puerto Rico and a long-time leader of the independence movement in Puerto Rico.
7. Ray Laforest--Haitian-American--labor unionist in the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees and a leader of the Haitian Coalition for Justice, an organization that fights police brutality in New York.
8. Uma Cutwal -originally from India, Uma Cutwal is president of Local 375 of the Civil Service Technical Union District Council 37 of American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees.
9. Dr. Christa Anders--Germany--doctor of medicine and an organizer of the German/European Tribunal.
10. Raniero La Valle--Italy--Former senator who has served 14 years in the Italian parliament and an anti-war leader in Catholic circles and spokesperson for the Italian War Crimes Tribunal movement.
11. Dr. Wolfgang Richter--Germany--Chairperson of the Society for the Protection of Civil Rights and Human Dignity and a leader of the War Crimes Tribunal movement in Germany.
12. Martha Grevatt--United States--National Secretary of the AFL-CIO for Lesbian/Gay/Bi/Trans Labor Organization called Pride at Work, and active in the United Auto Workers.
13. Michael Ratner--United States--Civil Rights Attorney on the National Board of the Center for Constitutional Rights and he took the U.S. government to court for violating the War Powers Act in its undeclared war against Yugoslavia.
14. Yole Stanesic--Yugoslavia, Russia--Montenegrin poet and writer living in Russia, member of the tribunals in Yaroslav, Kiev and Belgrade.
15. John Black--United States--retired President of the Health and Hospital Workers Union in Pennsylvania, responsible for bringing many thousands of hospital workers into the union. As a teenager in Germany he was active in the anti-Nazi underground resistance.
16. Dr. Berta Joubert--Puerto Rico--psychiatrist working in public health and organizer of Puerto Rican and African American anti-racist activities in Philadelphia.
6] THE PROSECUTOR TEAM
Ramsey Clark, former U.S. attorney general and founder of the International Action Center.
Pat Chin--originally from Jamaica, International Action Center spokesperson for solidarity with Haiti and Yugoslavia and other issues.
Sara Flounders, International Action Center national co-director, participant in numerous tribunal hearings.
Gloria La Riva, a leader of the Peace for Cuba Committee, producer of video "NATO Targets."
All were in Yugoslavia either during the war or participating in seminars or meetings after the war. ? ? Short opening remarks by Ramsey Clark, who will be lead prosecutor. ? Opening greetings from Mikhail Kuznetsov of the International Peoples Tribunal organized from Russia and Ukraine and other former Soviet countries.
7] WITNESSES & SCHEDULE
Tribunal schedule and list of participants
10 a.m. Doors open. Registration, if possible, show videos in the cafeteria or auditorium.
11:00 a.m. - 11:30 p.m Catrin Schuetz and Anya introduce judges and prosecutors: List of judges for the International Tribunal on U.S./NATO War Crimes against Yugoslavia--New York, June 10, 2000
Part I: Crimes against peace. (11:30 a.m. - 1:00 p.m.)
Our first witness is Lenora Foerstel (Maryland) of Women for Mutual Security. She has recently edited a book, War, Lies and Videotape, about the control of the media.
Jared Israel (Massachusetts). Jared Israel produced a film called Judgement showing how the corporate media distorted a picture to produce a Big Lie.
Jean Hatton (Great Britain), from the anti-war movement in Britain. Spoke of how massacre stories were used to justify the war.
Christopher Black (Canada), one of a group of Canadian attorney's who filed a suit charging NATO with war crimes at what is called the International Criminal Court for the Former Yugoslavia at the Hague. Speaks on ICFTY, how the Hague Tribunal was a part of the preparation for war.
Monica Moorehead (U.S.) of Millions for Mumia and contributing editor to Workers World newspaper, an expert on the prison-industrial complex in the United States.
Michel Collon, (Belgium) author of two books on the Balkans, Liar's Poker, and Monopoly; and contributor to the weekly newspaper, Solidaire, on the geo-political aims of the war, the Caspian pipelines.
Kadouri Al Kaysi an Iraqi American who has organized to expose the impact of sanctions on Iraq.
Stratis Kounias, vice-president of the Greek Committee for Peace and Professor at the University of Athens on NATO's role in Greece and the Greek anti-war movement.
John Catalinotto (New York), journalist and researcher who has represented the International Action Center at tribunals in Vienna and Belgrade, on Washington's premeditated plan regarding NATO and the attack on Yugoslavia.
Roland Keith (Canada), a monitor for the Observer Mission that was supposed to maintain the peace in Kosovo in 1998, before the war, on the real role of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe's Observer mission in Kosovo and Metohija.
Preston Wood (California), who participated in hearings in Novi Sad and who organized opposition to the war in Los Angeles, especially in the Lesbian/Gay/Bi/Trans community to present to the tribunal the truth about the supposed massacre in Racak, Kosovo, used to justify the attack on Yugoslavia.
Richard Becker (California), who has written and spoken extensively on the role of the talks held in Rambouillet, France in February and March 1999. Rambouillet ultimatum as provocation.
Gregor Kneussel (Austria), from the Austrian tribunal about the role of Constitutionally neutral Austria regarding Yugoslavia and in delivering this NATO ultimatum.
Part II. War Crimes & Crimes Against Humanity
La Riva, Gloria Prosecutor (California), opens with introduction on targeting civilians--shows 3-minute slice of video, NATO targets.
Sarah Sloan (New York), IAC Commission of Inquiry researcher on NATO claim it tried to minimize damage to civilian facilities in Yugoslavia. Comparing military and civilian targets hit by NATO.
Ellen Catalinotto (New York) is a midwife who has delivered over 1,200 babies to mostly poor women in the New York City. She also cares for HIV infected women and is involved in research on ways to prevent the transmission of HIV from pregnant women to their babies. Reports bombing of 33 hospitals including damage to maternity ward.
Prof. Ivan Yatsenko (Russia), former Soviet officer and foreign representative, now teaches law in Moscow. Damage to Yugoslav industrial infrastructure.
Admiral Elmar Schmaehling (Germany), former admiral and leading spokesperson for the German tribunal movement. On NATO's role in Yugoslavia.
Judi Cheng (New Jersey), IAC researcher. On bombing of Chinese embassy in Belgrade.
Dr. Janet Eaton (Canada), biologist and environment expert Dr. Janet Eaton to the stand, on destruction of the environment in Yugoslavia.
Dr. Carlo Pona (Italy) Physicist who attended a conference in Belgrade about depleted uranium and has written about this subject.
Fulvio Grimaldi (Italy), video maker and journalist. The impact of sanctions on the population of Yugoslavia.
Deirdre Griswold (New York) has recently visited sites of U.S. war crimes in south Korea, is editor in chief of Workers World newspaper on pattern of criminal conduct of the U.S. military.
Shani Rifati (Roma), originally from the Romani community in Kosovo, publishes an English-language newsletter about Romani affairs named Voice of Roma. On conditions for Roma in Kosovo.
Milos Raickovich Serb-American composer and anti-war activist to the stand. Can you comment on the destruction of churches and cultural sites in occupied Kosovo and Metohija.
Professor Michel Chossudovsky (Canada), an expert historian and economist, shows role of the so-called Kosovo Liberation Army and its ties to U.S. and German intelligence services, ties to NATO and the United Nations Rep. Bernard Kouchner.
Scott Taylor (Canada), former soldier, who now publishes the Ottawa-based magazine, Espirit de Corps, celebrated for its unflinching scrutiny of the Canadian military. He also appears regularly in the Canadian media as a military analyst. Expulsion of the Serb population from the Krajina in Croatia
Professor Barry Lituchy (New York), who has recently returned from a trip to Yugoslavia, to describe how the NATO occupying forces known as K-FOR have participated in expelling parts of the population from Kosovo.
Professor Greg Elich (United States), has recently visited the Balkans on un-humanitarian nature of . NATO's occupation of Kosovo.
Gilles Troude (France), on the editorial board of Balkans-Info, a pro-Yugoslavia, anti-NATO monthly published in Paris, France since 1996. Can you comment on the role the French government?
Professor Jorge Cadima (Portugal), a regular contributor on NATO-related subjects to to Avante, the weekly newspaper of the Portuguese Communist Party, on the role of Portugal in NATO and the resistance to the war.
5:30-6:15 Messages of solidarity and struggle
Ismael Guadalupe (Puerto Rico) The Committee for the Rescue and Development of Vieques on the relationship of Vieques to Yugoslavia.
Representative of Cuban Interest Section on Cuba's suit against U.S. for the costs of the embargo.
UN Ambassador Jovanovic of Yugoslavia. giving evidence of government's charges.
Part III -- Closing Section
6:15-6:30 International Campaign against NATO--Brian Becker, IAC codirector.
6:30-6:50--Summation of prosecution's case to the judges -- Ramsey Clark
7:00-7:45 Judges render their decision.
-------- iraq
Security Council Extends Oil-for-Food Program Allowing Iraq to Import Necessities
New York Times
June 10, 2000
By BARBARA CROSSETTE
http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/global/061000un-iraq.html
UNITED NATIONS, June 9 -- With Iraqi profits from oil sales now at record-high levels, the Security Council has extended the "oil-for-food" program for another six months to allow the imports of food, medicine and other civilian necessities.
During this period, a new arms inspection system will be readied to go into action in Iraq, the chief inspector said on Thursday, challenging Iraq to take advantage of a more lenient set of requirements for suspending economic sanctions imposed after Iraq's invasion of Kuwait in 1990.
The oil-for-food plan was instituted by the United Nations in 1996 to help alleviate the sufferings of ordinary Iraqis under the sanctions, and must be renewed every six months. Late last year, the United Nations lifted the ceiling on how much oil Iraq could sell.
In debate before a vote near midnight on Thursday, the deadline for the oil-sales extension, the council defeated a Russian and Chinese attempt to write into the resolution language that would have identified the sanctions as the sole cause of continuing hardships in Iraq.
That argument did not convince all council members, as the Iraqis are thought to have generated $8.4 billion in oil sales in the latest six-month phase. Since 1996, $25.3 billion in oil has been sold. Some experts say that President Saddam Hussein is also pulling in hundreds of millions of dollars in illegally smuggled oil.
Not all the legal profits go to the government for purchases to improve the lives of Iraqi citizens. A third of the income is set aside for a compensation fund for victims of Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, and other sums are earmarked for autonomous Kurdish areas of Iraq and for the arms inspection budget. Even so, Secretary General Kofi Annan said in his latest report to the Security Council this week, there is now enough money to significantly mitigate civilians' hardships if the government managed it better.
"Now that increased revenues are available for the implementation of the program, the government of Iraq is in a position to reduce current malnutrition levels and to improve the health status of the Iraqi people," Mr. Annan said. He urged Iraq to increase the oil revenue allocated to health and nutrition, to order and distribute supplies more efficiently.
Mr. Annan also said in his report that the most recent surveys by Unicef, the United Nations children's fund, found that malnutrition rates had leveled, with a slight reduction in the number of underweight children, although rates for severe conditions known as stunting and wasting were still too high. As for other aspects of children's welfare, Mr. Annan's report noted some advances in education, including the rehabilitation of schools.
But Mr. Annan again warned that the practice of certain Security Council members -- primarily the United States, though it was not named -- of blocking contracts with Iraq for water and sanitation equipment will continue to harm health.
The Security Council also decided in the resolution approved Thursday night to send an independent assessment team to Iraq to study the condition of the Iraqi people.
The sanctions were to have remained in place until Iraq was certified as free of prohibited weapons -- chemical, biological and nuclear arms as well as long-range missiles. But last December, the Security Council proposed suspending sanctions if Iraq cooperated with a new team of arms inspectors.
In an interview Thursday, Hans Blix, the executive chairman of the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission, or Unmovic, said that the new organization has now filled most senior-level jobs and will be training inspectors over the next few months. By August, they will be ready to reopen the Baghdad monitoring center, closed by Iraq since December 1998, and prepare for resumed inspections. The International Atomic Energy Agency, which Dr. Blix once directed and which is responsible for monitoring nuclear programs, is ready to resume its inspections at any time.
Although most of Iraq's complaints about the earlier inspection commission, Unscom, have been addressed in the new system, Mr. Hussein has shown no inclination to let inspectors return.
Dr. Blix said that after an absence of 18 months, inspectors will have to re-establish baselines for surveys, reviewing all suspect Iraqi sites to be monitored. Confounding his critics, Dr. Blix, a former Swedish foreign minister, has kept some essential experts from Unscom on his team, ignoring Iraqi and Russian demands for a clean slate.
"Then comes the question, when are we going in?" he said. "We see no sign whatever of that at the present time. However, in politics things can change, and my personal view is that the Iraqis would gain by cooperating and accepting."
"They demand that the so-called sanctions should be lifted," he said. But he added that few stringent sanctions remained, beyond a ban on air travel in and out of the country. "It was an embargo on the sale of oil first; now there are no limits on how much oil they can sell," he said. "They can use any amount they want to buy food and medicine -- but they cannot buy weapons.
"This is the Iraqi position: that they want to have all these restrictions lifted.
He said the Security Council resolution creating the new inspection commission offered some innovations that Iraq should consider if it wants to speed the end of sanctions. "It enables the Security Council to suspend the sanctions provided two criteria: that there be cooperation with Unmovic in 120 days, and included in the cooperation will also be the resolution of some key disarmament issues," he said. "The criteria are, I would say, more lenient."
-------- korea
North Korea Reaches Out Summit With South
Marks New Diplomatic Initiative
Washington Post
Saturday, June 10, 2000; Page A01
By Doug Struck Washington Post Foreign Service
http://search.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/2000-06/10/160l-061000-idx.html
TOKYO-The signs of change in North Korea seemed small at first, the stuff that diplomats notice: a dinner invitation to a Chinese ambassador, a quiet conversation in a U.N. hallway with an Italian official, an unexpected letter to the Australian foreign minister.
But they have blossomed into a diplomatic offensive by the reclusive state, culminating next week in the historic summit meeting between North Korean leader Kim Jong Il and the president of longtime enemy South Korea, Kim Dae Jung.
The South Korean leader will leave Seoul Monday, flying north over the peninsula that became the first bloody battlefield of the Cold War 50 years ago. The arrangements are all set; the only uncertainty is the nature of the North Korean leader who will meet him in Pyongyang.
Will it be the Kim Jong Il portrayed in years of intelligence reports as an erratic, undependable womanizer who rattles his missiles to spook the world and secretly works to build nuclear bombs as his propaganda machine cranks out tirades?
Or will it be the leader who has carefully cracked open the door of isolation, and is shrewdly steering toward moderation, the leader recently described by Kim Dae Jung as "a pragmatic leader with good judgment."
"The view of him has gradually shifted to a more capable and realistic leader. I hope that view is right," said Hiroyuki Sonoda, a key member of a Japanese parliamentary delegation to Pyongyang last December.
The answer will affect the course of politics in northeast Asia in coming years. Despite its isolation, North Korea and the military threat it wields have shaped the strategies of its neighbors. For Japan, South Korea and even the United States, North Korea has often played the role of Public Enemy No. 1.
But after being isolated and suspicious of all contact with the outside for years, North Korea has suddenly become diplomatically sociable. It has been talking with the United States, Japan, Russia, Britain and others. It has opened diplomatic relations with Italy and Australia, and is on the verge of joining a regional forum within the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.
Kim Jong Il traveled by train to Beijing last month, his first known visit outside North Korea in 17 years. Vladimir Putin's office announced that the Russian president will visit Kim in North Korea in July. And Pyongyang has not discouraged reports that the "Dear Leader," as Kim is called in the state-controlled press, may pay an official visit to Seoul after the summit--an extraordinary prospect for two countries whose armies face each other across the world's most militarized border.
"I think North Korea has reassessed its diplomacy in the light of its own economic problems, and come to the conclusion that it makes more sense to engage with the international community," said Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer.
That change was presented to Downer with the mail in April 1999. A top North Korean official wrote Downer out of the blue, suggesting closer contacts between the countries that had not had official relations for 25 years.
"In our view, it doesn't make any sense to refuse to talk and deal with them. Nothing had been achieved by that strategy over the last 25 years," Downer said in a telephone interview from Sydney yesterday.
The letter led to meetings in Bangkok, Pyongyang, and New York, and, eventually, the decision announced in May to establish diplomatic relations.
But that was only part of the diplomatic outreach. In May of last year, Kim Jong Il asked the Chinese ambassador, Wan Yongxiang, to dinner, an unprecedented invitation. The occasion was seen as preparatory for Kim to visit Beijing, and, indeed, a year later, on May 29, he showed up in the Chinese capital, with hugs and smiles for his hosts.
By last fall, North Korean diplomats were quietly working the halls of the United Nations in New York, seeing what kind of contacts could be made. They got a surprisingly good reception.
"They sought out our minister on the sidelines of the General Assembly. They only asked for an enlargement of relations, but we mentioned establishing full diplomatic relations," said a top Italian diplomat who asked not to be named.
The welcome mat was out because Pyongyang was changing its view, as had its adversary, South Korea. Kim Dae Jung was elected president in December 1997 and vowed to end Seoul's long antagonistic ties with the North. He has weathered criticism by hard-liners in South Korea and has stuck with his "sunshine" policy.
Washington, though somewhat more wary, also worked patiently to draw North Korea to the negotiating table, and won promises from Pyongyang in 1994 and 1999 to curb its weapons programs. With the objections of South Korea and Washington removed, other nations felt they could go ahead to forge diplomatic ties as Pyongyang loosened up.
"We noticed their foreign ministry people were able to make final interpretive decisions with a far greater easiness. They were more self-assured," said the Italian diplomat. "They were able to make decisions they were not able to take before."
When a Japanese government delegation went to Pyongyang in April to resume long-fitful negotiations, "we got the impression that the North Korean side was really interested in concluding the normalization talks," said Kazuyoshi Umemoto, a foreign ministry official who was a member of the delegation.
This diplomatic confidence was a change. And it seemed to quiet the questions about whether Kim Jong Il had a stable strategy and the personal and political control to exercise it. South Korea's intelligence services had often offered salacious and outrageous views of the man. Kim Dae Jung is said to have ordered his intelligence service to review its stream of derogatory reports about the North Korean leader to see if they were wrong all along.
"Even the American intelligence community doesn't have a good profile of him," said Ahn Byung Joon, a professor of political science at Yonsei University in Seoul, and analysts are revising their description of Kim Jong Il as a playboy under the thumb of the military.
"Our assessment is he is in firm control of the country," said a Japanese foreign ministry source. "If you follow Pyongyang broadcasts or the party newspaper, he has been to see many factories and other places. His photographs in the newspapers suggest he may be much healthier than before."
Indeed, Kim was quoted on his visit to Beijing as saying, "I used to smoke and drink a lot," but had largely given it up. He presented himself as the model of a rational leader.
"The international community is coming to the view that Kim may be behind this all," Downer said of North Korea's diplomatic offensive. "He's clearly very supportive of the whole notion of engagement with the broader community, and he is looking to develop new angles."
"But I don't want to overstate it," Downer added. Indeed, there are still many contradictions in Pyongyang's approach. It has welcomed the summit, but refused to allow non-Korean reporters into the country to show the summit to the world.
Among diplomats, there is talk that Kim snubbed Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov, who visited Pyongyang in February for the signing of a friendship pact but failed to meet Kim. The talks with Japan have gone nowhere and are on hold. North Korea rushed to agree to diplomatic relations with the Philippines, then mystified Manila by balking at sending its foreign minister to sign the deal.
And while North Korea may be offering a conciliatory tone, it has many hurdles to overcome from its checkered past. Even businessmen, far more likely than diplomats to embrace Pyongyang if there is a whiff of profit, may be wary, said Shinobu Sawaike, head of the East Asia Trade Research Board in Tokyo.
Big Japanese companies were burned in the late 1970s when Pyongyang refused to make debt payments. Trade between Japan and North Korea has dropped to one-quarter of its peak in 1980, Sawaike said.
"We think the summit will help," Sawaike said. "I can't say it will change the system in North Korea, but it will increase the communications. And that is necessary."
---
'Secret' nuclear program
Sydney Morning Herald
Date: 10/06/2000
Agence France-Presse
http://www.smh.com.au/news/0006/10/text/world2.html
Tokyo: North Korea has operated a secret uranium refining plant since 1989 for its nuclear weapons program, a Japanese newspaper said yesterday.
The underground Chonma Power Plant, in north-western Chonama mountain, had a uranium refining capacity of 1.3 grams a day, the Sankei Shimbun said.
About 400 people, including 35 engineers, worked at the plant, the daily said, quoting a Chinese report in which a former North Korean military official, who fled to China last year, had unveiled details of the plant.
Other workers were political prisoners who had been sentenced to life in prison, the missile station commander said in the report.
North Korea has been suspected of secretly pursuing a nuclear weapons program, for which it would require uranium.
The report said the United States had not detected the Chonma plant, although its technical team had inspected Kumchag-ri, 30 kilometres south-east of Chonma. Despite two inspections conducted in Kumchag, the US failed to realise that forests near the site were polluted by industrial waste water from the Chonma plant, the newspaper said. After the second inspection, the US said late last month that the suspected nuclear site in Kumchag-ri was an unfinished, empty complex.
A Japanese Foreign Ministry official said Tokyo had not confirmed the Sankei Shimbun report.
In Hong Kong, a senior US official said on Wednesday that North Korea's nuclear weapons development program was one of the main threats to the US and its allies in the Asia-Pacific region.
"The critical challenge is to eliminate the threat posed by North Korea's nuclear and missile program," said the US assistant Secretary of State for Non-Proliferation, Mr Robert Einhorn.
---
Four Dead in Japan Chemical Plant Blast
Yahoo News
Saturday June 10 10:31 AM ET
TOKYO (Reuters) - An explosion ripped through a chemical plant in eastern Japan on Saturday evening, killing four people, injuring 25 and forcing the evacuation of hundreds of nearby residents, fire officials said.
The blast, which occurred at 6 p.m., gutted the plant, damaged scores of buildings and broke the windows of nearby shops and cars in the town of Ojima.
``We are currently investigating the cause of the explosion but it damaged several buildings within a 1,000-foot radius of the factory,'' a fire official said.
The official said that some four hours after the blast, smoke was still billowing from the facility and 30 emergency vehicles were on the scene.
He said the explosion damaged 200 nearby homes and knocked out power. Roads in the area were also closed and residents were being evacuated.
The factory, about 70 miles north of Tokyo, is operated by Tokyo-based Nisshin Chemical Co., producing agriculture and pharmaceutical chemicals.
In Japan, where zoning laws are far from stringent, it is not unusual to have homes near chemical and industrial plants.
The injured in Saturday's blast ranged in age from a six-year-old girl to pensioners in their 80s. ``I heard a tremendous sound and five or six windows were broken at my home. I can still see red flames rising into the air,'' Katsuyuki Kato, an Ojima resident who lives about 0.6 miles from the plant, told Kyodo News.
Fire officials said that one person remained missing.
-------- russia
Russia suggests European nuclear defence system
Australian Broadcasting Corporation
This Bulletin: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 11:07 AEST
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newslink/weekly/newsnat-10jun2000-22.htm
Russia has proposed a Europe-wide joint nuclear missile defence shield with NATO.
The initiative comes in response to America's plans for its own limited missile defence system.
Russia and a number of other European countries have already expressed their opposition to America's plans for its own missile defence warning system - that it could cause a new global arms race. Now the Russian Defence Minister has outlined Russia's plans for a possible joint missile defence system for Europe in a meeting with NATO in Brussels.
He says the plans would not violate the 1972 anti-balistic missile treaty in any way.
No details of the proposal have yet been made public but the idea was quickly dismissed by the US Defence Secretary, William Cohen.
---
Putin Won't Pressure North Korea on Nukes agreements
Salt lake Tribune
Saturday, June 10, 2000
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.sltrib.com/06102000/nation_w/56953.htm
MOSCOW -- President Vladimir Putin won't try to persuade North Korea to drop its missile program during an upcoming state visit, despite U.S. concerns that the isolated communist country is a growing threat to world peace, Russia's foreign minister said Friday.
The Kremlin announced that Putin will visit North Korea shortly, but did not give a date. The visit would be the first by a Russian leader to North Korea, and comes at a time when Moscow and Washington disagree over its possible threat.
The United States is considering building a limited anti-missile defense system against "rogue states" such as North Korea, a proposal strongly opposed by Russia, which sees the U.S. plan as a threat to its own nuclear forces. Putin's visit to Pyongyang could further strain ties with Washington.
"President Putin is coming on a visit to a friendly country and he does not intend to talk anybody out of anything," Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov said when asked if the Russian leader would urge North Korea to curb its missile program. He added that Russia wants to help promote stability on the divided Korean peninsula.
Putin's foreign policy aide Sergei Prikhodko said the visit would be before the meeting of the G-8 industrialized nations in Japan on July 21-23.
Although Russia is potentially as vulnerable as the United States to rogue missile attacks, Ivanov said "we proceed from the view that currently, there is no realistic threat."
"In terms of the future, naturally, nothing can be excluded," he added.
Also Friday, North Korea accused the United States of using "fictitious" threats to justify its missile defense plan.
"The U.S. employs the trite method of sacrificing small countries to please big countries, but it is gravely mistaken if it thinks that will work on [North Korea]," the North's Foreign Ministry said.
Putin called Clinton on Friday to discuss several issues, including missile defense. His impending visit to North Korea was not discussed, a White House official said.
By making the visit, Putin aims both to undermine the United States and expand Russia's influence in foreign affairs, analysts said. Restoring some of Moscow's global clout is among Putin's top goals.
"To a certain extent, it's an anti-American move -- a Russian retaliation for the U.S. dismissal of Putin's proposal to jointly build anti-missile systems," said Yevgeny Volk, an analyst at the Heritage Foundation in Moscow.
Although Ivanov said Putin wouldn't try to dissuade North Korea from its missile program, some analysts suggested Moscow may be seeking a compromise such as putting the Korean missile force under international supervision.
"Putin may try to reach an agreement that would place North Korean missiles under international control in exchange for financial assistance -- a deal similar to that reached before on a North Korean nuclear program," said Sergei Markov, director of the Institute of Political Studies.
"That would deprive the United States of its key argument in favor of anti-missile defense," he said.
Moscow has been trying to revive some of its Soviet-era alliances. Moscow was a key backer of North Korea during the Cold War, but relations fell apart after the Soviet collapse.
North Korea has been taking small steps toward ending its isolation. The announcement of Putin's trip came just before North Korean leader Kim Jong Il was to meet for the first time with the president of South Korea, President Kim Dae-jung.
"Russia is trying to return to areas where it was traditionally present, which puts it on a collision course with the United States," said Ivan Safranchuk, a world affairs analyst at the PIR-Center independent think-tank.
Ivanov said the Russian leader was also considering an invitation from South Korea, but noted that it was "too early" to speak of anything definite.
---
Putin Says U.S. Missile Shield Would Harm Treaties
Yahoo News
Saturday June 10 11:43 AM ET
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20000610/pl/arms_putin_dc_1.html
BERLIN (Reuters) - Russian President Vladimir Putin has repeated warnings that a U.S. anti-missile defense shield could threaten disarmament pacts and urged a common system instead, a German newspaper said on Saturday.
Putin told Welt am Sonntag in an interview that the U.S. plan could ``undermine the strategic stability of the nuclear powers'' and threaten the foundation of all existing disarmament treaties.
``The price could be very high,'' he was quoted as saying.
In comments released by the newspaper before publication on Sunday, Putin called on Europe to support the 1972 anti-ballistic missile (ABM) treaty, which would have to be amended to allow the U.S. missile shield plan to go ahead.
Putin, due in Spain on Tuesday before flying to Germany on Wednesday for a three-day visit, said he would give more details of his plans for development of a common anti-missile system during his trip.
``This way we can avoid the destruction of the balance of power and secure the security of all European states,'' he said.
The United States wants to deploy a national anti-missile defense shield to intercept incoming rockets. Putin would rather place defenses close to so-called rogue states to shoot down missiles as they are launched.
During a summit last weekend in Moscow, Putin agreed with visiting President Clinton that the world faced an emerging missile threat from rogue states, but they failed to agree on how to tackle it.
---
Russia to be world's nuclear fuel dump ground
Sydney Morning Herald
Date: 10/06/2000
By PAUL BROWN in London
http://www.smh.com.au/news/0006/10/text/world3.html
A controversial plan to use Russia, a country struggling to cope with the consequences of its aging nuclear arsenal, as a storage depot for 10,000 tonnes of the globe's spent nuclear fuel is being developed in Washington and Moscow.
Five countries - Taiwan, South Korea, Mexico, the Netherlands and Switzerland - have expressed interest in sending the fuel to Russia to be placed in special stores where it would be kept safe and prevented from being used for nuclear weapons.
As part of the deal, the Russians would agree to halt plans to commercially reprocess spent fuel, assuring that it would make no more plutonium available for nuclear weapons.
Minatom, the Russian nuclear power agency, suggested in April a 20-year moratorium on reprocessing in exchange for the US helping Russia to build a dry store. Russia has the expertise to deal with spent fuel, but it has no money to build the storage facility.
The plan would generate an estimated $US15 billion ($25 billion) in fees during the first 10 years. This foreign exchange would provide the funding to build enough space for the 10,000 tonnes of fuel and solve the problem of what to do with Russia's increasing stockpile of fuel from reactors - believed already to be 14,000 tonnes.
The idea has influential backers in the US and Russia, including endorsement from senior environmental figures such as Dr Tom Cochran, the director of nuclear programs at the National Resources Defence Council, but some green groups are appalled by the idea.
"The world has huge problems with nuclear waste but sending it to Russia is not the answer," said Mr Michael Mariotte, the executive director of the Nuclear Information Resource Service. "The plan really represents the ultimate in 'not in my backyard' thinking."
Mr Vladimir Slivyak, of Russia's Ecodefence, an umbrella group of 300 environmental organisations, said: "We are shocked by the proposals, which have nothing in common with environmental principles and unethically promote the interests of Western nuclear industry, whose main concern is to get rid of its nuclear waste."
Mr Slivyak said Russia's Minister for Nuclear Power had included the building of 23 nuclear reactors in Russia as part of the program.
"These reactors are dangerous and not needed," he said. "Energy-efficient technologies do not exist on an industrial scale in Russia.
"Development of renewable sources of energy would provide Russia with a great amount of energy as well. But efficiency and renewables do not have great lobbyists as one of the richest corporations of the world - Minatom - has."
Still, Dr Cochran remains behind the initiative. "It would stop reprocessing in Russia for at least a couple of decades; it would aid nuclear non-proliferation by removing fuel from countries like Taiwan. It would also solve storage problems for countries in earthquake zones. The income stream ... could cure a lot of problems in Russia."
He said the five countries had expressed an interest in the scheme because it would solve their problems in disposing of spent nuclear fuel.
The Guardian
---
U.S. says Russian anti-missile plan doesn't appear feasible
Detroit News
Saturday, June 10, 2000
By Jeffrey Ulbrich / Associated Press
http://detnews.com/2000/nation/0006/10/nation-72152.htm
BRUSSELS, Belgium -- U.S. Defense Secretary William Cohen said Friday that Russia's proposal for an anti-missile defense system offers no protection for the United States -- or even Europe -- and consequently isn't feasible.
The Russians and some of the NATO allies oppose Washington's plan to deploy a limited system aimed at shooting down long-range missiles fired by "rogue nations" at the United States, saying it would breach the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and tip the balance of nuclear power in the world.
In an apparent attempt to head off American plans before President Clinton makes a final decision this fall, Russian President Vladimir Putin made a vague proposal to work with NATO to create a joint European missile defense system.
On Friday, after Russian Defense Minister Igor Sergeyev presented the allies with Putin's idea at a meeting of the NATO-Russia Permanent Joint Council, the Russian proposal was still vague. "It's unclear to me exactly what Russia has in mind," Cohen told reporters after a meeting between Sergeyev and NATO defense ministers, and a later bilateral session with the Russian.
"As far as I can determine, it's an idea based on a theater missile defense system, something of intermediate or shorter-range capability, so it is not a system that could provide protection to the United States, or to much of Europe," Cohen said. "So at this point it's an idea that does not appear to be feasible or desirable for protecting us against the kind of threats that are emerging."
Still, the allies didn't want to give the impression they were rejecting the Russian idea outright, especially at a time when NATO-Russia relations are starting to warm after a yearlong hiatus over Kosovo.
NATO Secretary-General Lord Robertson said the 19-nation alliance was not yet in a position to evaluate the Russian proposal.
"Questions have been asked, and clearly they will be dealt with at a later stage," Robertson said. "Clarification on such an important issue is of enormous importance. We were not able to do it in the meeting today."
Sergeyev, a Russian field marshal, did not disclose much to reporters, saying only that Putin's plan involved creation of a tactical anti-ballistic missile system and would not violate the ABM treaty.
That treaty prohibits the use of long-range defensive missiles. A 1997 U.S.-Russia agreement, still unratified, defines long range as essentially any missile capable of flying more than 2,200 miles.
Cohen said if Putin is talking about a theater missile system -- missiles with a shorter range -- it would not be sufficient to protect the United States, nor much of Europe.
Most of Europe is more than 2,200 miles from potential missile launch sites in Iran, and all of Europe and the United States is more than 2,200 miles from North Korea, Cohen noted. "A system limited to shorter range threats would not protect the American population," he said.
Nonetheless, Cohen said the allies were prepared to continue to explore ways of meeting the security concerns of Russia, Europe and the United States.
The United States says its intelligence assessment indicates rogue nations will be capable of launching long-range missiles carrying weapons of mass destruction by 2005 and any plans to create a defensive umbrella must be started by next year to be operational by that time.
To meet that schedule, the United States must begin building radar sites in Alaska by next spring, meaning Clinton must make the decision by fall.
No matter what the Russian idea turns out to be, Cohen said, "it could not be a substitute for the American program that is currently under research and development."
---
U.S. Rejects Russian Plan For Joint Missile Defense
Cohen Says Proposal Fails to Shield Against Long-Range Strikes
Washington Post
Saturday, June 10, 2000; Page A17
By William Drozdiak Washington Post Foreign Service
http://search.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/2000-06/10/131l-061000-idx.html
BRUSSELS, June 9-Defense Secretary William S. Cohen today spurned Russia's proposal to build a theater-based missile defense system in cooperation with NATO, saying it would leave the United States and Europe too vulnerable to strikes from long-range rockets being developed by countries such as Iran and North Korea.
Russian Defense Minister Igor Sergeyev met for nearly two hours here with Cohen and other NATO counterparts and provided new details on the joint missile defense project advocated by Moscow, which he said would not require any revisions to the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty.
In addition, Sergeyev said the Russian proposal, broached by President Vladimir Putin Monday in Rome, would fall safely within the limits of a 1997 agreement between the United States and Russia that would permit theater defenses against missiles with a range of less than 2,200 miles. That pact has not been ratified.
But Cohen, who held a separate meeting here with Sergeyev and plans to pursue further discussions in Moscow next week, said the Russian proposal raised many questions and did not appear to provide sufficient protection for the United States and its allies.
"If that in fact is what Russia has in mind, then there's a serious problem," Cohen said. "It's an idea that does not appear to be feasible or desirable for protecting us against the kind of threats that are emerging."
Cohen said that any effective defense for Russia, the United States or Europe would have to protect against long-range threats and that such a system would definitely require an amendment to the ABM Treaty. The treaty prohibits the use of long-range defensive missiles.
A system limited to shorter-range threats, Cohen said, would not shield the United States and most European nations, which are more than 2,200 miles from potential launch sites in North Korea and Iran.
Even if refinements were made to the Russian proposal, Cohen insisted that "it could not serve as a substitute for the American program that is currently under research and development."
President Clinton is expected to decide this year whether to proceed with the first phase of a limited U.S. national missile defense system that would involve building radar sites and interceptors in Alaska. The system would defend the United States, but not Europe, although Clinton has proposed sharing the technology with NATO allies and other "civilized" countries. Deployment of such a system would require changes to the ABM Treaty, but Russia has opposed amending it.
Because the Russians said their plan would stay within the bounds of the ABM Treaty, senior U.S. officials said this indicated that their system would have to intercept missiles during their initial boost phase. But U.S. officials said it would take 10 years to master the technological challenges of such a system.
Advocates of the U.S. proposal say the United States needs to deploy a missile defense system by 2005 because by that time, North Korea and Iran are expected to have the capability to fire long-range intercontinental ballistic missiles that can reach U.S. territory.
Although Russia has refused to approve changes to the ABM Treaty, U.S. officials have said they may be forced to abrogate it to build the missile shield within five years. The standoff has created much anxiety among the European allies, who fear that a collapse of the ABM Treaty could trigger a new global arms race.
Initial reaction in Europe to the new Russian proposal has been guarded, with some fearing that it could harm the transatlantic alliance.
"There is a lot of skepticism because this would seem to be another attempt by Moscow to drive a wedge between Europe and the United States," a senior European diplomat said. "The Russians seem to be playing the old Cold War game of trying to decouple the defense of Europe from that of the United States."
Nonetheless, NATO Secretary General George Robertson said the United States and its allies will continue discussions with Moscow about the nature of the evolving threat and what should be done about it. "Clarification of such an important issue is of enormous importance," he said.
Sergeyev's presence at the NATO meeting here was regarded as a significant milestone in the gradual reconciliation between Russia and NATO that has taken place in recent months. Relations were strained by NATO's decision to admit Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic as new members and by the alliance's bombing campaign against Yugoslavia last year.
But Putin, in his initial contacts with Clinton and other Western leaders following his election in March, has signaled that he wants to cooperate with the West on political, economic and security matters. And today, despite disagreements between the United States and Russia over missile defense, Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov told reporters in Moscow that he sees a "real chance" for a new arms control agreement with the United States this year. Discussions on a START III treaty on cutting warheads will begin this month, he said.
Alexander Pikayev, a Russian defense specialist in Moscow, said the stance of Putin and other officials reflects "an understanding that nuclear deterrence worked in the Cold War, but it is not compatible to post-Cold War new realities, and Russia wants to move beyond to become an ally or quasi-ally of the West."
Following up on his meeting with Clinton last weekend in Moscow, Putin phoned the president today to discuss "economics, arms control, missile defense and other areas of U.S.-Russian cooperation," White House spokesman Joe Lockhart said. He said the 15-minute call included some discussion of arms control issues but was "not a very detailed conversation."
Putin and Clinton are scheduled to meet four more times this year, Lockhart noted. "We expect that dialogue to be active between now and the end of the year," he said.
Correspondents David Hoffman and Sharon LaFraniere in Moscow and staff writer Charles Babington in Washington contributed to this report.
---
Ministers Urge More Cooperation With Russia
Yahoo News
Saturday June 10 11:39 AM ET
By Tabassum Zakaria
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20000610/pl/arms_cohen_dc_8.html
VILNIUS (Reuters) - U.S., Nordic and Baltic defense ministers agreed on Saturday that greater cooperation with Russia was the key to ensuring the region's stability and security.
``...you can't have a secure Europe if it is divided in two camps,'' said Defense Department spokesman Ken Bacon.
``Everyone wants to have a more normal, productive relationship with Russia. They don't want tension, they want cooperation with Russia, not confrontation,'' he said.
Defense Secretary William Cohen said that multilateral cooperation in the region ``clearly should include Russia,'' according to an outline of his speech to the meeting.
Cooperation with Russia in areas such as defense, environment and the economy would increase the opportunities for more cooperative ties, he added.
Bacon said Russia was showing signs of wanting to become more engaged with Western countries after giving them the cold shoulder for almost a year because of the NATO air war on Yugoslavia. ``Now Russia seems to be engaging again because of (President Vladimir) Putin,'' Bacon said.
The meeting in the Lithuanian capital was a chance to discuss issues rather than reach formal agreements. ``I think ...there's been a lot of benefit from cooperation between the Baltics and the Nordic countries on the one hand, and NATO on the other,'' said Bacon.
Cohen said joint exercises with Russia in the region would help to ``build a sense of mutual confidence, to reduce suspicion or apprehension so we can take measures in the future that will provide for security, stability and promote prosperity.''
Lithuanian Defense Minister Ceslovas Stankevicius said his country was working on cooperation with Russia, in particular with Kaliningrad , which is part of Russia but bordered by Lithuania and Poland.
``This confidence will very positively serve both countries. Russians see that Lithuania shows good will and is ready to cooperate with them in all possible areas,'' he said.
Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia want to join NATO when it considers taking new members in 2002. Russia has in the past opposed NATO's expansion to the east.
Cohen will end a week-long European trip with a visit to Moscow early next week where he will meet Defense Minister Igor Sergeyev and probably President Putin.
Cohen met Sergeyev during a NATO defense ministers meeting on Friday where they discussed their differing plans for a new missile defense system against missiles fired by what Washington calls ``rogue states.''
Putin said in an interview with the German newspaper Welt am Sonntag, released before publication on Sunday, that the U.S. plan could ``undermine the strategic stability of the nuclear powers'' and said he favors a common anti-missile system.
---
RUSSIA: PUSHING MISSILE PLAN
New York Times
June 10, 2000
World Briefing
http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/news/world/world-briefing.html
Defense Minister Igor Sergeyev continued Moscow's effort to sell its alternative to the United States missile defense proposals by briefing NATO allies on the plan in Brussels. NATO's secretary general, Lord Roberston, said the plan was still short on details. Mr. Sergeyev said only that it did not violate or compromise the Antiballistic Missile Treaty.
Suzanne Daley (NYT)
-------- terrorism
Greece Vows Antiterror Action as British Victim's Widow Issues Plea
New York Times
June 10, 2000
By ALESSANDRA STANLEY
http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/europe/061000greece-diplomat.html
ATHENS, June 9 -- As the Greek government pledged today to introduce new antiterrorism measures after the killing of a British military attaché on Thursday, the victim's widow delivered an emotional appeal to the Greek nation.
"I stand before you half the person I was yesterday," Heather Saunders told reporters outside her house in Athens this morning, her two teenage daughters standing at her side. "The Greek people, I know, are not responsible for what happened yesterday. But for the sake and future of Greece within a European community, I feel that these wicked men must be brought to justice."
In a letter delivered to a Greek newspaper early this morning, a group called November 17 claimed responsibility for the death of Brig. Stephen Saunders, 53, saying he had been killed because of Britain's role in the "barbaric" NATO bombing of Yugoslavia last year.
It was believed to be the 23rd killing in 25 years linked to November 17, a left-wing guerrilla organization that first emerged in 1975 with the killing of Richard Welch, the Central Intelligence Agency station chief in Athens. In all, the deaths of four American officials have been linked to the group.
The United States and Britain renewed pressure on Greek officials to take serious antiterrorist steps, noting that no member of November 17 has ever been arrested or even identified. Washington has long faulted Athens for lacking the political will to root out the organization. Four days before the attack, a special bipartisan commission set up by Congress recommended sanctions against Greece for "failing to fully cooperate" with Western antiterrorist activity.
Today, a spokesman for the Greek government said Prime Minister Costas Simitis had held a cabinet meeting to discuss new counter-terrorism steps.
"The prime minister is determined to undertake all the necessary and additional measures that are required to combat and eradicate terrorism," the spokesman, Dimitris Reppas, said after the meeting. "Efforts in the future will be more intense."
Mr. Reppas said Mr. Simitis "also stressed the importance of taking all the necessary measures to ensure a framework of total safety for the 2004 Athens Olympic Games." Greece has presented some security plans to the International Olympic Committee but has not yet developed a full security strategy for the Games.
"The Games have always been a favored forum for terrorists striving to internationalize their campaign, and this risk does exist also in the case of Athens," said Dennis Oswald, a Swiss official on the International Olympic Committee. "Greece has ample time to put a security plan in force. That's the good thing about hosting the Games -- governments are forced to do things they normally wouldn't or neglect to do."
Mr. Reppas said the government did not foresee fundamental changes to the legal system, but added that it was considering some extraordinary measures, citing the possibility of using a one-judge trial in terrorist cases instead of a jury, a step used by Italy in the 1970's to try Red Brigade terrorists.
Italy and other nations also resorted to other extraordinary measures, including secret hearings, anonymous prosecutors and witness protection programs, to reduce the possibility of jury intimidation and terrorist reprisals against judges and magistrates.
It was not clear today whether the Greek government planned to consider further measures, but some Western diplomats took heart.
"That is exactly the right path for Greece to take," a Western official said today. "These are measures that Greece's European allies took to defend themselves against their indigenous terrorist movements in the 1970's and 1980's."
A Greek official told Reuters that an unprecedented search for the killers had been started. As yet, the police have not even found the motorbike that was used. Security was visibly tighter in downtown Athens today, and nerves were edgy. When an explosion was reported near the city of Rhodes, some Greek news services immediately speculated that it was another terrorist attack. Turkish officials later explained that the noise came from submarine torpedo practice during a naval exercise in the Aegean.
The intense international scrutiny of Greece's antiterrorism record also hit a raw nerve. Some newspapers today blamed the United States and Europe for darkening Greece's image. But there were also signs that the killing of Brigadier Saunders had profoundly shocked the nation.
Even in To Vima, a newspaper that traditionally supports Prime Minister Simitis's Socialist Party, editorials spoke of a national disgrace. For the first time, the paper acknowledged Washington's concerns about counterterrorism in Greece.
"We are incompetent to provide protection to the families we host in our country," the paper's senior editorial writer, Ioannis Pretenderis, wrote. "For 25 years, this same group of terrorists have been moving around freely, killing anyone they desire, and then sending their proclamations to the press. This is the sign of a bankrupt society."
He added: "The Americans are absolutely right to complain. Twenty-five years and we have done nothing about terrorism. It is the bitter reality. Yet instead we prefer to flaunt an anti-American bravado."
Some in Greece worried today that such sentiments might not last.
"Obviously I really, really hope that this time will be different, that something will happen," said Nikos Peratikis, whose brother Costas, an Athens shipowner who was a British citizen, was killed by November 17 in 1997. "But people have been saying that after every murder for the past 25 years."
---
Pakistan Outlines Plans to Curb Militant Networks
New York Times
June 10, 2000
By JUDITH MILLER
http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/mideast/061000pakistan-terrorism.html
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan, June 8 -- After months of criticism from Washington of its handling of terrorism, Pakistan today outlined an ambitious campaign aimed at slowly curbing networks of militants that have taken root here and in Afghanistan.
Senior officials said the military government has decided to act not because of the American pressure, but because the networks threaten Pakistan by "fanning sectarian violence and poisoning people's minds," said Moinuddin Haider, the interior minister.
There has been a growing criticism of Pakistan by Washington and independent groups. A Congressionally appointed advisory panel has recommended that Pakistan be designated as a government that is "not cooperating fully" against terrorism.
In an interview, Mr. Haider said his government had made a "clear-cut policy decision" to begin controlling the thousands of religious schools, some of which preach hatred of the West and provide young recruits to the "jihads," or holy wars, in Kashmir, Afghanistan, Bosnia and Chechnya, and to other conflicts involving Muslims.
Some also channel militants to terrorist groups such as those linked to the Saudi financier Osama bin Laden, who is being sheltered by Afghanistan and whose network has been accused of repeatedly killing Americans.
At Pakistan's urging, Mr. Haider said, the Taliban in Afghanistan have expelled several Pakistanis and several Arabs wanted by their home governments for alleged terrorist attacks. He said the Taliban have also occupied Rishkavour, which Western diplomats say is a leading training camp for militants near Kabul.
In addition to providing mujahedeen, or holy warriors, for conflicts throughout the world, such camps have also produced the terrorists who bombed the World Trade Center and two American Embassies in Africa, intelligence officials have concluded. Most recently, veterans of such camps plotted to attack tourist sites in Jordan and America around the time of the new year's celebrations, they say.
The United States has become alarmed about those networks, particularly those affiliated with or supported by Mr. bin Laden.
Mr. Haider, a retired general who was governor of Sindh Province until his current appointment, insisted that Pakistan made the decision based on its own security interests. "I feel this is good for Pakistan," he said. "I'm not following anyone else's agenda. "Pakistan ought to become a progressive, modern and tolerant secular state."
He said the campaign would mark a radical departure from some of Pakistan's political and religious traditions. "It will not happen overnight, and it will upset many people," Mr. Haider said. But he added that his government was determined to enforce a "gradual rollback" of the networks.
Asked for comment on the steps outlined this week, Karl F. Inderfurth, assistant secretary of state for South Asia, said the United States welcomed them. Though Washington had not been officially informed about some of the measures, he said: "These are precisely the kinds of things we've been hoping to hear from the government of Pakistan. We hope they'll be successful in carrying them out."
Whether they will be, he added, is "the $64,000 question."
Another American official who monitors terrorism expressed skepticism about whether the Taliban were being truly responsive and whether Pakistan, which is facing strikes and growing criticism of its economic measures, would maintain pressure on the Taliban.
He noted, for example, that Washington had not confirmed that the Taliban have taken over Rishkavour. But he said Islamabad's actions reflect a "higher level of effort than we've recently seen."
Among other things, the steps Pakistan is talking about include demanding that Afghanistan shut down 18 training camps identified by Pakistan; arresting and extraditing 20 to 25 Pakistanis and an unspecified number of Arabs wanted for terrorism by their respective governments; and improving border controls.
A second part of the effort involves the potentially explosive topic of identifying thousands of religious schools, which typically have not been regulated, and imposing standards on them.
To date, Mr. Haider said, about 4,000 religious schools, or madrassas, have been registered. He has been meeting with madrassa leaders, he said, to encourage them to modernize their curriculum to include mathematics and computer skills. Such schools, he said, which often take the place of public schools, should not produce zealots, but "balanced persons."
Jessica Stern, a terrorism expert at Harvard University and a former official in the Clinton administration, said the Pakistani program could greatly reduce terrorism in the region. But she said only 4,345 schools have been registered so far, of an estimated 40,000. And, she said, most of the rural, most extremist madrassas strongly oppose government intervention in their activities. Pakistan has come a long way, she said, but it has a long way to go in preventing sectarian violence.
Zahid Hussain, a senior editor of Newsline, an independent monthly, said the military government is caught between competing pressures. On one hand, he said, it needs the West economically and does not want to be isolated politically. But on the other, he said he doubted that it could afford to antagonize the religious groups that are a core political constituency.
-------- us military
Space Critical To Warfighting Capacity
by Senior Airman Aaron Cram, Spacer.com
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/milspace-00j.html
Osan, S.Korea - June 10, 2000 - According to the U.S. military's top commanding general for aerospace, space plays an important role in today's military operations and everyday life.
Gen. Ralph E. Eberhart, commander in chief, North American Aerospace Defense Command and U.S. Space Command, and Air Force Space Command commander, visited Osan May 28 through May 30. During his visit, General Eberhart took time to visit Osan's Joint Tactical Ground Station, a forward-deployed SPACECOM asset responsible for theater ballistic missile warning for Pacific Command. He also discussed what space command does to contribute to the nation's warfighting capability, and how space is a growing part of today's military operations.
"Space command is a very important part of the team," General Eberhart said. "We are war fighters supporting war fighters. The men and women who are space experts are critical to today's warfighting capability. In the past, if we could have used space for these purposes, we were better off. Now, space is an essential ingredient. We've learned to rely on what we get from space; therefore, you don't leave home without it, and you don't fight a war without it."
The general also said space is vital to other military operations. "Space isn't just about the fight, but the entire spectrum," he said. "We rely on space for communications, navigation, timing, surveillance, reconnaissance and weather forecasting. We use it in humanitarian and peacekeeping operations. It's part of everything we do." General Eberhart also talked about looking at space in other ways as well.
"Space is the ultimate high ground," the general said. "Not only do we have to use it, we have to be able to defend it and deny our enemy the use of space if we are at war. It doesn't mean communications and navigation are less important, but we have to ensure space superiority for our commanders and men and women who rely on it during the fight." While getting the word out on how important the role of space is in today's military and how critical space superiority is, General Eberhart said taking care of the people who help the United States exploit space is just as important.
"When I was young and growing up in the Air Force we didn't have to walk to school in snow both ways with no shoes," he said. "For years and years, we thought if you were overseas, especially on a remote assignment, things were supposed to be tough.
"We've come to realize that is wrong," he said. "In my view, quality of life and infrastructure is very important overseas, even when on unaccompanied tours. The Department of Defense and the Air Force are continually looking for ways to improve quality of life for those far from home."
General Eberhart also wanted to reiterate messages from senior leadership throughout the DoD of its esteem for the men and women serving their country.
"It's so important we can't say it enough," he said. "I have great admiration and respect for the people serving -- including civilians, guardsmen and reservists -- regardless of what branch of service you're in, what job you do or where you do it, but when you serve away from home, the comforts of home and family, it's a challenge. I thank everyone for all they do. It's so important and I know it's not easy, but your leaders greatly respect what you do."
MILSPACE
Budget Bolsters Milspace Programs by Mary Ann Roney Peterson AFB - April 11, 2000 - The Air Force space budget for fiscal year 2001 provides all necessary components to continue to organize, train and equip the nation's premier space and missile force at Air Force Space Command.
-------- us nuc facilities
Fifty Questions for Senator Fred Dalton Thompson on Amendment 3250 to S.2549
10 Jun 2000,
by E. A. Slavin
http://www.downwinders.org/questions.htm
Here are fifty questions to ask Senator Fred Dalton Thompson in letters, faxes, E-mails, telegrams, phone calls, personal visits, press conferences, fundraisers, etc. (You may also wish to address them to the Senate cosponsors, who were apparently frustrated by Thompson's refusal to compromise on the Amendment.)
1. Why are there no Congressional findings and purposes? Isn't that customary, particularly in a piece of reform legislation? Why was this left out?
2. This Amendment reads like a rewrite of DOE's bad bill -- who drafted the Amendment? Was the proposed Nuclear Weapons Workers, Veterans and Residents Compensation and Health Act (NWWVARCHA) ever even considered? See http://www.downwinders.org/summary.htm and http://www.downwinders.org/new_draft.htm .
3. Why didn't Senator Thompson offer the Voinovich-Kennedy bill as a floor amendment and put it to a vote?
4. Why are there no action-forcing deadline mechanisms, as in the Voinovich-Kennedy bill, where claims are automatically granted if not denied by the deadlines?
5. Why are federal court lawsuits required to obtain discovery for beryllium victims? This is expensive, time-consuming and cumbersome -- the Department of Labor Office of Administrative Law Judges has its own discovery rules.
6. Why must beryllium victims wait 180 days before commencing a lawsuit to compel discovery? No such forced delays exist in DOL compensation litigation.
7. Why is the only mention of the word "court" in the entire bill in connection with beryllium workers having to sue to obtain discovery? Why aren't existing DOL administrative law judges used to decide cases with independence?
8. Why is there no provision for an award of reasonable attorney fees, other than for a lawsuit seeking discovery in federal court?
9. Why is there no ban on attorney solicitation, as there is in the Black Lung bill?
10. Why is there no ban on contingency fees, and a provision for attorney fees at reasonable hourly rates, as in Black Lung legislation?
11. Why are there no penalties for solicitation and contingency fees, as in the Black Lung legislation?
12. Why are there no penalties for perjury and document withholding by DOE and its contractors?
13. Why does the bill not say that it is remedial and to be liberally construed? Why do the words reform, remedial or liberal construction nowhere appear in the legislation?
14. Why is there no apology to workers DOE made sick -- as in Rep. Kanjorski's bill, filed some 18 months ago?
15. Why does the bill involve DOE deciding who to compensate for its own toxic chemicals?
16. Isn't that a conflict of interest to involve DOE in any way deciding who gets compensated?
17. Why are victims of cyanide, heavy metals and other toxicants left to the tender mercies of state workers' compensation systems?
18. Why isn't there funding of the compensation through a polluters-pay provision, requiring DOE contractors to pay for what they have done through their recklessness?
19. What discussions were had by Senator Thompson's office with Lockheed, DOE, insurance companies and other special interests?
20. Did Senator Thompson ever consider any of the testimony from his March 22, 2000 hearing in drafting the bill? Does he think this bill will help any of those witnesses? Why were the witnesses who filed written testimony with Senator Thompson not sent letters of thanks (common Congressional courtesy)?
21. Why were Senator Thompson's hearings so limited in duration and scope? Why were non-DOE witnesses limited to only five or ten minutes? Why were whistleblower and criminal law issues excluded from the hearing?
22. Why is there no provision in Senator Thompson's bill regarding investigation and prosecution of DOE contractors?
23. Why are the DOE-proposed medical panels in the legislation?
24. Aren't medical panels susceptible of influence and control? What lessons have been learned from the Reagan Administration's pressures on Social Security judges to deny benefits?
25. Why aren't medical panels protected by 5 U.S.C. 3105, the law that protects the independence of administrative law judges?
26. Why is there nothing to prevent pressures by DOE upon medical panel members?
27. Why is there an irrevocable election?
28. Why aren't rights to sue contractors for intentional torts preserved?
29. Why isn't the Federal Tort Claims Act amended to eliminate the discretionary function exemption for ultrahazardous activities?
30. Why is the phrase ultrahazardous activities totally missing from the legislation?
31. Why aren't Administrative Law Judges in the bill?
32. Why aren't appeals to the Administrative Review Board in the bill?
33. Why is there no provision for judicial review?
34. Why aren't genetic injuries to children and grandchildren covered?
35. Why aren't injuries to spouses and other household members covered?
36. Why aren't sick residents and Downwinders covered?
37. Why isn't the Administrative Procedure Act made applicable to hearing requirements?
38. Why aren't more diseases covered?
39. Why aren't more toxicants covered?
40. Why aren't cyanide, mercury and hydrogen fluoride -- the three major Oak Ridge toxicants -- never mentioned in the legislation, with compensation left up to the weak workers compensation system in states like Tennessee?
41. Why isn't independent medical care assured, free of influence by DOE and its contractors?
42. Why isn't independent medical research provided for, free of influence by DOE and its contractors?
43. Why is there no provision for a memorial to sick workers and residents whose suffering made the Cold War victory possible?
44. Did Senator Thompson ever do lobbying work for Lockheed Martin or any other DOE contractor? What kind of campaign contributions and other support has he received?
45. Did Senator Thompson's son ever work for Lockheed Martin, as indicated in a news report? When? Where? Why? What job duties? What salary/benefits? Is his son still working for Lockheed Martin? Where does he work now? 46. Did Senator Thompson talk about this legislation with his son? What was the discussion with Senator Thompson's son?
47. Did Senator Thompson talk about this legislation with Howard Henry Baker, Jr., whose corporate law firm spent some $159,000 in DOE money to sue DOL to prevent a hearing in Dr. Reid's case? What was the discussion with Howard Henry Baker?
48. Why did Senator Thompson serve as an obstacle and a stumbling block to real reform, breaking his promises to compensate and protect sick workers?
49. Just what did Senator Thompson think this bill is going to accomplish?
50. How many workers does Senator Thompson really think will be compensated under this bill? What is the source of the $1 billion estimate? Who made it?
Edward A. Slavin, Jr.
-------- ohio
Car dings truck hauling uranium containers
Columbus Dispatch
Saturday, June 10, 2000
Dispatch State Service
http://www.dispatch.com/news/newsfea00/jun00/309547.html
CHILLICOTHE, Ohio -- A truck hauling two 10-ton uranium containers was damaged yesterday when a car driven by a Hilliard man ran into it, officers said.
No one was injured and the cylinders did not leak, but the incident sent personnel from USEC, the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio's hazardous materials team and firefighters scrambling to the crash on Rt. 104, about 35 miles south of Columbus.
The cylinders were empty except for residual amounts of natural uranium, said Angie Duduit of USEC in Piketon, Ohio.
Duduit said the cylinders belong to Caneco, a Canadian company that sells uranium to the Piketon plant, which in turn enriches the uranium for use as fuel. The cylinders had been emptied at the plant and were being shipped back to Ontario, she said.
"There was no radiological threat and no harm to the public,'' Duduit said. The plant sent its transportation manager and a member of its health physics group to assist, she said.
Trooper Lee Thompson of the State Highway Patrol said the crash occurred at 10:57 a.m. on Rt. 104, about 9 miles north of Chillicothe.
David E. Sheffer, 45, of 1963 Camino Lane was driving south when he went over the center line, Thompson said. The car struck the left front tire of the northbound truck, bounced off and hit the rear tandem axle of the truck's trailer, Thompson said.
He said he was watching for the car, which had been reported weaving in Pickaway County.
Sheffer was charged with driving left of center and was given an alcohol test. Results of the test won't be known for about a week, Thompson said.
He said Sheffer had minor injuries but refused treatment. The truck driver, Larry E. Miller of Cobourg, Ontario, was not injured.
The road was blocked about four hours.
-------- south carolina
BARRELS FAIL TEST AT SRS
Containers used to transport plutonium don't meet site's criteria; redesign will cost $1.8 million
Web posted Jun. 10 at 09:45 PM
By Brandon Haddock Staff Writer
Augusta Chronicle
Plutonium is one of the world's most dangerous materials, and so its container is intended to be one of the world's hardiest.
The 9975, as dubbed by the federal government, can withstand fire up to 1,400 degrees Fahrenheit or submersion in water for 24 hours. But a recent test revealed a problem with the stainless- steel drum - a 30-foot drop jarred loose part of its lid.
The failure has some observers questioning the safety of shipping plutonium - scheduled to begin this fall - at Savannah River Site.
``In our view, shipping containers with plutonium brings unacceptably high risks to the public,'' said Rita Kilpatrick, executive director of Campaign for a Prosperous Georgia. ``The safety of these shipping containers and lack of testing has long been a concern raised by citizen groups.
``Shipping plutonium across our highways is not a safe solution.''
Watchdogs aren't the only ones barking. The U.S. Department of Energy's manager at SRS rebuked the federal nuclear-weapons site's contractor, Westinghouse Savannah River Co., last week for its oversight of the container's design.
Westinghouse failed to implement ``a framework of acceptable rigor for controlling the design, testing criteria and test procedure'' for the 9975, Greg Rudy wrote. The failure was one of three Westinghouse mistakes that cost the company $1 million in bonuses.
The contractor is working to correct the deficiencies, a Westinghouse spokesman said.
``We're confident that we will get that job done well,'' Will Callicott said.
Already, site engineers are reworking the way the lid is bolted to the can, said Dean Campbell, a Westinghouse spokesman.
Redesigning the containers will cost about $1.8 million, Mr. Campbell said.
About $800,000 will be spent to re-engineer and retest the design of the 9975, he said. An additional $1 million will be spent to retrofit 700 existing drums, which already cost $8,000 to $10,000 apiece.
The changes should not delay shipments of plutonium to the site, which are scheduled to begin this fall from the Energy Department's Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site in Colorado, Mr. Campbell said. Even relatively small amounts of plutonium, a radioactive metal used in nuclear weapons, can cause cancer.
``We've got the time to work on them,'' Mr. Campbell said of the containers. ``We're being conservative. We want to build in the safety margin.
``That's why we went through the redesign. We wanted to make sure that we did it in the safest way possible.''
The 35-gallon drums contain two additional stainless-steel barriers, in addition to a half-inch layer of lead used as a radiation shield, said Kim Sidey, a program manager for the Energy Department at SRS.
A material called Celotex also fills much of the drums, serving as a flame-retardant shield between a fire outside the canisters and the plutonium inside, Mr. Sidey said.
To be certified, the container must survive a series of tests designed to simulate the conditions of a severe highway accident.
The drum must survive a 30-foot drop test, and a 4-foot drop onto a spike to determine whether the drums are susceptible to punctures, Mr. Sidey said. The drum also must withstand being exposed to a 1,400-degree fire for 30 minutes, and being submerged in water for 24 hours.
If the container hasn't leaked plutonium at the close of the submersion, it is considered safe under federal rules, Mr. Sidey said.
``Doing a drop test from 30 feet and having the lid partially separate doesn't mean that after submerging the container for 24 hours, that there is going to be a leak,'' he said.
But the lid's failure broke an internal SRS rule governing the canister's design, Mr. Sidey said, so engineers decided the 9975 needed further work. Site officials are following a stricter standard than federal transportation rules, he said.
``We set certain criteria so it would be clear to us when we needed to stop and take a look at it,'' he said. ``We decided to stop and go back and raise the bar of what is thought to be safe.''
Watchdogs, however, remain unconvinced.
``The lesson here is that we're generally concerned about the standards for shipping casks that are used for nuclear materials,'' said Ed Lyman, scientific director for the Nuclear Control Institute in Washington.
``This demonstrates a clear inadequacy even under the existing standards, which are themselves too weak. It's not clear that they represent a real-world, worst-case crash condition.''
Reach Brandon Haddock at (706) 823-3409 or bhaddock@augustachronicle.com.
-------- washington
Clinton Creates 4 National Monuments
Sites in Colorado, Washington, Oregon, Arizona Protected
Washington Post
Saturday, June 10, 2000; Page A03
By Charles Babington Washington Post Staff Writer
http://search.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/2000-06/10/141l-061000-idx.html
One of the Columbia River's few free-flowing stretches, a rich archaeological site in Colorado and two other western sites will be protected as national monuments, the White House announced yesterday.
President Clinton is invoking the 1906 Antiquities Act to add new layers of protection to the lands, all of which are under federal control. An Oregon mountain range and an ironwood forest in Arizona round out the newest batch of national monuments.
Several presidents, Republican and Democrat, have used the Antiquities Act to make such designations. Clinton has been especially active, however, prompting some congressional Republicans to complain that he is unnecessarily locking up areas that face no real threat from development or degradation.
Vice President Gore, banking on his environmental credentials to help his presidential bid, visited Washington state yesterday to tout the two new monuments in the Pacific Northwest, a key campaign battleground. He used a power boat to travel a portion of the 51-mile "Hanford Reach" of the Columbia River.
The reach is a spawning ground for salmon and a boundary to the Hanford nuclear reactor reservation, owned by the Department of Energy. The government made plutonium for the nation's Cold War nuclear arsenal at the reservation, now a priority Superfund area for future environmental cleanup.
Gore also announced the creation of the Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument in south-central Oregon, along the California border. It includes Soda Mountain and encompasses about 52,000 acres controlled by the Bureau of Land Management.
"These lands are among America's great natural treasures, and we owe it to future generations to preserve them," the vice president said. "We act today so that, years from now, Americans will still be able to paddle free-flowing waters and hike pristine peaks, enjoying these extraordinary stretches of our natural heritage."
At the White House, officials described the other two new monuments: The Ironwood Forest National Monument, near Tucson, contains stands of ancient trees and many species of birds and animals, they said. The new Canyons of the Ancients National Monument will be in southwest Colorado's Four Corners region, near Durango. A White House briefing paper said it contains "the highest known density of archaeological sites anywhere in the United States, with rich, well-preserved remnants of native cultures going back thousands of years."
Supporters said the national monument designations are needed to protect the areas from vandalism, pressures for new mining or logging activities, and other threats. But several western Republicans accused the administration of political grandstanding.
Sen. Slade Gorton (R-Wash.) said of the Hanford Reach site: "There is no threat to the reach, since all of the property on either side of the river is owned by the government. The only 'emergency' is the fact that President Clinton will soon be out of office. . . . While we all agree it should be protected, it has always seemed to me it should be done" in consultation with local residents.
The White House is fighting a House Appropriations Committee rider to the Interior Department's funding bill that would bar the use of the money for designing, planning or managing national monuments created this year under the Antiquities Act. Opponents will try to strip the language from the bill when it reaches the House floor next week, congressional sources said.
Clinton earlier this year invoked the Antiquities Act to create the Grand Canyon-Parashant, Giant Sequoia, Agua Fria and California Coastal National Monuments, all in the West. Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt had recommended the creation of those monuments, plus the four newest ones.
"These are priceless natural landscapes that have somehow remained almost untouched by exploitation, development and urban sprawl," Babbitt said in making the latest recommendation to Clinton in May. "But we are losing open spaces every day. Protection of several of these areas, in one form or another, has been discussed for years, but no action has been taken. We may not have another chance before they are lost."
Gore told preservationists who have fought to protect the Hanford Reach area, "Sometimes the effort must have seemed like you yourselves were swimming upstream. But your ship's come in. I don't want to get too many metaphors in here, but this is a good day."
Gore also called for an Oregon "summit" involving supporters and opponents of a proposal to breach four dams across the Snake River to help save the region's endangered salmon, the Associated Press reported. Industry and labor officials say that breaching the dams, as environmentalists suggest, would threaten businesses and jobs. One protester's sign yesterday said, "Don't Gore our Dams."
"Extinction is not an option, nor is massive economic dislocation," Gore said in prepared remarks. "I reject both extremes."
George W. Bush, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, has pledged to block any attempt to breach the Snake River dams. Bush campaign spokesman Dan Barlett criticized the vice president for not taking a clear stand on the issue, saying: "Al Gore continues to demonstrate weak leadership on an important issue."
Gore defended his actions, saying: "I will bring together all interested parties to find a real solution. Mine will be an inclusive approach based on solid science--the kind of approach that is working right now in coastal areas like the Puget Sound."
SETTING ASIDE LAND
President Clinton signed proclamations creating four national monuments covering more than 500,000 acres.
1. Hanford Reach
200,000 acres
This is the last free-flowing, non-tidal stretch of the Columbia River, where 80% of fall Chinook salmon spawn.
2. Cascade-Siskiyou
52,000 acres
Diverse species of butterflies, snails and fish live in the area, which contains the spotted owl's old growth habitat.
3. Canyons of the Ancients
164,000 acres
The area contains more than 20,000 archaeological sites, in some places more than 100 sites per square mile.
4. Ironwood Forest
134,750 acres
The ironwood habitat in the Silver Bill Mountains holds several endangered or threatened species.
SOURCE: Interior Department
----s
UH physicist goes to Washington to oppose missile defense
Honolulu Star-Bulletin
Saturday, June 10, 2000
By Helen Altonn Star-Bulletin
http://starbulletin.com/2000/06/10/news/story5.html
University of Hawaii physicist Michael Jones will speak for scientists at a national gathering Monday to protest a proposed missile-defense system.
"The rush to make a decision on deploying this isn't based on sound scientific and technical information," Jones said before leaving today for Washington, D.C.
Citing frustration with "the politicization" of the issues, the Union of Concerned Scientists is seeking to educate Congress on the issues. More than 35 scientists and missile experts from 16 states will meet at the Capitol to tell President Clinton and lawmakers "the proposed system won't work."
Others speaking at a news conference Monday afternoon will be: Roy Danchick, mathematician and former employee of TRW, a national missile defense contractor; Dr. Joseph Lach, physicist at Fermi National Accelerator Lab, Chicago; and Dr. Lisbeth Gronlund, research fellow, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Security Studies Program.
Gronlund also is senior staff scientist for the Union of Concerned Scientists and author of a study on the planned missile system.
Clinton is expected to decide whether to deploy the system after a third intercept test in July and a Pentagon recommendation.
One of two tests so far has failed, Jones pointed out. "There is so very little information and what little there is doesn't seem particularly encouraging."
Leaders of Russia, Germany, China and other countries oppose the proposed system as a threat to their security.
The plan, estimated at a cost of about $49 billion, would start in 2005 with construction of 20 interceptor missiles in Alaska, growing to 100 two years later. They would be armed with non-nuclear "hit-to-kill" vehicles.
Ground-based phased radar stations and satellite-based infrared sensors would back the interceptor missiles in a system designed to shield the United States from a limited missile attack.
Hawaii Sens. Daniel Akaka and Dan Inouye and Rep. Neil Abercrombie last year co-sponsored legislation to deploy national missile defense "as soon as is technologically feasible." Abercrombie had opposed it, then switched, Jones said.
"I'm hoping to learn more about what they're actually worried about and why they did this," he said, adding that he believes they're worried about a threat from North Korea.
The Union of Concerned Scientists argues that the proposed missile-defense system wouldn't be effective "unless tested against the kinds of countermeasures that even countries like North Korea are capable of," Jones said.
Even if tests were successful, it's uncertain whether the deployed system would be able to distinguish a real warhead from decoys and other counter-measures, Jones said.
He said it's worth pursuing and testing sea-based theater missile defense systems, being developed against short-range missiles such as the Scuds used by Iraq in the Gulf War. But they have many of the same drawbacks as the national missile defense system, he said.
Democrat Leader Urges Care on Missile System
Yahoo News
Saturday June 10 11:09 PM ET
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The top Democrat in the U.S. Senate has urged the Clinton administration to proceed cautiously with its proposal for a multi-billion-dollar national missile defense system.
Senate Democrat leader Tom Daschle, in an interview with CNN due to be broadcast on Sunday, said Washington had to be certain of the reliability of such a system and needed to consider international concerns about sparking a new arms race.
``We've got to be able to answer a lot more questions about this prior to the time we commit the resources,'' Daschle said, according to a transcript of the interview released in advance.
``Will it work, first of all? What effect will it have on our allies? Can it be protected?... Who is going to answer those questions?''
President Clinton has pledged to decide later this year whether to deploy the $60 billion system, which would aim to protect the United States against long-range missiles fired by what it considers ``rogue states'' like North Korea and Iraq.
However, a growing number of Democrats are urging Clinton to leave to his successor the decision on whether to build and deploy the system.
Earlier this week, the New York Times reported that some military experts and critics of the defense system said tests of it were rigged to mask a fundamental flaw -- that it could not distinguish between enemy warheads and decoys.
Daschle said that if that were the case, Washington should not put money into a system that was not reliable.
``Just this week there was a very important new revelation that we may not know the difference between a phony missile coming toward the United States and a real one,'' he said.
``If we can't know the fundamental questions...if we don't know a phony one from a real one, I don't know that we're ready to commit the resources, the $60 billion.''
Washington's European allies have said a unilateral U.S. anti-missile system could lead to a renewed arms race.
On Saturday, Russian President Vladimir Putin reiterated his warning that a U.S. missile shield could threaten disarmament pacts.
``I think that we've got to be concerned about triggering an arms race... I think it's just about all of our European allies (who have expressed worries). Everyone in NATO has said exactly the same thing,'' Daschle said.
Building the U.S. missile shield would need a modification to the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty arms control agreement with Russia. Moscow, however, says it is opposed to any amendment to the ABM treaty and has proposed a joint NATO-European missile defense system.
----
30 Years After
The legacy of America's largest nuclear test
By Jeffrey St. Clair
http://inthesetimes.com/stclair2317.html
Photo explosion: http://inthesetimes.com/stclair2317.gif
Amchitka Island sits at the midway point on the great arc of Alaska's Aleutian Islands, less than 900 miles across the Bering Sea from the coast of Russia. Amchitka, a spongy landscape of maritime tundra, is one of the most southerly of the Aleutians. The island's relatively temperate climate has made it one of the Arctic's most valuable bird sanctuaries, a critical staging ground for more than 100 migratory species, as well as home to walruses, sea otters and sea lions. Off the coast of Amchitka is a thriving fishery of salmon, pollock, haddock and halibut.
All of these values were recognized early on. In 1913, Amchitka was designated as a national wildlife refuge by President William Howard Taft. But these ecological wonders were swept aside in the early '60s when the Pentagon and the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) went on the lookout for a new place to blow up H-bombs. Thirty years ago, Amchitka was the site of three large underground nuclear tests, including the most powerful nuclear explosion ever detonated by the United States.
The aftershocks of those blasts are still being felt. Despite claims by the AEC and the Pentagon that the test sites would safely contain the radiation released by the blasts for thousands of years, independent research by Greenpeace and newly released documents from the Department of Energy (DOE) show that the Amchitka tests began to leak almost immediately. Highly radioactive elements and gasses, such as tritium, americium-241 and plutonium, poured out of the collapsed test shafts, leached into the groundwater and worked their way into ponds, creeks and the Bering Sea. At the same time, thousands of Amchitka laborers and Aleuts living on nearby islands were put in harm's way. Dozens have died of radiation-linked cancers. The response of the federal government to these disturbing findings has been almost as troublesome as the circumstances surrounding the tests themselves: a consistent pattern of indifference, denial and cover-up continues even today.
There were several factors behind the selection of Amchitka as a test site. One most certainly was the proximity to the Soviet Union. These explosions were meant to send a message. Indeed, the tests were designed to calibrate the performance of the Spartan anti-ballistic missile, built to take out the Soviet nuclear arsenal. Publicly, however, the rationale offered by the AEC and the Defense Department was simply that Amchitka was a remote, and therefore safe, testing ground. "The site was selectedand I underscore the pointbecause of the virtually zero likelihood of any damage," claimed James Schlesinger, then chairman of the AEC.
What Schlesinger and his cohorts overlooked was the remarkable culture of the Aleuts. Amchitka may have been remote from the continental United States, but for nearly 10,000 years it had been the home of the Aleuts. Indeed, anthropologists believe the islands around Amchitka may be the oldest continuously inhabited area in North America. The aleuts left Amchitka in the 1880s after Russian fur traders had wiped out the sea otter population, but they continued to inhabit nearby islands and relied on the waters near Amchitka for subsistence. The Aleuts raised forceful objections to the tests, pointing to the risk of radiation leaks, earthquakes and tsunamis that might overwhelm their coastal villages. These concerns were never addressed by the federal government. In fact, the Aleuts were never consulted about the possible dangers at all.
In 1965, the Long Shot test exploded an 80 kiloton bomb. The $10 million test, the first one supervised by the Pentagon and not the AEC, was really a trial run for bigger things to come. But small as it was, there were immediate problems. Despite claims by the Pentagon that the test site would not leak, radioactive tritium and krypton-85 began to seep into freshwater lakes almost instantly. But evidence of radioactivity, collected by Defense Department scientists only three months after the test, was kept secret for five years. The bomb site continues to spill toxins into the environment. In 1993, EPA researchers detected high levels of tritium in groundwater samples taken near the test site.
The contamination from Long Shot didn't deter the Pentagon bomb-testers. In 1969, the AEC drilled a hole 4,000 feet deep into the rock of Amchitka and set off the Milrow nuclear test. The one megaton blast was 10 times as powerful as Long Shot. The AEC called it a "calibration test" designed to see if Amchitka could withstand a much larger test. The evidence should have convinced them of their dangerous folly. The blast triggered a string of small earthquakes and several massive landslides; knocked water from ponds, rivers and lakes more than 50 feet into the air; and, according to government accounts, "turned the surrounding sea to froth."
A year later, the AEC and the Pentagon announced their plans for the Cannikin nuclear test. At five megatons, Cannikin was to be the biggest underground nuclear explosion ever conducted by the United States. The blast would be 385 times as powerful as the bomb dropped on Hiroshima. Cannikin became a rallying point for native groups, anti-war and anti-nuke activists, and the nascent environmental movement. Indeed, it was opposition to Cannikin by Canadian and American greens, who tried to disrupt the test by taking boats near the island, that sparked the birth of Greenpeace.
A lawsuit was filed in federal court, charging that the test violated the Limited Test Ban Treaty and the newly enacted National Environmental Policy Act. In a 4 to 3 decision, the Supreme Court refused to halt the test. What the Court didn't know, however, was that six federal agencies, including the departments of State and Interior, and the fledgling EPA, had lodged serious objections to the Cannikin test, ranging from environmental and health concerns to legal and diplomatic problems. Nixon issued an executive order to keep the comments from being released. These documents, known as the Cannikin Papers, came to symbolize the continuing pattern of secrecy and cover-up that typified the nation's nuclear testing program. Even so, five hours after the ruling was handed down on Nov. 6, 1971, the AEC and the Pentagon pulled the switch, detonating the Cannikin bomb.
In an effort to calm growing public opposition, AEC chief Schlesinger dismissed environmental protesters and the Aleuts as doomsayers, taking his family with him to watch the test. "It's fun for the kids and my wife is delighted to get away from the house for awhile," he quipped.
With the Schlesingers looking on, the Cannikin bomb, a 300-foot-long device implanted in a mile-deep hole under Cannikin lake, exploded with the force of an earthquake registering 7.0 on the Richter Scale. The shock of the blast scooped a mile-wide, 60-foot-deep subsidence crater in the ground over the test site and triggered massive rockfalls.
The immediate ecological damage from the blast was staggering. Nearly 1,000 sea otters, a species once hunted to near extinction, were killedtheir skulls crushed by the shockwaves of the explosion. Other marine mammals died when their eyes were blown out of their sockets or when their lungs ruptured. Thousands of birds also perished, their spines snapped and their legs pushed through their bodies. (Neither the Pentagon nor the Fish and Wildlife Service has ever studied the long-term ecological consequences of the Amchitka explosions.) Most worrisome was that a large volume of water from White Alice Creek vanished after the blast. The disappearance of the creek was more than a sign of Cannikin's horrific power. It was also an indication that the project had gone terribly wrong; the blast ruptured the crust of the earth, sucking the creek into a brand new aquifer, a radioactive one.
In the months following the explosion, blood and urine samples were taken from Aleuts living in the village of Adak on a nearby island. The samples were shown to have abnormally high levels of tritium and cesium-137, both known carcinogens. Despite these alarming findings, the feds never went back to Adak to conduct follow-up medical studies. The Aleuts, who continue their seafaring lifestyle, are particularly vulnerable to radiation-contaminated fish and marine mammals, and radiation that might spread through the Bering Sea, plants and iceflows.
But the Aleuts weren't the only ones exposed to Cannikin's radioactive wrath. More than 1,500 workers who helped build the test sites, operate the bomb tests and clean up afterward were also put at risk. The AEC never conducted medical studies on any of these laborers. When the Alaska District Council of Laborers of the AFL-CIO, began looking into the matter in the early '90s, the DOE claimed that none of the workers had been exposed to radiation. They later were forced to admit that exposure records and dosimeter badges had been lost.
In June 1996, two Greenpeace researchers, Pam Miller and Norm Buske, returned to Amchitka. Buske, a physicist, collected water and plant samples from various sites on the island. Despite claims by the DOE that the radiation would be contained, the samples taken by Buske revealed the presence of plutonium and americium-241 in freshwater plants at the edge of the Bering Sea. In other words, Cannikin continues to leak. Both of these radioactive elements are extremely toxic and have half-lives of hundreds of years.
In part because of the report issued by Miller and Buske, a new sense of urgency was lent to the claims of laborers who said they had become sick after working at the Amchitka nuclear site. In 1998, the union commissioned a study by Rosalie Bertell, a former consultant to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (which replaced the AEC). Bertell found that hundreds of Amchitka workers were exposed to ionizing radiation at five times the level then recognized as hazardous. However, the research is complicated by the fact that many of the records from the Amchitka blast remain classified and others were simply tossed away. "The loss of worker exposure records, or the failure to keep such records, was inexcusable," Bertell says.
One of the driving forces behind the effort to seek justice for the Amchitka workers and the Aleuts is Beverley Aleck. Her husband Nick helped drill the mile-deep pit for the Cannikin test; four years later, he died of myelogenous leukemia, a type of cancer associated with radiation exposure. Aleck, an Aleut, has waged a multi-year battle with the DOE to open the records and to begin a health monitoring program for the Amchitka workers. In April of this year, the Clinton administration finally agreed to begin the first health survey of the Amchitka workers. The study was supposed to begin this summer, but it is languishing without funding.
Will the victims of the Amchitka blasts ever get justice? Don't count on it. For starters, the Aleuts and Amchitka workers are specifically excluded by the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act from receiving medical assistance, death benefits or financial compensation. There is move to amend this legal loophole, but even that wouldn't mean the workers and Aleuts would be treated fairly. The DOE has tried repeatedly to stiff arm other cases by either dismissing the link between radiation exposure and cancer or, when that fails, invoking a "sovereignty" doctrine, which claims the agency is immune from civil lawsuits.
Dr. Paul Seligman, deputy assistant secretary of the DOE's Office of Health Studies, writes it off as the price of the Cold War. "These were hazardous operations," Seligman says. "The hazards were well understood, but the priorities at the time were weapons production and the defense of the nation."
At a time when the mainstream press and Republican politicians are howling over lax security at nuclear weapons sites and Chinese espionage, a more dangerous betrayal of trust is the withholding of test data from the American public. China may use the Los Alamos secrets to upgrade its tiny nuclear arsenal, but the Amchitka explosions already have imperiled a thriving marine ecosystem and caused dozens of lethal cancers.
The continuing cover-up and manipulation of information by the DOE not only denies justice to the victims of Amchitka, but indicates that those living near other DOE sites may be at great risk. "DOE management of the U.S. nuclear weapons complex is of the old school in which bad news is hidden," says Pamela Miller, now executive director of Alaska Community Action on Toxics. "This conflicts with sound risk management and makes the entire system inherently risky. The overwhelming threat is of an unanticipated catastrophe."
Jeffrey St. Clair is a contributing editor of In These Times.
---
Pentagon Accused of Rigging Its Tests To Make Dummies Easier to Intercept Debates on Technology and Geopolitics Add Heat to Missile Defense Issue
International Herald Tribune
Paris, Saturday, June 10, 2000
By William J. Broad New York Times Service
http://www.iht.com/IHT/TODAY/SAT/FPAGE/shield.2.html
NEW YORK - Citing the Pentagon's own plan, critics of the proposed anti-missile defense and even some military experts say all flight tests of the Clinton administration's proposed $60 billion weapon have been rigged to hide a fundamental flaw: The system cannot distinguish between enemy warheads and decoys.
In interviews, they said that after the system failed to achieve this crucial discrimination goal against mock targets in its first two flight tests, the Pentagon substituted simpler and fewer decoys that would be easier for the anti-missile weapon to recognize.
The Pentagon's plan was obtained by Theodore Postol, an arms expert at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who opposes the weapon. It covers the four tests that have taken place as well as future tests up to the system's projected deployment in 2005.
Other technical experts who have seen it, including both anti-missile and decoy designers, concurred with his criticism, as did a senior government official who has examined the Pentagon's testing plan.
''It is clear to me,'' the official said, ''that none of the tests address the reasonable range of countermeasures,'' or decoys, that an enemy would use to try to outwit an anti-missile weapon.
While acknowledging that the plan was authentic, Pentagon officials strongly defended the testing program. Lieutenant General Ronald Kadish of the air force, director of the Pentagon's Ballistic Missile Defense Organization, denied that his program had engaged in any deception or dumbing down. General Kadish said the testing program would be extremely useful and the resulting defensive weapon would defeat crude warheads launched by inexperienced nuclear powers that might emerge, like Iran, Iraq or North Korea.
Though unclassified, the plan is considered sensitive. Mr. Postol said he obtained it from a Defense Department source he would not identify.
Mr. Postol, who is preparing a report for the White House on what he sees as the plan's flaws, made his argument Monday at a meeting of the State Department's advisory board on arms control, along with another anti-missile critic, Nira Schwartz. A former senior engineer at the defense contractor TRW Inc., Ms. Schwartz lost her job after she challenged the assertions the company was making for the weapon.
Mr. Postol, who worked in the Reagan administration on issues like anti-missile defense, says the Pentagon has ignored earlier criticism like Ms. Schwartz's and instead put flawed testing methods at the heart of all its plans to develop and build a working weapon. The upshot, he says, is that any real attacker - no matter how inexperienced - would be able to outwit the weapon easily.
Pentagon officials ''are systematically lying about the performance of a weapon system that is supposed to defend the people of the United States from nuclear attack,'' Mr. Postol said in an interview.
General Kadish conceded that ''this technology is difficult.'' As a result, he said, his organization's approach ''is to walk before we run, with increasingly stressful decoys to match what we expect'' by way of enemy threats. ''When we get to that end point, we'll have the confidence to put this on alert.''
But far from increasing the complexity of future tests, the Pentagon has made them easier, military experts who examined the testing plan said. Two rigorous flyby experiments in 1997 and 1998, to have the weapon simply observe the targets, they said, have been followed by interception tests designed to make discriminating between decoys and mock warheads as easy as possible.
''They did a good fox-trot for the first couple of tests and then slowed down to a crawl,'' said Bob Dietz, a retired former designer of warhead decoys for U.S. missiles. ''You have to ask why they don't build better decoys. They've always said they'd get better with time.''
Michael Munn, a retired scientist for the defense contractor Lockheed Martin Corp. and a pioneer in designing and testing anti-missile weapons, said, ''The only way to make it work is to dumb it down. There's no other way to do it. Discrimination has always been the No. 1 problem, and it will always remain that way.''
He said that manipulation of anti-missile flight tests was nothing new. ''It's always been a wicked game.''
The Pentagon itself is sharply divided on the testing issue. In February, Philip Coyle 3d, the Defense Department's director of testing and evaluation, faulted the anti-missile tests as insufficiently realistic to make decisions about moving from research to building the weapon.
The Clinton administration plans to decide this year whether to start building a defensive system based on such interception technology, which is to shield the United States from limited missile attacks by so-called rogue states.
Mr. Postol, a professor of science and national security studies at MIT and the author of many private and federal weapon reports, was a top navy science adviser in the Reagan administration and for decades has studied the issue of enemy countermeasures to anti-missile weapons.
-------- us politics
Gore Praises Move to Aid Salmon Run
New York Times
June 10, 2000
By KATHARINE Q. SEELYE
http://www.nytimes.com/library/politics/camp/061000wh-gore.html
RICHLAND, Wash., June 9 -- After an hourlong ride in a speedboat up the choppy Columbia River, Vice President Al Gore today announced President Clinton's designation of the Hanford Reach in south-central Washington, one of the most important salmon-spawning beds in the world, as a national monument.
The designation provides protection from dams, dredging and development for 195,000 acres of public land along the river, including the point, which a jeans-clad, wind-blown Mr. Gore examined by boat today, where more than 80 percent of fall chinook salmon spawn.
The new monument surrounds a region that, paradoxically, was already protected -- for other purposes -- by the federal government as part of the Army's secret Manhattan Project, which designed and built the atomic bomb in World War II. The plutonium for the bomb that the United States dropped on Nagasaki, Japan, in 1945 was made at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation near here. The nuclear reactors and their adjacent burial grounds of high-level radioactive waste are excluded from the national monument boundary.
As Mr. Gore told a small crowd today along the banks of the Columbia here, "It is a great irony of our history that in closing off these lands to build great weapons of destruction in service to the cause of freedom, at the same time we actually ended up protecting one of our greatest natural treasures."
"And let me tell you," he added, "I am committed to making sure that we continue to clean up the cold war legacy of contamination on this land."
The lands, under various federal and state orders, are to be cleaned up by 2070. But there is fierce opposition to this move, both from local governments that want to keep control of the area and agricultural interests that want to use the river to irrigate farms.
Representative Richard Hastings, a Republican who represents this area, which has been a buffer zone between the contamination and the community, wrote to the president recently asking him not to make the designation. Mr. Hastings said there was no immediate threat to the river because of a federal law that bans new dams and navigational projects on this part of the river.
Mr. Clinton actually signed the proclamation designating the Hanford Reach and three other areas -- the Ironwood Forest in Arizona, the Canyons of the Ancients in Colorado and Cascade-Siskiyou in Oregon -- as national monuments this morning in Washington.
Aides to Mr. Gore said the president's action relieved the vice president of any official obligation here and allowed him to stage the announcement as a campaign event.
---
Gore Announces New U.S. Monuments
Associated Press
June 10, 2000
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/w/AP-Gore.html
RICHLAND, Wash. (AP) -- Wind mussing his hair, Vice President Al Gore sped up the Columbia River Friday in a boat named ``Can Do II,'' turning the administration's designation of new national monuments into a campaign event.
The Democratic presidential candidate saluted local preservationists who have fought for three decades to protect the Columbia's Hanford Reach, a 51-mile stretch of salmon-rich waters and sloping sandstone bluffs. It once served as a security buffer for Hanford, where the government made plutonium for the nation's Cold War nuclear arsenal.
``Sometimes the effort must have seemed like you yourselves were swimming upstream,'' Gore said. ``But your ship's come in. I don't want to get too many metaphors in here, but this is a good day.''
Hours before Gore, in blue jeans, made a 16-mile tour of the Columbia then addressed a riverbank gathering, President Clinton made the formal monument designations at the White House.
The designations were made under the Antiquities Act, which allows creation of monuments on federal land for scientific or historic reasons. Also chosen:
-- Oregon's Cascade-Siskiyou, including Soda Mountain and nearby lands where plant and animal life are abundant.
-- The Canyons of the Ancients, nine miles west of Mesa Verde National Park in Colorado.
-- The Ironwood Forest, a 129,000-acre area northwest of Tucson, Ariz., that is filled with stands of ironwood trees.
Gore's courtship Friday of the Pacific Northwest -- emerging as a battleground in the race against Republican George W. Bush -- was an exhaustive one. He left Los Angeles at 6 a.m. for a 17-hour day of campaigning across Washington state.
At the U.S. Conference of Mayors' meeting in Seattle, Gore touted the administration's economic record: ``One of the reasons America's cities are back is that America is back and our economy has turned around.''
Preparing for a two-week campaign swing focused on future economic policy, Gore warned that bad decisions about how to handle budget surpluses are just as dangerous as bad decisions about deficits. ``We could kill the golden goose,'' Gore said.
He also headlined the state Democratic Party dinner in Spokane before returning to the nation's capital on an overnight flight.
At a Democratic Party lunch to raise $450,000, Gore shook hands with Seattle Mayor Paul Schell, the first elected official to endorse the vice president's primary rival, former Sen. Bill Bradley. Both now support Gore.
Asked by a reporter if Washington Democrats are enthusiastic about Gore, Schell said, ``We have no choice,'' saying he's better than Bush. As for formerly backing Bradley, he said, ``I make no apologies.''
``It's not helping him that we got the federal government trying to take apart one of our major businesses out here,'' Schell said, referring to the government-ordered breakup of Seattle-based Microsoft Corp.
Rich Steele, a retired engineer from the Hanford nuclear plant, piloted the small motor boat that cruised Gore and the state's top Democrats, Sen. Patty Murray and Gov. Gary Locke, up the river.
Gore was later the ``surprise guest'' at a re-election fund-raiser for Locke.
The vice president promised, if elected, to convene a ``summit'' to decide the controversial question of breaching four dams across the Snake River in Washington to help save the region's famous but endangered salmon.
``I will bring together all interested parties to find a real solution. Mine will be an inclusive approach based on solid science -- the kind of approach that is working right now in coastal areas like the Puget Sound,'' Gore said.
Industry and labor officials say that breaching the dams, as environmentalists suggest, would threaten farming, other businesses and jobs. Demonstrators with signs that read, ``Don't Gore our Dams,'' greeted the vice president here in southeast Washington.
Bush has pledged to block any attempt to breach the dams and his campaign criticized Gore Friday for not taking a position.
``Al Gore continues to demonstrate weak leadership on an important issue,'' said Bush spokesman Dan Barlett.
Meanwhile, in Boise, Idaho, Green Party candidate Ralph Nader also urged the breaching of the dams.
Washington Sen. Slade Gorton, a Republican, and county commissioners in Hanford's three surrounding counties oppose the federal designation of the Hanford Reach, arguing that such decisions should take into account the views of local residents.
The Hanford nuclear site is a priority Superfund area for future cleanup, and Gore said, ``I am committed to making sure that we continue to clean up the Cold War legacy of contamination on this land.''
---
Bush Criticizes Gore Record on Trimming Bureaucracy
New York Times
June 10, 2000
By ALISON MITCHELL
http://www.nytimes.com/library/politics/camp/061000wh-bush-invent.html
WILTON, Conn., June 9 -- Gov. George W. Bush today assailed Vice President Al Gore's signature effort to streamline government, saying the Clinton administration had not reinvented the bureaucracy, but "simply reshuffled it."
Beginning the campaign day in Philadelphia at the Carpenter's Hall, the site of the First Continental Congress, Mr. Bush stepped squarely onto the territory of his opponent, who has overseen the administration's "reinventing government program."
"Today, when Americans look to Washington, they see a government which is slow to respond, slow to reform, ignoring changes that are taking place in the private sector and in some local and state governments," Mr. Bush told a small crowd of invited guests.
Ridiculing some management titles and duplicative government efforts, the Texas governor proposed plans for bringing government into the era of new technology, saying he would save $88 billion over five years by phasing out 40,000 management jobs, contracting out services to the private sector, and increasing use of the Internet.
The speech was his second in two days concentrating on government operations, and today he had Mr. Gore directly in his sights. "You may recall the present administration came to Washington promising to change all this -- to clear away the clutter of bureaucracy and to streamline the system," Mr. Bush said. "At last report they had, in the vice president's words, created government that works better and costs less. That doesn't really square with the facts."
Gov. Tom Ridge of Pennsylvania, campaigning at Mr. Bush's side, implicitly raised the questions about Mr. Clinton's character that are also at the heart of the Bush campaign. "We need a president who people trust and we need a president who trusts the people," said Mr. Ridge, whose name has often appeared high on lists of potential running mates for Mr. Bush.
Mr. Ridge even stole the slogan of the first Clinton campaign for president as he introduced Mr. Bush, saying, "We need a president who puts people first."
With Mr. Gore at the helm, the Clinton administration began an effort to streamline the government in President Clinton's first year in office. So far, administration officials say, the government has saved about $136 billion through the effort.
Mr. Clinton and Mr. Gore say the government work force is smaller than at any time since the early 1960's, with 377,000 fewer employees than when they came into office in 1993. The administration also says that changes in government procurement methods have saved more than $12 billion.
"The federal government is smaller than it's been in 40 years and we've balanced the budget to boot," said Douglas Hattaway, a spokesman for Mr. Gore. "At the same time that we've made government smaller, we've invested more in education, health care and other ways to help people."
Mr. Bush challenged some of the administration's estimates of savings. He said that the independent General Accounting Office had been unable to document two-thirds of the savings.
He mocked the federal government for having one safety agency that inspects cheese pizza, and another that inspects pepperoni pizza, saying: "Apparently the revolutionary idea that maybe these functions should be combined hasn't dawned on anybody yet."
Mr. Bush made fun of the titles of some senior federal administrators. "We now have Washington offices crowded with people bearing titles like associate principal deputy assistant secretary, or principal deputy to the deputy assistant secretary," he said to a ripple of laughter.
"The point is that for all the administration's rhetoric about reinvention, they never asked the fundamental question about the purpose of government," Mr. Bush said, "what it's doing or whether it should be doing it at all. At a time when private businesses are turning to leaner management teams, Washington keeps adding new managers. They haven't reinvented the government bureaucracy; they have simply reshuffled it."
Mr. Bush said he would not replace half of the managers at senior and middle levels who are expected to retire over the next eight years -- eliminating 40,000 jobs. He called on Congress to create a "sunset review board" to evaluate every government program and agency "to make sure it has not outlived its usefulness."
He outlined an array of other changes, like moving government procurement to the Internet and creating a chief information officer, and spending $100 million to promote e-commerce proposals.
The Gore campaign responded by pointing to Texas, saying that since Mr. Bush took office in 1995, the Texas budget has grown to $98.1 billion from $72.8 billion, or by 36 percent, compared with 21 percent federally.
Later in the day, Mr. Bush stumped before an enthusiastic crowd at a high-tech company here in Connecticut, the Silicon Valley Group Lithography Systems, and attended fund-raisers that aides said would generate nearly $2 million for Republican campaigns.
---
GEORGE W. BUSH'S JOURNEY: THE CHEERLEADER
Earning A's in People Skills at Andover
New York Times
June 10, 2000
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
http://www.nytimes.com/library/politics/camp/061000wh-bush.html
LANDOVER, Mass. -- Perhaps there have been other presidential candidates who have dressed in drag, flaunting their legs from beneath a (fairly short) white skirt. But George W. Bush is probably the only one who has done it in front of a camera.
A photograph showing George and friends wearing wigs and employing falsies to fill out their sweaters appears in a yellowed copy of the school newspaper of Phillips Academy here in Andover, near Boston. It was 1963, and George, then a high school senior and head cheerleader, was leading a skit intended to mock rival schools.
Governor Bush's student days were in most respects supremely undistinguished, and anyone hoping to find reassurance about his candidacy through signs of great intellect or gravitas in those years will be disappointed. There were many other students then who seemed far more likely to emerge as political leaders.
Yet there was one important area where young George did excel: people skills. It was in high school that he first seemed to cultivate them and exhibit them, using the tactics that show through in that photo -- wisecracking showmanship -- to carve out an identity for himself, an identity that is more subdued today but otherwise intact.
It was also then that George W., while forging countless loyal friendships, also began to turn some people off with what they saw as arrogance, emptiness and a tendency to smirk and be dismissive.
In his stump speeches today, Mr. Bush comes across not as a policy maven or intellectual but as a politician motivated in large part by optimism and a yearning to "lift the spirit of America," as he puts it. In all this, there is perhaps an echo of a boy at Andover long ago who finally found his niche by building coalitions across cliques and lifting the spirits of his school.
In an institution that respected brains and brawn, George seemed to overflow with neither. He was a mediocre student and no more than a decent athlete, and he paled in comparison with his father and namesake, who had been brilliant at everything he did.
Yet, in the end, George found alternative ways to claim the stage and become popular. Against the odds, he emerged by force of personality as a significant figure on campus.
No one thought of George W. Bush as a future politician, and he seemed oblivious to the civil rights struggle and other issues of the day. But he worked hard to remember everyone's name and managed to worm his way into the limelight. Early on, he showed one of the most fundamental political skills: the ability to make people feel good.
"You can definitely see the germination of leadership there, even though the activity was not anything you would call political," said Randall Roden, a childhood friend of George who also attended Andover. "He was learning those skills, or perfecting them, at Andover."
Portraits of the youthful George W. tend toward the extremes, presenting him either as a paragon of decency, street smarts, charisma and quips, like some Republican John F. Kennedy, or else as a spoiled dolt who (as was said of his father) was born on third base believing that he had hit a triple. Yet the George whom classmates recall is no such caricature, one way or the other, but rather the more complex image of the nervous, excited and exuberant boy with a thick Texas accent who showed up for classes at Andover in September 1961.
A Question of Privilege
What if George W. Bush's father had been an ordinary Texas oilman named Smith? Or, to ask it another way, how much of his achievement has been his own? This is a question that dogs him today as a presidential candidate, and it does seem that from the very beginning, Mr. Bush got a crucial helping hand in life because of his name and family connections. Otherwise, he would probably not have been admitted to Andover and then Yale.
This question of privilege is one that rankles Mr. Bush, and when he was asked about it in a long interview about his past, he became prickly.
"I think I'm asked that all the time," Mr. Bush scolded. "It's interesting, they always use the word 'Smith,' too." He deepened and modulated his voice to mimic a television interviewer: " 'Would you be standing here as presidential candidate if your name were George Smith?' Well, you know, it's not George Smith. It is George Bush. And how did it influence? I don't have any idea."
In fairness, aside from help with admissions committees, the name was not the eye-opener then that it is now. Young George's father was an obscure Texas oilman until he ran for the United States Senate in 1964, the year George graduated from Andover. His grandfather, Senator Prescott Bush of Connecticut, occasionally visited George at Andover in a car with the senatorial "Connecticut 2" license plates, but several friends from that era insisted in interviews that they did not even know back then about his grandfather and did not see George as anyone special.
George W. had generally enjoyed a privileged upbringing, particularly after he moved with his family at the age of 13 to Houston from the West Texas oil town of Midland. There the family settled into a large house with a pool on a 1.2-acre lot, and George attended the eighth and ninth grades at Kinkaid, an excellent private school.
The specific benefits of his family heritage became clear in 1961, when George was accepted by Andover, one of the country's premier high schools. Then an all-male institution, Andover had a college-level faculty and an amazing $80,000 budget just for mowing the lawns and planting the grounds.
It was also exceptionally difficult to get into, and George had already encountered problems with admissions officers. He had been rejected by St. John's, the best private school in Houston.
(A family friend vaguely recalled the rejection, but when Governor Bush was interviewed he said he knew nothing of this. Later, after checking with his parents, he went out of his way to confirm, without any apparent embarrassment, that he had indeed been rejected.)
Andover was far more competitive than St. John's. A contemporary magazine article says 80 percent of Andover applicants were then being turned down, and it seems unlikely that George would have been admitted to Andover entirely on his own merits.
But he did not need to be. The Andover admissions process calculated a numeric score for each applicant, ranging from 4 to 20, and then gave a 3-point bonus to any son of an Andover graduate. George's father had been a star graduate, still beloved by teachers there.
This may diminish George's achievement in getting into Andover but it does not erase it. Even among sons of Andover graduates, fewer than half were admitted at that time. Mr. Bush says he has no recollection of his grades at Kinkaid, but a friend from that time says he was an A student, and it was those grades and his activities as a class officer and athlete that, along with his pedigree, put him over the top at Andover.
Adjusting to Andover
The adjustment to Andover was a rough one for young George, who had been wrenched from sunny Texas and a school where he had effortlessly been a good student. At Andover, in contrast, George's first grade on an essay (about his sister's death from leukemia when he was 7) was a zero, boldly written in red ink along with the teacher's scrawled comment: "disgraceful."
"It was a shocking experience," Clay Johnson, a fellow Texan in the class of '64, said of Andover. "It was far away from home and rigorous, and scary and demanding. The buildings looked different, and the days were shorter. We went from being at the top of our classes academically to struggling to catch up. We were so much less prepared than kids coming from Massachusetts or New York."
And young George had another concern. "He had this fear that generation after generation had gone to Andover," Mr. Johnson said, "and he would fail after three weeks."
As a presidential candidate, Mr. Bush has emphasized education policy and the need to raise expectations. That theme, he suggested, is rooted in those hours spent slaving over assignments at Andover.
"If you want to translate real-life experience, I understand what it means for people to raise expectations," he said. "When I talk about high expectations of schools, Andover has high expectations, at least when I went there. And it was rigorous. I mean it was very rigorous academically, and I'm a better person for it."
Yet despite the pressure, young George seems to have remained remarkably sunny. Classmates remember him as cheerful and exuberant. When snow began falling in October of his first year, he bounded outside in excitement to catch the flakes and try to gather enough for a snowball.
"My memory of living with George was that it was probably the funniest year of my life," recalled Donald E. Vermeil, a roommate at Andover. "George is just an incredibly funny guy. He had a way of keeping everything light and entertaining without offending people or getting out of line."
Andover was rife with cliques, and George fell into the jock crowd, which was disproportionately made up of boys from beyond the Northeast. Although George had always had a foot in the privileged blue-blood world of the Northeast -- he frequently visited his wealthy maternal grandparents in Rye, N.Y., as well as the family retreat in Kennebunkport, Me. -- he hung out less with the ubiquitous New Yorkers and more with the jocks who also felt a bit out of place and overwhelmed by the schoolwork.
"He was less of a jock; he was more of a jock hanger-on-er," said Peter Schandorff, a classmate. "He was a member of teams, but he never really distinguished himself in sports."
Those who played basketball, baseball or football remember George as moderately talented but exceptionally scrappy, sometimes too much so. Once the coach had to pull him out of a basketball game when he became angered at a referee's call and hurled the ball at an opposing player.
A Rebel From Texas
George W. Bush was a slob.
School rules required boys to wear jacket and tie during meals and classes. He tested these rules by frequently wearing sneakers (without socks), ancient pants, a wrinkled shirt, a disastrously knotted tie and sometimes an army jacket. Friends say his aim was not just to rebel but also to remind everyone that he was a Texan, not a preppy.
Students all ate in the Commons, an elegant dining hall with high ceilings, somber portraits and dark wood paneling -- the formal atmosphere undermined by the pats of butter that the boys sent hurtling at one other or at the walls, where they stuck if catapulted with enough force. George and the other jocks mostly sat together at one end of the Commons, while the academic types and nerds sat on the other end.
Most of the time, there were only 2 blacks among the 240 students in the class of '64, although in their final year they were joined by the son of the prime minister of Somalia. (He proved to be a useful resource to the teenage boys because he had several wives and, under pressure, revealed something of the mysteries of sex.)
"Much to my astonishment, the fellows from the South, especially the guys from George's little Texas group, were more friendly than their Northern counterparts," recalled Conway A. Downing, a black student from Virginia. "At least with respect to African-American guys in the class, he got along very well with them."
José R. Gonzalez, a Puerto Rican, has the same memory of Mr. Bush, as unusually friendly, open and unpretentious.
"A guy from Puerto Rico was sort of unusual at Andover," Mr. Gonzalez recalls, "but it didn't bother him."
Mr. Gonzalez remembered being invited once to spend Thanksgiving vacation with George at his grandfather's house in Connecticut. It was only after he arrived at the house that he figured out that the grandfather was a United States senator.
"He took pains to get along with everybody," recalls Thomas B. Eastland, a classmate. "He was building coalitions throughout."
Yet there are others who recall things very differently, and who remember limits to that inclusiveness.
One of Mr. Bush's political problems today is a perception among some voters that he is arrogant, an empty suit smirking condescendingly at the world, and that perception seems to have first manifested itself at Andover. That is when he developed his smirk (which his friends insist is simply a self-deprecating smile), and even then it irritated some classmates who saw him as no more than an empty polo shirt.
While Mr. Bush charmed his way into the most desirable social circle, some recall say that he was dismissive of other students and practiced his put-downs on them.
"George was very much in the 'cool' group, and it seemed to me that he wasn't that interested in those who weren't," said Robert P. Marshall, a more scholarly classmate.
" 'Inclusive,' " Mr. Marshall added, "is about the last word I would have used to describe how George was at Andover."
Matthew J. McClure, who was then on a lower social plane than Mr. Bush's crowd, also remembers Mr. Bush's social skills as directed only at others who were "in," while disdaining the less fortunate.
"When I was at Andover, I was not part of the cool crowd, and George was," Mr. McClure said. "If you were not cool, then George ignored you. When you're that age and the people who are cool ignore you, it's unpleasant, and that was my experience."
Raising School Spirits
George W. found his avenue to prominence on campus by leveraging his enthusiasm and affability. One steppingstone was his role as head cheerleader, which gave him a chance to ham it up in front of crowds.
George initiated a series of humorous pep talks and skits in the weekly school assemblies, but school officials fretted that they simply drew attention to the cheerleaders rather than to the football team. G. Grenville Benedict, the dean of students, urged the cheerleaders to tone it down and perhaps call off the skits.
That drew a swift rebuke from the school newspaper, the Phillipian, which ran a lead editorial in defense of "Bush's antics."
In the end, Mr. Benedict grew extremely fond of George. The next head cheerleader, Michael M. Wood, said he was taken aside by Mr. Benedict and told that George had raised Andover's school spirit to its highest level since Mr. Benedict had joined the school, in 1930.
More than cheerleading, though, George's claim to fame at Andover was organizing a huge intramural stickball program. Stickball, played with broomsticks and a tennis ball on a field, a variant of the kind played on the streets in New York City, had been an informal pastime at Andover for several years.
But at the weekly assembly in April of his senior year, George stood up and announced the formation of a stickball league. He was wearing a top hat like a circus showman, and instead of a brief announcement, he offered a 20-minute speech that had much of the audience in stitches.
"I was his roommate and I don't remember him rehearsing or practicing," said John Kidde. "And he got up, and you can see why he's doing what he's doing today. He announced how he was high commissioner of stickball, and he got some chuckles, and he just kept going. He was making it up as he went along. And he started talking about rules, and it was very funny. It was a riot."
The stickball league was popular among the students in part because it was seen as subversive, spoofing Andover's somber athletic traditions. Instead of the earnest sports matches that were rigidly controlled by adult coaches, the stickball league was entirely run by the students and was dedicated to fun rather than excellence, just like the high commissioner himself.
George chose team names for their appeal to adolescent tastes. There were the Nads, so that fans could scream "Go, Nads!" And there were various other risque names, or else respectable-sounding ones that cleverly had unprintable acronyms. Team members printed personal nicknames on their white T-shirts -- McScuz, Vermin, Zitney and the like.
"Stickball was a way to send up Andover and let off some of the inevitable senior year springtime steam," recalled David T. Mason, a classmate. "To George's eternal credit, it did this without getting anyone expelled."
The season culminated in a tournament and eventually a grand-championship game umpired by George himself, in which the Steamers faced the Beavers. Throngs watched as the teams dueled, with the 6-foot-9 Steamer pitcher (Root) facing off against a skinny but wily junkballer (Zitney) for the Beavers. After a dropped fly ball, the Steamers won 3-0.
"The Beavers were heartbroken, but it had been a hell of a season," recalled Zitney, more formally known as Peter T. Pfeifle. "I doubt there has ever been anything like it again since that spring of 1964. Stickball was the thing, and Bush was stickball."
Friends found that George became increasingly self-confident as he realized that he had a talent for social leadership.
"It was part of his self-image and what built his confidence," said Mr. Roden, his childhood friend. "He knew he could get people to do things."
Precursors of Politics
George was particularly admiring of a legendary history teacher, Thomas T. Lyons, and later majored in history at Yale. Yet he exhibited little intellectual curiosity, and he also was largely oblivious to politics.
"We certainly didn't talk about world affairs," recalls Mr. Bush's girlfriend in those years, Debbie Taylor, with whom he danced the twist, played tennis and listened to the Crystals' song "He's a Rebel."
"I thought he was kind of studly," Ms. Taylor recalled, laughing. "He played tennis well. He could drive. Not to belittle anything that he is, but he could drive and that was important. He was more assertive and certainly more outgoing than some other guys. I thought he was good-looking.
"I was 15," she added, laughing at herself.
George was not involved in student government. But some classmates now think that his roles as stickball commissioner and head cheerleader were precursors of politics. When Governor Bush talks about making America feel better about itself -- well, some classmates think back to their old stickball commissioner.
"At the time the whole stickball thing seemed like a grand prank, without political overtones," said Bryce Muir, a classmate. "Looking back, it was an inspired scheme with definite political implications."
Mr. Bush himself does not claim, of course, that his student activities qualify him for the White House. Asked about his leadership at Andover, he said sarcastically, "Well, I think the stickball commissioner makes me perfectly suitable to become the president."
Ever since Andover, Mr. Bush has consistently demonstrated the same kind of leadership: not a powerful intellect or dazzling policy expertise but rather an exceptional ability to make friends, work a crowd, cheer people up and take them all in his direction. As Texas governor, for example, he worked with Democrats as well as Republicans, built successful coalitions and became a popular figure without typically becoming immersed in policy details.
A Helping Hand at Yale
eorge fretted among friends about the pressure to get into Yale, which his father and grandfather had attended, and he hit the books largely with that goal in mind.
Mr. Benedict, the dean, looked over George's transcript and College Boards and then suggested in a kindly way that he apply to some easy colleges in addition to Yale. So George applied to University of Texas as his "safe school," but in the end Yale accepted him.
Yale, like Andover, gave a helping hand to alumni sons in the admission process -- far more than now -- and it seems unlikely that Mr. Bush would have been admitted into Yale otherwise.
There were no class rankings, but George never made honor roll even one term, unlike 110 boys in his class. His College Board scores (leaked by some current Yale students and reprinted in The New Yorker) were 566 for the verbal part and 640 for math. Those were far below the median scores for students admitted to his class, as published in his Yale class's 25th reunion book: 668 verbal and 718 math.
So if his father and grandfather had not been stars at Yale, and his grandfather had not been a Yale trustee, George almost certainly would have ended up at the University of Texas.
Several of George's classmates went to Harvard instead, and one of them, Mr. Schandorff, became friendly there with a young Tennessean named Al Gore. It is, of course, difficult to compare a high school pupil with a college student, but Mr. Schandorff recalls George Bush and Al Gore as strikingly different.
Mr. Schandorff says that George was energetic, memorable and a constant cheerleader, but never showed any political interest, deep thoughts or long-term ambition. In contrast, he says he found the youthful Al Gore immersed in politics, very intelligent and fiercely ambitious.
"I always thought Gore might be president," Mr. Schandorff recalled. "We talked about things like that. He talked about buying The Nashville Tennessean and working his way up to be president. We laughed and he said, 'What job would you like in the cabinet?' I said, 'National cruise director.' "
As he graduated from Andover, George was a well-known character on campus, a young man with warm and loyal friends but not one who seemed destined for greatness. He was not a finalist in voting for "most likely to succeed," "most respected," "politico," or any of the other main categories. But, in a reflection of his people skills, he did come in second for "big man on campus."
What would those Andover students have thought if they had been told back then that George W. Bush would become a candidate for president?
"The reaction," said William T. Semple, a classmate, "would have been gales of laughter."
---
DNC: Democrats Fire Back at Bush Social Security Scam
PR Newswire
06/10/00
'Here's My Review: Under Bush, Social Security Would Be 'Gone in Sixty Seconds.'' - DNC National Chair Joe Andrew
WASHINGTON, June 10 /PRNewswire/ -- Immediately following the Republican National Committee's announcement of a multi-million dollar issue ad campaign to boost George W. Bush's sagging Social Security proposal, Democrats reacted to Republicans' new ad campaign. ``Have you seen the movie 'Gone in 60 Seconds?''' Democratic National Committee National Chair Joe Andrew asked. ``Regardless of the distortions in Bush's new minute-long TV ad, that would be the future of Social Security under Bush's privatization plan. One minute, you've got a rock-solid guarantee, and then suddenly it's gone.'' (Photo: http://www.newscom.com/cgi-bin/prnh/20000107/DCF015)
Andrew pointed out that even under the rosiest scenarios, Bush's Social Security plan would devour the entire budget surplus -- a surplus that Bush has already spent several times over on his tax plan and various proposed spending increases. ``While Democrats and Al Gore welcome a real bi-partisan approach to ensuring the future of Social Security, the Bush plan is nothing but a fraud. It would undermine the prosperity we enjoy by creating a one trillion dollar hole in the surplus, remove the guarantee of benefits, and turn the Social Security system into a game of winners and losers,'' Andrew said.
Nonpartisan Social Security experts have said Bush's plan could mean deep cuts in benefits, nearly $1 trillion in transition costs and could lead to an S&L-style bailout of Social Security. Bush has refused to rule out raising the retirement age, and has left open the possibility that workers could get fewer benefits under his privatization plan than under traditional Social Security.
Andrew said, ``Republicans like Senator John McCain and Representative Lindsay Graham have also expressed concern with Bush's Social Security plan.''
During a campaign stop in South Carolina, Senator McCain said, ``Governor Bush's proposal has not one new penny for Social Security, not one penny to pay down the debt, not one penny for Medicare. There's a difference there. He puts all the extra surplus into tax cuts. I don't think we need that.''
For a DNC reality check / Ad Watch, please go to www.democrats.org .
SOURCE: Democratic National Committee
---
Campaign Briefing THE DEMOCRATS
New York Times
June 10, 2000
http://www.nytimes.com/library/politics/camp/061000campaign-briefing.html
GORE CONSIDERS HIS LEGACY Vice President Al Gore has clearly given extensive thought to his legacy. Emphasis on extensive. Here was his answer Thursday at a fund-raiser in Los Angeles when a guest asked him how history would view him after two terms as president: "I would hope that at the end of my tenure it would be said that during those years the American people reached their highest potential and had obstacles and impediments removed from their way, that the progress and prosperity of our nation continued and accelerated, that we gave every child health care and moved quickly toward universal health care for all, that we revolutionized the educational system and brought the productivity revolution of the private sector into the schools and respected teachers and made our schools the very best in the world. I would want it said that we were a more harmonious nation where race and ethnicity were understood and recognized but didn't make a difference because we respected one another's differences and embraced what we had in common. I would want it said that violence declined sharply. I would want it said that the environment became a central principle of what we did and how we did it and that we led the world toward a successful confrontation with the problem of global warming. I would want it said that we reformed our politics and campaign financing and that we made democracy more real in the lives of our people, and finally, I would want it said that at the end of those years we as Americans had a stronger belief in our own ability to govern ourselves and to make our dreams real." Katharine Q. Seelye (NYT)
THE POLLS
BUSH AND GORE STILL EVEN Two new national polls have Gov. George W. Bush and Vice President Al Gore still locked in a race that is too close to call.
One new survey gives Mr. Bush a slight edge, 41 percent to 38 percent. The poll, conducted by Princeton Survey Research for Bloomberg News, surveyed 1,208 adults between May 25 and June 4 and has a margin of sampling error of 3 percentage points. A CNN-USA Today Gallup poll taken last week put Mr. Bush at 44 percent and Mr. Gore at 44 percent, with a margin of error of 5 percentage points. (NYT)
THE REFORM PARTY
BUCHANAN'S SPOKESMAN FIREDNeil Bernstein, campaign spokesman for Patrick J. Buchanan, was dismissed yesterday by Bay Buchanan, the candidate's sister and his chief strategist.
In a press release announcing his own departure, Mr. Bernstein said: "I have attempted to inject creativity and vision into the press operation and to the campaign at large. However, the desire to add even a modicum of creativity and vision into this campaign is not shared by Bay Buchanan or the majority of the senior staff." True, Ms. Buchanan said, adding that Brian Dougherty, a former producer at Fox Television News, has replaced Mr. Bernstein. Of Mr. Bernstein, who joined the campaign in October, she said, "We wish him well." Douglas Jehl(NYT)
THE INTERNET
In the growing world of online campaigning, both Democrats and Republicans unveiled party-sponsored Web sites this week -- both designed to look a lot like news pages. The new sites, in fact, contain many news articles, but also have a heavy dose of promotional materials. The Republican site, www.GOP.gov, has an exclusively political focus and is designed to give Congressional Republicans a chance to post their press releases. The Democratic site, www.FreeDem.com, is also heavy on politics, but also lists things like movie reviews and top news stories.
It also offers free Internet access, a feature the party says is intended to "help span the digital divide." Leslie Wayne (NYT)
-------- activists
Rob Campbell asks supporters to send letters to the White House regarding a National Day of Remembrance for victims of atomic weapons.
National Association of Atomic Veterans
Terry T. Brady,
Alaska State Commander
3842 Wesleyan Drive
Anchorage, AK 99508-4821
Phone 1-907-333-9462
E-Mail akatvet@hotmail.com
June 10, 2000
President William Jefferson Clinton The White House Washington, D.C.
Dear President Clinton:
July 16, 2000 is the 55th Anniversary of the first atomic explosion, the Trinity Shot, held on a dark summer morning in New Mexico, that forever changed our world and the lives of literally billions of human beings ... the alive ... those yet too be alive ... and many now dead.
As the Alaska State Commander of the National Association of Atomic Veterans, on behalf of nuclear veterans, including those still with us, healthy and sick; and those who paid the ultimate price of an early death caused by non-combat radiation wounds; as well as hundreds of thousands of family members affected; I respectfully request you declare July 16 to be a "National Day of Remembrance".
Nothing affected the last half of the 20th Century, as did the introduction of the Nuclear Age, for good or for evil. And the 21st Century is starting off with the threats still over us.
Hundreds of thousands of U.S. Servicemen and women, and many thousands more civilians, were subject to ionizing radiation from nuclear weapons, during manufacture, in storage, and deployed, beginning with Trinity. This included American Prisoners of War in Japan in August 1945, and the non-volunteers at the hundreds of atmospheric tests in the Pacific and Nevada Test Sites. In addition the handlers of nuclear material throughout the "Cold War", continuing to the young men and women of Desert Storm, have all been affected.
Many times these personnel, sworn to secrecy for great portions of their lives, were exposed ... and many of those alive are ill, yet unrecognized.
The "Day of Remembrance" must also recognize the citizens of our nation who were unknowingly exposed, as uranium miners, nuclear plant workers, those living downwind of atmospheric tests ... and as the story is told, many more affected simply because they were alive and breathing.
As the nation that "beat the Axis enemies to developing the science that provides weapons of mass destruction" as well as "hopefully peaceful uses of the atom", it would be magnanimous if the United States would formally recognize former enemies as well as friends who likewise have been affected since July 1945.
Perhaps a "National Day of Remembrance" will remind contemporary leaders to act in ways so that the "Nuclear Genie" that was loosed on July 16, 1945 is never again "Let out of the Bottle."
Then the veterans can rest, knowing their risks, and sacrifices (as well as those of the families) will have meant something positive, rather than just being forgotten veterans of the "Cold[1] War".
I thank you for considering this request, and offer all the support that the National Association of Atomic Veterans can give in bringing this day about, not just as a hollow resolution from Congress ... but as a media happening that all can partake of.
Sincerely
cc: Sen. Ted Stevens
Sen. Frank Murkowski
Rep. Donald E. Young
Gov. Tony Knowles
----
INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNAL ON U.S./NATO WAR CRIMES IN YUGOSLAVIA
Saturday, June 10
A public meeting to launch a worldwide movement to abolish NATO
11 am sharp to 7 pm Doors open 10 am: slides, video Martin Luther King HS Auditorium (W. 65th St. & Amsterdam, Manhattan, NYC) donation requested
On June 10, 2000, the International Action Center is holding a day- long International Tribunal on U.S./NATO War Crimes Against Yugoslavia. This is the one-year anniversary of NATO's occupation of Kosovo. The initial hearing last July 31 in NY was followed by similar hearings in a dozen U.S. cities and in Belgrade, Buenas Aires, Oslo, Novi Sad, Berlin, Rome, Vienna, Moscow, Kiev, Sydney, and Tokyo. At a mass peoples tribunal in Athens last fall, 10,000 people found Clinton guilty of war crimes.
Former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark will prosecute U.S. and NATO leaders for 19 charges of war crimes, crimes against peace, and crimes against humanity. International expert witnesses will present testimony. A distinguished international panel of judges will hear the case.
Come and be part of this historic event.
FEATURING INTERNATIONAL DELEGATES FROM 15 COUNTRIES, including: Former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark; Prof. Michel Chossudofsky, economist and author; Margarita Papandreou, former first lady of Greece; Pat Chin, journalist; Ismael Guadalupe, leader of the movement to get the U.S. Navy out of Vieques, Puerto Rico; Former Admiral Elmar Schmaehling, leading spokesperson for German movement; Michel Collon, Belgian journalist, anti-war activist, author about NATO aggression in the Balkans; Sara Flounders and Brian Becker, Co-Directors, International Action Center; Gloria La Riva and Richard Becker, West Coast Regional Co- Directors, International Action Center; Shani Rifati, Voices of Roma; Mikhail I. Kuznetzov, president of the Russian/Slavic War Crimes Tribunal against NATO; Roland Keith, Canadian officer attached to the Observer Group in Kosovo in 1998-1999; Jorge Farinacci, Puerto Rican Socialist Front; Monica Moorehead, Millions for Mumia; Prof. George Wright, author; Janet Eaton, biologist and encironment expert, Canada; Angeles Maestro Martin, member of the Spanish Parliament; Raniero La Valle, Italian religious anti-war leader, former MP; Charles Pascal Tolno, president of the African Association of Writers from Guinea (Conakry); Gilles Troude, an editor of Balkans-Info, Paris, France; Ben Dupuy, former Haitian ambassador at large during the Aristide administration; Olga Mejia, former director of Panamanian Human Rights Commission;
International Tribunal on U.S./NATO War Crimes in Yugoslavia c/o International Action Center
International Action Center 39 West 14th Street, Room 206 New York, NY 10011 email: iacenter@iacenter.org web: www.iacenter.org CHECK OUT THE NEW SITE www.mumia2000.org phone: 212 633-6646 fax: 212 633-2889
----
CAMPAIGN AGAINST DEPLETED URANIUM
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE AGAINST DEPLETED URANIUM
Bringing Together Speakers and Campaigners from All Over the World We hope this international conference will be an opportunity not only to provide accessible information to those not familiar with the issue, but also provide a working platform for activists, politicians and national representatives to collaborate on key global strategies for removing the threat of depleted uranium from all peoples, and for putting pressure on governments to respond appropriately to this threat. The conference will also provide a place for scientists from around the world to compare notes on their research thus far. The conference will begin at 9am on Saturday 4 November and conclude at 5 pm on Sunday, 5 November. The plenary sessions will include speakers from Iraq, Serbia, and veterans groups. Scientists will present the latest information on the testing programmes and medical effects. Workshops on the huge range of issues related to DU include: health effects, the nuclear industry, international law and UN work, government responses, Gulf War and Balkans veterans, clean up operations, practical support for those affected, the role of the World Health Organisation and the International Atomic Energy Authority, environmental effects, non-violent protest actions, etc. Full conference programmes will be sent out with your registration pack.
Speakers Include:
High-level UN speakers have been invited, but we are still awaiting confirmation (June 2000). Confirmed speakers thus far include representatives from campaign groups in Puerto Rico, the Netherlands, Italy, Serbia, and the U.S.; the International Association of Lawyers Against Nuclear Arms; the Military Toxics Project; radiation scientists from Iraq and Serbia; Alice Mahon, MP; Dr. Doug Rokke, US Army Radiation Health Specialist during the Gulf War; Dr. Rosalie Bertell, who has worked in the field of environmental epidemiology of cancer and birth defects for thirty years; Karen Parker, JD, international lawyer at the UN; Dr. Malcolm Hooper, Chief Scientific Advisor to UK Gulf War Veterans; Damacio Lopez, director of the International Depleted Uranium Study Team; Dr. Chris Busby, physical chemist and consultant to the Low Level Radiation Campaign; and Felicity Arbuthnot, investigative journalist.
What is Depleted Uranium?
Depleted Uranium is a waste product of the nuclear industry. It is radioactive and chemically toxic, extremely dense, and is now used to make armour-piercing weapons. When it burns or explodes, a fine, breathable, insoluble radioactive dust is released that can travel for many miles. DU has a half-life of 4.5 billion years. This means that, unless isolated, it can remain accessible to the human environment forever. About 320 tons of DU were fired on Iraq during the Gulf War, and about 10 tons on Kosovo and Serbia; a smaller, unknown amount, was used in Bosnia in 1994-95. Veterans and civilians in the Gulf War and the Balkans have reported ill-health, cancers, and nerve damage, as well as cancers and genetic abnormalities in their children.
What is CADU?
The Campaign Against Depleted Uranium was launched in Manchester, England, in January 1999. Issues covered by its work include ill effects of DU on soldiers and civilians in Iraq and the Balkans, medical effects of DU on soldiers and civilians, DU storage in the UK and the US, DU in scrap metal in the UK, use of DU in airplanes, and DU testing in New Mexico, Scotland, Japan and Puerto Rico. CADU, together with other groups, initiated meetings at the Hague Appeal for Peace, May 1999. These meetings formed the strong international links in the campaign against DU that are enjoyed today. CADU is a small, largely voluntary group, funded by small grants, affiliation fees and donations.
CADU's Aims:
-a global ban on the manufacture, export, and use of depleted uranium weapons;
-recognition by European defence ministries that DU weapons are connected with illnesses among veterans and civilians from the Gulf War, the Balkans, and among those near DU testing, manufacturing and air crash sites;
- governments that use DU must take responsibility for environmental decontamination of areas where it has been used;
-recognition that DU weapons are already banned under international humanitarian law.
Manchester - A Nuclear Free City for Twenty Years
5 November 2000 marks the twentieth anniversary of Manchester's 'nuclear free' policy. Manchester became the UK's first Nuclear Free Local Authority in the world in 1980. Manchester City Council is generously supporting the conference.
Invitation and Registration Form for the INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE AGAINST DEPLETED URANIUM 4-5 November, 2000 Manchester, UK Register soon! Limited places available! Sponsors: The Wainwright Trust, The Rowntree Reform Trust, Manchester City Council, Greater Manchester and District CND
Send your form (below) and payment by post to: CADU, One World Centre, 6 Mount St., Manchester, M2 5NS England Invoiceable organisations only may: email to: gmdcnd@gn.apc.org OR fax to: 44-(0)161-834-8187 Thank You! For more information please telephone the CADU office on: 44-(0)161-834-8301; or 834-8176 or send us an email!
Registration Form International Conference Against Depleted Uranium 4 -5 November 2000 Manchester Town Hall, England
Organisation (if any)
Name
Address
Tel Fax E-Mail
Please send me information about Hotels, Guest Houses and Youth Hostels (Delegates must make their own arrangements for accommodation).
Places are limited. Please register as soon as possible! Send your form and payment by post to: CADU, One World Centre, 6 Mount St., Manchester, M2 5NS England Invoiceable organisations only may: email to: gmdcnd@gn.apc.org OR fax to: 44-(0)161-834-8187 Thank You! For more information please telephone the CADU office on: 44-(0)161-834-8301; or 834-8176
Greater Manchester and District Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (GM&DCND), One World Centre, 6 Mount Street, Manchester, M2 5NS, UK Tel: +44 (0)161 834 8301, Fax: +44 (0)161 834 8187, E-Mail: gmdcnd@gn.apc.org
----
Somewhere, oh, for the Rainbow
Gathering site not announced, but group members already making their presence felt
By BOB ANEZ
Associated Press Missoulian
June 10, 2000
http://www.missoulian.com/archives/index.inn?loc=detail&doc=/2000/June/10-155-news12.txt
HELENA - While officials of federal, state and local governments wait to find out where the Rainbow Family will hold its annual gathering next month, members of the counterculture group already have made their presence known in Montana.
Welfare offices, food banks and homeless shelters have been affected. Some minor crimes allegedly connected to Rainbow members have been reported. Law enforcement, emergency service agencies and public health officials are preparing for the possible arrival of 25,000 to 30,000 people for the Rainbow gathering.
"The overnight appearance of a community the size of Helena in a remote mountain meadow can present some unique public health problems," said Todd Damrow, state epidemiologist.
About 500 members of the group, a melding of 1960s-style hippies and societal dropouts preaching peace and harmony, already are camped on Bureau of Land Management land near Jackson, about 60 miles northwest of Dillon.
The camp will constitute the annual Spring Council for the Rainbow Family, which may decide this weekend the exact location of the Gathering of the Tribes 2000. Usually, the event takes place near the council meeting site.
Government preparations for the gathering, scheduled for July 1-7, involve the U.S. Forest Service; state departments of Justice, Disaster and Emergency Services, Environmental Quality, and Public Health and Human Services; county and city governments in southwestern Montana; and local health, medical and law enforcement officials.
Barry Adams, a Rainbow spokesman who lives near Drummond, could not be reached for comment Friday.
With Rainbow members already migrating to the area, some social services have been affected.
At the God's Love shelter in Helena, 200 to 300 members have sought help as they passed through on their way south, said Cathy Leitheiser, bookkeeper for the shelter.
The upper and lower floors of the building were filled with people sleeping on the floor, she said. Many came with children and, when the shelter was full, they were given money for rooms at low-priced local hotels, she added.
"A lot of them came unprepared, without camping gear or clothing," Leitheiser said. Many were sent to the local Good Samaritan store for clothes.
Sheila Saltzman, an official in the Townsend welfare office, said small groups of Rainbow members began trickling into the office about mid-May, seeking help. They were provided with blankets, food and gasoline.
"They said they didn't want to deplete our community and wouldn't take any more than they needed," she said.
But, concerned about depleting supplies for needy people already in the community, the office decided to use money provided by local religious groups to provide vouchers for gasoline, lodging and food, she said. The vouchers were available through the sheriff's office, but few Rainbow members asked for them, Saltzman said.
A 16-year-old girl from a Rainbow encampment was taken to the Dillon hospital by ambulance, and gave birth early Wednesday.
The Food Pantry, a food bank in Dillon, gave 25 pounds of beans and a similar amount of rice to a group of Rainbow members last week, said Millie Brown, who operates the facility.
But the bank's board members called a halt to those handouts, she said. "The board decided local people will be served before we serve the Rainbow people."
Larry Laknar, disaster and emergency services coordinator for Beaverhead County, and Bill Fox, who heads a special Forest Service management team that handles large-group events on national forests, said authorities have reported minor incidents of theft by some Rainbow members as they migrated to southwestern Montana.
Fox said about a dozen Rainbow members have been arrested in the last few weeks. Law enforcement officials for Beaverhead and Jefferson counties did not return telephone calls Friday.
"There's a criminal element within the Rainbow Family," Fox said. "But there's a lot of good people who attend the gatherings, too."
State investigators and the Montana Highway Patrol will supplement law enforcement from Beaverhead and surrounding counties when the gathering nears.
One of the biggest concerns raised by the huge meeting involves availability of clean drinking water and disposal of human waste. "They're not very adept at doing much with water sanitation," Laknar said, although members coming to the event have been advised to boil drinking water.
"I'm not sure how sewage will be handled," he said "There's not enough porta-potties in the whole Northwest to handle that many people."
Fox, who has helped manage the last two Rainbow gatherings, said the group usually digs trenches to serve as toilets.
Damrow said information from the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention indicates health problems have been widespread when the Rainbows come together. Sunburns, dehydration, broken bones, drug overdoses, sprains, dog bites, spider bites, snake bites, food poisoning and other water- or food-borne diseases can be expected, he said.
A planning meeting involving state and local health officials is scheduled for Sunday in Dillon.
On the Web
Information about the Rainbow Family gathering is available at the group's unofficial site, www.welcomehome.org/rainbow.html.
-----------
Posted
without profit or payment for research and educational
purposes only,
in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107.