------- Index of Articles

NUCLEAR
Japan Appealing a Ruling Aiding Victims of A-Bombs
N. Korea Demands U.S. Compensation
Dangerous Dead-End
Experts Counter Bush on Missile Shield Tests
Asian Leaders Target Muslim Extremists [and missile defense]
Bush, Putin Plan on New Partnership
Selected Quotes by Bush, Putin
Bush Q&A With AP
Putin Cites 1954 NATO Document
Bush Urges Putin to Approve Plans for Missile Shield
Treaty barely a blip in U.S. defense plans
Treaty at Heart of Missile Debate
Bush, Putin to meet
Selected Quotes by Bush, Putin
Bush's Vision
Bush-Putin Bond Is Goal of First Meeting
Ethics of Key Bush Officials Targeted
DON'T GET FOOLED AGAIN

MILITARY
UN Halts Aid Deliveries in Angola
Former Rising Star on Wall Street Is Arrested in Arms Sale Inquiry
Forces Exchange Fire in Macedonia Despite Cease-Fire
Colombia Frees FARC Rebels in Landmark Swap
Cannabis Legalization Sought in UK
Turning a Friendlier Face to Iran
Japan Minister Departs for US Meeting
President Urges Expansion of NATO to Russia's Border
Profiles of the nine official NATO candidate countries
New Zealand Aims to Scrap Air Defense
Bush Will Ask Congress To Cancel Vote on Vieques
UN Halts Aid Deliveries in Angola
Angola Aid Plane Fired on, U.N. Says

OTHER
Energy Disruptions Brighten Future of Coal, a Fossil of a Fuel
The Next Industrial Revolution
ABROAD AT HOME - The Closed Mind
195 Fluoride facts, horror stories and cover-ups
Police Join in Cincinnati Rally
Reports: Hanssen Told Wife He Spied
2 Held for U.S. Embassy Bomb Plot

ACTIVISTS
Rioters Disrupt EU Summit
SWEDISH POLICE SHOOT ANTI-BUSH DEMONSTRATORS
Protesters Arrested at U.S. Embassy
Seoul Activists Burn U.S. Flag
Landless Leader Found Murdered


-------- NUCLEAR

-------- japan

Japan Appealing a Ruling Aiding Victims of A-Bombs

New York Times
June 16, 2001
By CALVIN SIMS
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/16/world/16TOKY.html?searchpv=nytToday

TOKYO, June 15 - The Japanese government is seeking to overturn a court ruling early this month that provided the first compensation for survivors of the 1945 atomic bombings in Hiroshima and Nagasaki who now live overseas.

The Justice Ministry said today that it had appealed a June 1 Osaka District Court decision that ordered the local government to pay a Korean survivor of the Hiroshima bombing $17,000 for medical care that the prefecture had halted after he left Japan for Seoul.

Explaining the reason for the appeal, Mayumi Moriyama, the justice minister, said that when Parliament passed the Atomic Bomb Victims Relief Law in 1994, the legislation excluded the estimated 5,000 survivors of the bombings who live abroad.

"This is totally inhumane," said Kwak Kwi Hoon, 77, the South Korean plaintiff, who was serving in the Imperial Japanese Army and suffered a spinal injury during the atomic attack.

"I think Japan is dragging its feet waiting for A-bomb survivors to die," Mr. Kwak told reporters. "We don't have much time left."

Legal experts said it could take several years for the appeal to make its way through the courts, leaving overseas survivors, who live mainly on the Korean Peninsula and in Brazil, with little or no means to pay for treatment.

The current Japanese law excludes all survivors who live overseas, both Japanese and foreigners. They are eligible for free medical treatment and financial support if they return to Japan.

Groups representing bomb survivors in Japan and overseas said the government's decision to contest the ruling was particularly onerous because many victims now living abroad were forcibly brought to Japan to serve as laborers during the country's colonial occupation of much of Asia before World War II.

Jeong Gihwa, secretary general of the Special Committee for the Welfare of Korean Atomic Bomb Sufferers in Hiroshima, sharply condemned the appeal, saying the 2,000 atomic bomb victims living in Korea would suffer greatly.

"We have been fighting a long time for support for victims residing outside Japan, and it appears that the plight of these people is still not understood," he said.

Tadatoshi Akiba, mayor of Hiroshima, said the appeal was "extremely disappointing" and vowed to increase pressure on the government to extend medical benefits to all victims regardless of their residency. "As a city, we have been working hard to eliminate nuclear weapons and establish world peace," he said, "but the government must do its part to take responsibility for all victims."

The appeal today contrasted sharply with a surprise move last month by Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi to let another district court ruling stand that ordered the government to pay compensation to leprosy patients who had been confined to sanitariums for decades after a cure for the disease was discovered.

Mr. Koizumi was widely lauded for his compassion after he ordered the government to issue a formal apology and was seen on television shaking hands with leprosy patients.

Mr. Koizumi's aides had said the administration planned to challenge the leprosy ruling because it would leave the government open to similar lawsuits and because the district court had granted compensation for rights violations beyond a 20-year statue of limitations.

Asked to explain the difference in the way the government handled the two cases, Hideki Hama, director of the Justice Ministry's administrative litigation division, said: "The leprosy case was an exceptional one in which the patients had suffered historically, directly at the government's hands. The victims of the atomic bomb are also suffering but you can't value one over the other."

Mr. Hama said the government was simply following the strict letter of the law, which allows for victims to receive compensation for medical treatment only in Japan. In legal matters, especially those involving compensation, Japan has traditionally adopted a rigid stance. Mr. Hama said the appeal was also based on a 1999 case in a Hiroshima district court that ruled in favor of the central government in a lawsuit filed by atomic bomb victims living in South Korea.

Hiroshi Tanaka, a professor of sociology at Ryukoku University who has written extensively on the rights of non-Japanese living in Japan, said that behind the government's appeal was a disturbing trend towards Japanese ethnocentricity. "Mr. Koizumi's administration clearly views Japanese victims different from non- Japanese," he said. "It's common sense in the global area for any country to provide compensation for all people who are eligible, no matter where they live."

Koizumi administration officials have expressed concern about the public criticism that is likely to result from the appeal and said they are seeking measures to assist bomb victims living overseas, including providing transportation allowances for the victims to come to Japan for treatment.

-------- korea

N. Korea Demands U.S. Compensation

JUNE 18, 06:40 EST
By PAUL SHIN
Associated Press Writer
http://wire.ap.org/APnews/center_story.html?FRONTID=ASIA&STORYID=APIS7CMTLA80

SEOUL, South Korea (AP) - North Korea, in its first response to a U.S. proposal to resume contact, said Monday that talks should begin with discussion of economic losses that Pyongyang blames on Washington.

President Bush this month ordered his foreign policy team to resume talks with the communist state, saying discussions should focus on North Korea's missile program and its massive deployment of troops near the border that bisects the Korean peninsula.

Nudging aside that proposed agenda, North Korea said Monday that talks should focus on the alleged U.S. failure to keep its end of a 1994 agreement under which the North froze its suspected nuclear weapons program.

The agreement requires a U.S.-led international consortium to provide North Korea with two power-generating light-water nuclear reactors by 2003. However, the $4.6 billion project has been delayed by financing and political tensions on the Korean Peninsula.

Claiming that the delay is causing it a huge electricity loss, North Korea demanded compensation.

``The electricity loss from the delay in building light-water reactors should be taken up as a priority agenda in the talks,'' a North Korean Foreign Ministry spokesman said in a radio broadcast monitored in Seoul.

The spokesman, who was not identified by name, also complained that Washington unilaterally set the agenda despite saying the proposed talks have no conditions attached.

``We cannot but evaluate the U.S. proposal as unilateral and conditional in its nature and hostile in its intentions,'' the spokesman said. ``The U.S.-proposed agenda concerns our nuclear, missile and conventional armaments and this all is nothing but an attempt to disarm us.''

The spokesman said any reduction or re-redeployment of North Korea's 1.1-million-member military cannot be discussed before the United States withdraws its military presence in South Korea.

The United States keeps about 37,000 troops in South Korea as a deterrent against a possible invasion by North Korea. The Korean peninsula has been divided since the end of World War II, and the 1950-53 Korean War ended in an armistice.

South Korean officials said the North Korean response could set the stage for dialogue with the United States.

``By proposing its own agenda, North Korea has expressed its intentions to accept the U.S. offer of dialogue, although it is discontent with the U.S.-proposed topics,'' said Rhee Bong-jo, an assistant minister at Seoul's Unification Ministry.

Analysts in Seoul also saw the North's response as positive.

``The North Korean demand does not cloud the prospect of talks with the United States,'' said Koh Yu-hwan, a North Korean affairs professor at Seoul's Dongguk University. ``It is rather pragmatic, indicating that the North is prepared to negotiate with the U.S.''

There was no immediate U.S. reaction.

On Wednesday, U.S. and North Korean officials met in New York to make arrangements for the possible resumption of talks, suspended in January while the Bush administation reviewed U.S. policy regarding the communist state.

The United States described Wednesday's talks as ``a good beginning to the dialogue process'' and said they were expected to continue.

However, the United States has rejected previous North Korean demands for compensation, arguing that the 2003 date stipulated in the 1994 agreement was a target date, not a contractual date.

The 1994 agreement also requires the U.S.-led international consortium, the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization, to provide North Korea with 500,000 tons of fuel oil annually until the first reactor is built.

The United States says the fuel oil should be considered compensation for the delay in building the reactors.

North Korea suffers from an acute electricity shortage. Visitors say many of the communist country's factories are operating at less than 30 percent of capacity.

-------- missile defense

Dangerous Dead-End

JAMES K. GALBRAITH
The Progressive Populist,
June 16, 2001
http://www.populist.com/01.12.galbraith.html

Since Ronald Reagan announced Star Wars in 1983, missile defense has come to dominate the evolution of strategic thinking. For the leaders of the nuclear establishment, the propaganda value of this has been immense; it has let them escape the stigma of Dr. Strangelove.

The American debate over missile defense has accepted this so much so that Donald Rumsfeld now describes the pursuit of missile defense as a "moral imperative."

But in fact, missile defenses in all forms are drastically destabilizing, easily defeated, and globally dangerous whether the system works or not.

Put simply, national missile defense is:

1. A diplomatic disaster. Deployment of national missile defense requires abrogation of the 1972 ABM treaty. The administration claims to regard this treaty as a "Cold War relic," but it is the foundation of the entire structure of strategic arms control. Without the ABM treaty, neither Russia nor China can feel secure in their deterrent capabilities, and neither will comfortably adhere to their longstanding restraint in nuclear offensive weapons. Our allies in Europe recognize these dangers, and for this reason they oppose US NMD.

2. A technological dead end. As defense, national missile defense will not work, for the simple reason that it is too easily defeated by decoys and by attacks on the "eyes" of the system. The fact that the technology has not matured after 40 years of effort is clear evidence of this. It only took six years to go from the discovery of uranium fission all the way to the detonation of an atomic bomb; only one test showed that the implosion bomb would work. National missile defense has been tested repeatedly. There is no sign that the fundamental difficulties of making it work under combat conditions can be overcome.

3. A budget sink-hole. Missile defense is impossibly expensive. Standard estimates of $60 billion for a working system overlook two important facts. First, many scores of billions have already been spent on the system, with little to show. Second, all military development programs cost much more than is budgeted for them at the outset. Cost is particularly open-ended for high-urgency programs whose technological difficulties remain unresolved. Such programs are, of course, an invitation to misrepresentation and fraud; and important accusations of this have already been made against NMD.

4. A strategic threat. The administration claims that national missile defense is really targeted against the threat of a rogue state or an accidental missile launch. The obvious fallacy is that no "rogue state" would target the United States with a ballistic missile, when simpler, cheaper, effective, untraceable means of delivery of a small atomic terror weapon are available. The accidental launch argument, on the other hand, concedes that Russian and Chinese missiles are the real targets. But the risk of accident could be eliminated by de-alerting Russian missiles (China's missiles are not on high alert now), as well as our own -- de-alerting which is only possible without missile defense

The fact that NMD cannot defend us calls attention to the only way in which NMD might work: as an adjunct to an American first strike that destroys most enemy forces and everything else on the ground. Following a first strike, a limited missile defense might then shoot down the handful of surviving retaliatory missiles -- thus completing the carnage. This point is clear to both Russia and China who long ago concluded that NMD extends long-standing American strike-first plans -- by which they have felt threatened for 50 years. They will respond, as both have warned, by increasing the numbers of their own missiles and by placing their forces on a higher alert.

National Missile Defense is, in short, an unlimited budget drain mined at a deeply immoral objective: the nuclear blackmail of other states. It repudiates diplomacy. It puts hair-trigger systems back onto forward stations. It signals, and reflects, contempt for the interests, concerns and perspectives of allied powers. It is a highway back to the days when thermonuclear death threatened from one minute to the next in any form, it threatens the fragile stability of the nuclear peace.

As the United States government now announces its irrevocable commitment to this program, it is past time for the world's great anti-nuclear communities to wake up to the danger.

- James K. Galbraith is chairman of Economists Allied for Arms Reduction, www.ecaar.org. This piece is adapted from an essay in the ECAAR newsletter and appeared in The Texas Observer. -

----

Experts Counter Bush on Missile Shield Tests

By Steven Mufson
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, June 16, 2001; Page A16
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A3083-2001Jun14?language=printer

When President Bush meets Russian President Vladimir Putin today, he will press for abandoning the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, which Bush says "prohibits the United States from investigating all possibilities as to how to intercept missiles."

But many U.S. arms control experts contend that the United States could test missile defense possibilities for years without scrapping the ABM treaty.

"The 1972 treaty is not holding back design and development of the technology needed for national missile defense, nor is the treaty slowing the testing of an NMD system," said Philip E. Coyle, former head of weapons testing at the Defense Department. "Development of NMD will take a decade or more for technical and budgetary reasons, but not due to impediments caused by the ABM treaty."

Some arms control experts believe the administration's intent is to get rid of the treaty -- regardless of whether it really is an obstacle to research and testing -- because Bush considers it a "relic" that would prohibit the eventual construction of a missile shield.

"They're not seeking to find a way to do this within the treaty," said Jack Mendelsohn of the Arms Control Association. "They want to break the treaty."

The dispute centers on the treaty's Article 5, in which U.S. and Soviet leaders pledged "not to develop, test, or deploy ABM systems or components which are sea-based, air-based, space-based, or mobile land-based."

The treaty, however, does not forbid tests of interceptor missiles based at fixed sites on land. Nor does it limit testing of "theater" missile defenses, which are designed to protect a small area, such as U.S. troops on a foreign battlefield.

Since the treaty negotiators recognized that they could not measure or verify intent, the treaty applies to real world tests. And in the real world, many experts argue, the United States could do all the testing it needs for the next two to six years in a way that would be open to interpretation and would not require repudiation of the treaty.

For example, the Navy has been developing ship-based interceptors, and the Air Force has been testing a laser mounted on an airplane. Both of those technologies are intended for theater defenses. But officials say they might later become part of a national or global missile shield.

"The negotiators of the ABM treaty recognized that in early development, one could not necessarily determine through satellite imagery whether a particular test was of an NMD system, let alone whether it was of a system intended to be fixed or mobile," Coyle said.

John Rhinelander, a lawyer who helped negotiate the ABM treaty during the Nixon administration, agreed. "If you're talking about a fixed land-based system, you can do all the testing you want as long as you do it at one of the two [allowed] test sites," he said.

While the treaty would prohibit the advanced development and testing of sea-based interceptors or airborne lasers for national missile defense, Rhinelander added, "It does not prohibit either of those for theater missile defense."

"We do all our testing in accordance with the treaty," Lt. Gen. Ronald T. Kadish, head of the Pentagon's missile defense group, said Thursday in congressional testimony. "And it hasn't prevented us from doing what we need to do for the ground-based system per se. So we're marching along smartly in accordance with the treaty."

Kadish added, however, that the Pentagon has "very high hopes" for laser technology and is "very close to our first shoot-down demonstration," which could take place in late 2003 and might violate the ABM treaty, if it is clearly not a small-scale, theater-only test.

In 1972, it was the United States that was most eager to distinguish between theater and national missile defenses because it feared the Soviet Union might link its many surface-to-air missile batteries into a national system. "What's happened is that we have reversed our position," Rhinelander said.

The Bush administration, however, is seeking broader flexibility. "We really want to be free to look at all the possibilities," the president's national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, said yesterday. "And the ABM treaty has so many constraints in it, because it was intended to prevent you from bringing along defensive systems, that almost anything you do, in a sense, is not within the treaty. Now, there may be some minimal things that can be done, but that's not the approach that we want to take."

----

Asian Leaders Target Muslim Extremists [and missile defense]

By John Pomfret
Washington Post Foreign Service
Saturday, June 16, 2001; Page A15
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A8509-2001Jun15?language=printer

BEIJING, June 15 -- The leaders of China, Russia and four Central Asian nations agreed today to band together against Islamic terrorism and issued a joint statement against U.S. plans to create a missile defense system.

Under a blanket of security that brought Shanghai to a halt, the leaders of China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan agreed to promote trade and investment in the Central Asian region, where substantial oil reserves have prompted worldwide competition for influence.

The Chinese president, Jiang Zemin, also met with Russian President Vladimir Putin on the margins of the Shanghai meeting Thursday, the first of three meetings scheduled with Russia's leader this year.

The organization, formerly called the Shanghai Five, changed its name to the Shanghai Cooperation Organization with the addition of Uzbekistan. Diplomats say Mongolia could become its next member.

The organization underscores China's interest in increasing its influence in Central Asia, where it vies with the United States and Russia. It also illustrates Beijing's concerns with the growing pull of Islamic fundamentalism in the region and the potentially destabilizing role played by Afghanistan's Taliban government.

Chinese officials say they believe separatists from Xinjiang province in China's far northwest receive training in Afghanistan and then sneak back into China, where they carry out violent attacks on members of China's Han majority. Last year, the Shanghai Five agreed to establish a center to fight terrorism in Kyrgyzstan's capital, Bishkek. In a joint statement today, the leaders recommitted themselves to establishing the center.

"The signing of the Shanghai Pact has laid the legal foundation for jointly cracking down on terrorism, separatism and extremism, and reflects the firm determination of the six states on safeguarding regional security," Jiang told a news conference.

The agreement on fighting Islamic militants would set a legal framework for cooperation among security services and prepare the way for setting up the center, the leaders said. But Western diplomats remain skeptical that the organization will be able to become anything more than a talk shop, especially in combating terrorism.

Defense ministers from the group also issued a joint statement against U.S. plans to create a missile defense system. The communique declared support for the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, which Washington wants to change in order to set up a national system as a shield against missile attacks from unpredictable hostile states.

The officials also opposed U.S. plans for a theater missile defense system in Asia, which China fears could be used to shield Taiwan, the island it regards as a breakaway province, from being reunited with the mainland, by force if necessary.

----

Bush, Putin Plan on New Partnership
Putin Cautions Against 'Unilateral Action' on Missile Defense

By Robert Burns
Associated Press
Saturday, June 16, 2001; 12:20 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A9802-2001Jun16?language=printer

BRDO PRI KRANJU, Slovenia - President Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin agreed Saturday to exchange visits to the United States and Moscow. "We will seize the moment to make a difference for the world," Bush said.

"We found a good basis to start building on cooperation, counting on a pragmatic relationship between Russia and the United States," Putin said at a joint news conference.

Putin said the two hours of talks, the first between the leaders, inside Brdo Castle were an "honest, frank dialogue."

Bush had hoped to use the meeting to thaw the chill in U.S.-Russian relations over Bush's plan to deploy a missile defense system. But Putin did not appear moved.

"Any unilateral actions can openly make more complicated" problems and issues between the two countries, Putin said. "Differences in approaches do exist."

Bush focused his remarks on the positive, emphasizing that the talks were "straightforward and productive ... an important step in building a constructive, respectful relationship with Russia."

He announced that Putin would come to the United States in the fall and visit Bush's ranch in central Texas. Bush said he would, in turn, visit Moscow. Putin said he looked forward to welcoming Bush to his home.

"I am convinced that he and I can build a relationship of mutual respect and candor," Bush said.

The pair meets again next month in Genoa, Italy, at the G-8 summit of industrial powers.

On Saturday, Bush and Patin exchanged warm compliments as they addressed reporters on the lawn of the elegant 16th century estate that was a favorite of the late Yugoslav dictator Josip Broz Tito.

Putin saluted Bush as "an honest, straightforward man who loves his country."

Bush said the Russian was a leader whom Americans can trust. He also passed along a compliment that seemed to carry special meaning, given Bush's domestic priority on tax cuts.

"I was so impressed that (Putin) was able to simplify his tax code in Russia with a flat tax. I'm not so sure I'll have the same success with Congress," Bush said.

On missile defense, atop Bush's foreign policy agenda, Putin voiced unwavering reservations and appealed for a go-slow approach.

Without restating Russia's opposition, Putin said, "The official position of the Russian government is known."

He said the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty banning such missile defense plans is the "cornerstone of the modern architecture of international security."

The United States and Russia must work together to identify security threats and officials from both countries should sit down to "try to find a way together to solve these problems," Putin said.

On another contentious issue, Bush reiterated his support for expanding NATO. He then invited Putin to restate Russia's opposition to the Western alliance taking in states along the Russian border.

Putin fished around on his lectern for a declassified, 1954 Soviet memo to document from which to read.

"I'm going to lay it out for you," Putin said, while Bush chuckled at his counterpart's theatrics.

"Russia is cooperating with NATO. ... There's no need to fire up this whole situation," Putin said.

Their initial meeting - just the two leaders plus one security adviser and one translator apiece - lasted an hour and 40 minutes, about 40 minutes longer than scheduled. Bush and Putin took a break, strolled along a gravel road winding through pines on the castle grounds, then went into another meeting. The overall summit lasted a little more than two hours.

In Ljubljana, riot police brought in armored cars and a water cannon to disperse about 1,000 protesters who had marched to the Russian embassy Saturday afternoon. A woman planted herself in front of the convoy.

Earlier Saturday, security guards and riot police detained 20 environmental activists after some of them jumped a fence surrounding the U.S. embassy compound. Other protesters chained themselves together outside the compound, holding a banner reading "Stop Star Wars."

Russia asserts that Bush's approach would ignite a new arms race, although it has expressed a willingness to explore the question of what, if any, changes should be made to current arms-control regimes.

In an effort to normalize the relationship, Bush hopes to begin consultations among American cabinet secretaries and Russian ministers on security and economic issues, U.S. officials said.

At the same time, Bush wants to disband a high-level panel, run by then-Vice President Al Gore and then-Russian Prime Minister Viktor Chernomyrdin, that oversaw major U.S.-Russian issues during the Clinton administration.

----

Selected Quotes by Bush, Putin

New York Times
June 16, 2001
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-Bush-Putin-Highlights.html?searchpv=aponline

Highlights of the news conference Saturday in Brdo Pri Kranju, Slovenia, with President Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin:

``I said to President Putin that we need a new approach for a new era, an approach that protects both our peoples and strengthens deterrence by exploring and developing a new attitude toward defenses in missile defenses.'' -- Bush.

``I'm saying this, any unilateral actions can only make more complicated various problems and issues.'' -- Putin.

``We proceed from the idea that the 1972 ABM (Anti-Ballistic Missile) Treaty is the cornerstone of the modern architecture of international security.'' -- Putin.

``When we hear about things like concerns of the future and about threats in the future, we do agree that together we have to sit down and have a good think about this.'' -- Putin.

``I looked the man in the eye. I found him to be very straightforward and trustworthy. We had a very good dialogue. I was able to get a sense of his soul, a man deeply committed to his country and the best interests of his country. And I appreciated so very much the frank dialogue. There was no kind of diplomatic chit chat, trying to throw each other off balance.'' -- Bush.

``The Cold War said loud and clear that we're opponents and that we bring the peace through the ability for each of us to destroy each other. Friends don't destroy each other.'' -- Bush.

``The president is a history major, and so am I. And we remember the old history. It's time to write new history in a positive and constructive way.'' -- Bush.

``When the president of a great power says he wants to see Russia as a partner and maybe even as an ally, this is worth so much to us. But if that's the case, then, look, we ask ourselves a question. Look, this is a military organization. Yes, it's military. They don't want us there. They don't want us there. It's moving toward our border. Yes, it's moving toward our border. Why?'' -- Putin.

``Everybody is trying to read body language. Mark me down as very pleased with the progress and the frank discussion.'' -- Bush.

``This is not a bargaining session. The president didn't say, 'Well, if you do this, I'll do that.' It's bigger than that. It's a bigger relationship than that, and it's important to understand that.'' -- Bush.

--------

Bush Q&A With AP

New York Times
June 16, 2001
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-Bush-Interview.html?searchpv=aponline

BRDO PRI KRANJU, Slovenia (AP) -- President Bush's comments about missile defense discussions, from a brief interview Saturday with The Associated Press:

Q: What did Putin mean when he talked about a constructive development and a common approach?

Bush: ``I'm hesitant to put words in anybody's mouth. You ought to look at the fact that Rumsfeld and Ivanov are going to visit about ways to address the current threats that we face and it became clear to me in our discussion that the Russians feel the same threats we feel and there is no specifics on the table. There will be.

``But he understands my frame of mind. My philosophy, and the fact that there's an opportunity for the United States to develop, through research and development, the capacity to develop a system which is limited in nature but effective against the true threats.

``Mr. Putin himself earlier talked about intercepting missiles on launch and it was on that basis that we began discussions. He also understands that ... we're still going to have nuclear arsenals. We'll be reducing ours. And he began to get a sense for -- as you noticed during the discussion I kept talking about whether or not we were suspicious or not. That was part of the discussion. If he is suspicious of me, suspicious of our government, then he won't be willing to think anew. I think what you saw there was somebody who is willing to listen and perhaps think differently.''

Q: Did you get the impression that he is willing to think so differently that he is open to allowing the development of a missile defense system within the ABM framework?

Bush: ``I think he's willing to ... understand our intentions, to get a sense for the direction of our research and development and he wants to hear how the ABM constrains research and development and why it's necessary for us to -- what kind of research and development we intend to conduct.''

Q: And maybe even allow some of it to be conducted?

Bush: ``Well, that's obviously the intent of the discussions.''

Q: Is it fair to say President Putin was more open toward your missile development position than you thought?

Bush: ``I would think (he) was. I'm careful not to put words in his mouth. He spoke for himself. I will tell you, I don't know what discussion with other Russians have been like in the past with presidents but the notion of diplomatic talk -- to talk around an issue for example, just wasn't there.''

Q: The two of you just talked?

Bush: ``He talked. We talked. We talked just like you and I would talk. We talked straightforward. Nothing was rejected out of hand. There was a willingness to listen and to think and, as importantly, to understand each other and understand why I've undertaken the position I've taken.''

Q: Nothing was rejected out of hand, including the ABM?

``Nothing was rejected out of hand and there was a receptivity that I was most pleased to see.''

-------- russia

Putin Cites 1954 NATO Document

JUNE 16, 13:26 EST
By The Associated Press
http://wire.ap.org/APnews/center_package.html?FRONTID=ELECTION&PACKAGEID=bushforeign&STORYID=APIS7CLPDJO0

Russian President Vladimir Putin addressed NATO expansion Saturday by dusting off a 47-year-old document in which the Soviet Union appealed for membership in the alliance - and was flatly turned down.

When President Bush invited Putin to answer a reporter's question on the alliance's expansion, Putin appeared to ignore him. As Bush stared at him expectantly, Putin silently flipped through the papers as if reading them for the first time.

``I'm going to lay it out for you,'' Putin finally said, prompting a chuckle from Bush.

``This Soviet government announces its intention to enter into discussions with NATO countries about its participation in NATO with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization,'' Putin said, reading from the document.

The Soviets proposed in March 1954 that they join NATO on the condition the West abandon a planned European Defense Community. The Soviets argued that allowing them into NATO could end the Cold War by reuniting the anti-Hitler forces of World War II.

The United States, Britain and France immediately dismissed the proposal as a scheme meant to undermine NATO.

Putin read aloud what he said was NATO's rejection: ``There is no need to stress the completely unrealistic nature of such a proposal from the Soviet Union.''

The Russian president said he received a similar rebuff a year ago when he raised the possibility anew with then-Secretary of State Madeleine Albright. ``Look, we're not talking about this right now,'' he quoted Albright as saying.

NATO admission apparently off the table, Putin said Saturday he appreciated Bush's overtures of partnership to Russia.

``When the president of a great power says he wants to see Russia as a partner and maybe even as an ally, this is worth so much to us,'' he said.

But he also sounded a note of concern: ``Look, this is a military organization,'' he said. ``It's moving towards our border. Why?''

----

Bush Urges Putin to Approve Plans for Missile Shield

New York Times
June 16, 2001
By FRANK BRUNI
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/16/world/16CND-PREXY.html?searchpv=nytToday

BRDO PRI KRANJU, Slovenia, June 16 - President Bush sat down with Vladimir V. Putin, the Russian president, here this afternoon and extended an offer of closer friendship, along with a request: that Russians look beyond a landmark 1972 treaty and bless Mr. Bush's plans for a missile defense shield.

At a news conference just after the talks, Mr. Bush said the two men had held a "straightforward and productive" meeting, and that the dialogue would continue, with the aim of building a constructive and respectful relationship. He said both leaders had agreed to visit each other at home.

Mr. Putin added that the talks had been quite frank and that Mr. Bush had formulated a "global wide-scale approach" to history.

The summit meeting, set in a medieval castle in the Alps near the Slovenian capital of Ljubljana, was their first, and it brought together two world leaders with strikingly different personalities and backgrounds and innumerable points of potential conflict.

But as they mingled before their formal discussion, their rapport was warm. Mr. Bush extended his hand to shake Mr. Putin's, and Mr. Putin clasped it firmly with both of his.

Mr. Putin also said that a speech on the future of Europe and Russia that the American president had delivered in Warsaw on Friday had made a "good first impression" and "prompts optimism."

"That's a very good foundation on which to proceed," Mr. Putin said.

Mr. Bush returned those verbal courtesies with his own. "I've been looking forward to this for a long period of time," he said. "I think we'll find we have a lot in common."

The men posed for photographers in several settings inside the 16th- century country manor and on its manicured grounds, sometimes talking intently with one another. At one point, as they sat in adjacent chairs, they leaned so close to one another that their foreheads almost touched.

And they lingered during the first part of their meeting - a more private encounter before they reconvened in a group that would include senior aides - for more than an hour, twice the time scheduled. No concrete agreement was expected to emerge from the day's meeting.

Instead, Mr. Bush had been saying all week, as he rehearsed for this meeting in visits to four other European countries over four previous days, that his intent was to bring the United States closer to Russia, and vice versa. The first step in that direction, he said, was for him and Mr. Putin to become more familiar - and perhaps less suspicious - of one another.

"He doesn't know me, and I don't know him very well," Mr. Bush said at a news conference in Warsaw on Friday, just before his speech, which sounded notes both provocative and conciliatory toward Russia. "First and foremost is to develop a trust between us."

That challenge was not nearly as daunting as the one that confronted the representatives of Washington and Moscow decades ago, before the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Then, meetings of this kind were most often a dire attempt to stave off the prospect of nuclear annihilation - to keep the cold war on ice. The surnames of certain American and Soviet leaders seemed linked together, like a tense, symbiotic unit: Kennedy and Khrushchev, Nixon and Brezhnev, Reagan and Gorbachev.

And yet the issue hovering over all others at the talks today between Mr. Bush, a former Texas oilman, and Mr. Putin, a former K.G.B. spy, once again involved missiles.

Mr. Bush has stated an ambitious desire to build a kind of shield, a huge defense project that would challenge three decades of conventional wisdom about the best way to keep the United States and Europe safe.

In order to do so, he needs to amend or abandon the Antiballistic Missile Treaty, a 1972 accord signed by Washington and Moscow that Mr. Putin, along with the leaders of a few of the United States' key European allies, are loath to set aside.

On Friday, before he left for Slovenia, Mr. Putin said he was interested in listening carefully to what Mr. Bush had to say. "I hope we can succeed in starting the process of working out common approaches to determining the future architecture of international security," Mr. Putin told reporters in Moscow. The promise in that statement was the tacit acknowledgment that a discussion was necessary and that the world had changed over the last three decades.

At the meeting Mr. Bush was to be joined for the second segment of their discussion by several of his top aides. They were General Colin L. Powell, his secretary of state; Condoleezza Rice, his national security adviser; Daniel Fried, the Europe specialist on the National Security Council; and Karen P. Hughes, the counselor to the president.

Mr. Putin was to be joined by as well by senior aides, including Igor Ivanov, his foreign affairs minister, whom Mr. Bush met during his presidential campaign, Vladimir Rushailo, the secretary of Russia's security council.

Mr. Bush has signaled that he will proceed with a missile defense shield - and thus abrogate the ABM Treaty - whether or not he wins the blessing of Russia and of European allies. But he would prefer to have their consent and cooperation, and his ability to bring Russia more or less on board could have a profound influence on the attitudes of France and Germany, two allies that have so far resisted Mr. Bush's plan.

Senior administration strategists have said that they are prepared to offer the Russians arms purchases, military aid and joint antimissile exercises as incentives to scrap the 1972 treaty. These officials said the proposal might well include the purchase of Russian-made S-300 surface-to-air missiles that could be integrated into a defensive shield over Russia and Europe.

But Ms. Rice said that Mr. Bush and Mr. Putin would not discuss specifics like that today and would probably leave such matters to be negotiated by their aides over the weeks and months following the meeting.

She said that what Mr. Bush would be pressing for was a kind of intellectual agreement that missile defense makes sense. She added that what Mr. Bush wanted to do was "sketch out his broad vision of how he'd like to see U.S.-Russian relations go, but not to make specific proposals."

"There will certainly be - at an appropriate time, in appropriate channels - several ideas that we want to put on the table with the Russians about how we might be able to cooperate on missile defense," she said on Friday.

And she said that one reason Mr. Bush was not prepared to talk in detail about a missile shield is that

knowing what shape it would take required precisely the kind of testing that the ABM Treaty bans.

"You really need a pretty robust development, testing and evaluation program in order to know what is going to actually fit the bill," she said. "And we are constrained by the ABM Treaty."

Ms. Rice and other administration officials said that the ABM Treaty was just one of many subjects Mr. Bush planned to discuss with Mr. Putin, and there was a clear sense that the administration did not want to make this issue too large at the leaders' first meeting.

Mr. Bush's speech in Warsaw made for an interesting and in some ways curious prelude. He talked extensively about his vision of a Europe that embraced Russia, but he also advocated an Atlantic Alliance that would include the Baltic states and stretch all the way to Russia's borders. Russian officials have long found that prospect unnerving.

Mr. Bush seemed, in one sense, to be telling them that they could get on the same page with the United States and be closer friends than ever, or they might find themselves more alone.

-------- treaties

Treaty barely a blip in U.S. defense plans

Saturday, June 16, 2001
By Jonathan S. Landay
INQUIRER WASHINGTON BUREAU
http://inq.philly.com/content/inquirer/2001/06/16/front_page/MISSILE16.htm?template=aprint.htm

WASHINGTON - Since an Iraqi Scud missile killed 28 U.S. soldiers in a barracks in Saudi Arabia 10 years ago, the Pentagon has been striving to make sure that kind of attack cannot happen again.

The military has been trying to develop a laser-armed aircraft and destroyers fitted with high-speed interceptors that eventually could shield U.S. troops, ships and military facilities like ports from short- and medium-range missile attacks.

The Bush administration wants to see if these limited, so-called theater missile defenses, which are allowed under the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, can be used as part of a rudimentary national missile defense to protect the United States by 2004.

That use would violate the ABM Treaty, and officials say that is why President Bush and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld are talking about dumping the treaty.

"The ABM Treaty has so many constraints in it, because it was intended to prevent you from bringing along defensive systems, that almost anything you do, in a sense, is not within the treaty," national security adviser Condoleezza Rice said yesterday in Warsaw. "Now, there may be some minimal things that can be done, but that's not the approach that we want to take. We really want to be free to look at all the possibilities."

The administration is looking at a number of options that would violate the treaty.

For example, the treaty bans sea-based defenses against intercontinental ballistic missiles.

The Navy has presented to the administration a plan to deploy two Arleigh Burke-class destroyers off the Korean peninsula to try to shoot down any ICBM fired by North Korea. It would cost up to $200 million and could be operational within 12 to 18 months, said a Navy official who asked not to be identified. The Navy also proposed expanding an existing Navy program to hit ICBMs in space, though some Pentagon officials say it would take many years to develop. The program is now being designed to use high-speed interceptors to defend U.S. troop and naval deployments, which the treaty permits.

"We want to develop and test a sea-based system against long-range missiles," a senior administration official said, also speaking on condition of anonymity.

He also said a program to build a fleet of Boeing 747-400s armed with missile-killing lasers was a priority. Some experts say the airborne laser could easily be adapted for national missile defense, but the treaty bans that, too.

The senior administration official stressed that the Pentagon had not made a final decision on what components to use in a proposed global system to protect the United States, its troops and its allies.

All tests of missile-defense systems now scheduled comply with the ABM Treaty, said a spokesman for the Pentagon's Ballistic Missile Defense Organization.

The ABM Treaty with Moscow bars the United States from using theater missile-defense systems such as the airborne laser and interceptor-equipped destroyers to defend the country. It also bans testing their potential for national missile defense.

Bush has argued vehemently during his European trip that the United States should have "the flexibility and opportunity to explore all options" and that the treaty should be junked as "a relic of the past."

Bush and Russian President Vladimir V. Putin planned to discuss the ABM Treaty at their meeting today in Slovenia. Bush has committed the United States to abandoning the treaty unless Russia agrees to sweeping changes that would allow the rapid deployment of a U.S. national missile defense.

Russia, China, key European allies, and Democratic leaders in the Senate argue that jettisoning the treaty could ignite a new nuclear arms race.

Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D., Mich.) has said he would try to deny funds for any missile-defense tests that violate the accord.

Some experts say there is no need to get rid of the treaty now. It will be years before the theater defense systems the administration is interested in harnessing for national missile defense will be ready for the tests barred by the pact, they say.

Many experts doubt the systems will ever work properly.

"The purpose of this approach is really to . . . commit the United States to the development of national missile defenses long before these technologies have been proved," said Daryl Kimball of the Coalition to Reduce Nuclear Dangers, a Washington arms-control group.

Advocates argue that theater missile-defense systems show enormous promise, and could quickly be combined with land-based interceptors - tested without much success during the Clinton administration - in a rudimentary national missile defense that could be improved over time.

The ABM Treaty permits theater missile defenses to protect troops, military installations such as ports, and cities.

But the treaty prohibits Russia and the United States from building national missile defenses. The theory is that neither would launch a devastating nuclear strike as long as it was open to massive retaliation by the other side.

----

Treaty at Heart of Missile Debate

New York Times
June 16, 2001
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Tale-of-a-Treaty.html?searchpv=aponline

WASHINGTON (AP) -- In Moscow in 1972, Richard Nixon gazed across a table at Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev, who was doodling pictures of missiles on a notepad. Near midnight three days later, they signed a historic arms control agreement President Bush now says is past its time.

The Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty is an oddity of sorts in the world's nuclear weapons rulebook. While most treaties try to restrain weapons of attack, the ABM limits weapons of defense.

That's the problem for Bush, and why he's willing to leave the treaty behind.

Bush's hopes to build a missile defense system can't be realized under the ABM treaty as worded. Moscow, as well as some U.S. allies, don't want to let the treaty go.

The agreement:

--Prohibits either side from deploying a missile defense that covers its entire territory.

--Allows each side to have one defensive system to protect a national capital or a missile launch site.

--Permits either party to withdraw from the treaty on six months' notice, although some U.S. officials argue the agreement is already null because the Soviet Union no longer exists.

The rationale of negotiators in 1972, and of opponents of Bush's plan today, is this: If either side builds a system that could defend its entire region from incoming missiles, the other side would amass more weapons to try to overwhelm it.

Even as Nixon was trying to get the treaty, he was promoting research on a modest anti-missile defense system for the United States. Because the Soviets already had a system, he said, a U.S. counterpart would give him bargaining leverage.

``In that sense,'' he said of a U.S. missile defense, ``we had to have it in order to be able to agree to forgo it.''

--

Nixon and Brezhnev were negotiating two treaties at once in that 1972 summit -- the ABM agreement and the SALT I treaty limiting offensive nuclear weapons. The talks, in the midst of the Cold War, were delicate.

Brezhnev ``used a red pencil to sketch missiles on the notepad in front of him as we discussed the timing and techniques of control and limitation,'' Nixon recalled about one lengthy negotiating session.

When Nixon proposed ways to make sure neither side cheated, Brezhnev seemed to take offense. ``If we are trying to trick one another, why do we need a piece of paper?'' he asked, according to Nixon's recollection.

After dinner ended on May 26, 1972, with a flaming baked Alaska, the two leaders met in Vladimir Hall, an ornate white, green and gold room in the Kremlin, to sip champagne and toast the signing of both treaties.

With the ABM treaty allowing one anti-missile site each, the Soviets chose to defend Moscow. The United States chose to defend missile silos in Grand Forks, N.D.

``The idea was that we would defend our offensive missiles against any attack so we would have a second strike to hit back if they ever attacked us first,'' said John Rhinelander, who helped draft the treaty.

Ineffective and costly, the North Dakota system was shut down in the 1970s by Donald H. Rumsfeld, defense secretary then and now.

Research for a missile defense has gone on for years. President Johnson called his program Sentinel. Nixon's smaller program was known as Safeguard.

Ronald Reagan took it to a higher level with his Strategic Defense Initiative, which others dubbed Star Wars. President Clinton, who favored a more limited missile defense than Bush, deferred essential decisions on the plan until he was out of office.

Bush's program so far is lacking in details. And a name.

-------- us nuc politics

Bush, Putin to meet
U.S. looks for 'partner in peace'

BY EDWIN CHEN
Los Angeles Times
http://www.journalstar.com/nation?story_id=4923&date=20010616&past=

WARSAW, Poland - President Bush said Friday that he intends to tell Russian President Vladimir V. Putin Saturday afternoon that "the United States is no longer your enemy" and urge Russia to be "a partner in peace, a partner in democracy, a country that embraces freedom (and) a country that enhances the security of Europe."

"I also will stress that my vision of Europe includes Russia and that Russia should not fear the expansion of freedom-loving people to her borders," Bush said, alluding to his support for continued eastward enlargement of NATO.

Bush offered a preview of what will be his inaugural summit with the Russian leader as he made a state visit to Poland, a one-time Soviet satellite state, saying he hopes to engage Putin in a broad conversation about "a frame of mind and an attitude."

"A definition of the relationship will evolve over time. But first and foremost, it's got to start with the simple word "friend,' " Bush said during a joint news conference here with Polish President Aleksander Kwasniewski after their own meeting.

Bush added that he will speak of "the need for capital to have open markets and rule of law, transparency in the economy."

"If Russia makes the right choices, she will attract a lot of capital, U.S. capital," the president said. "Russia has got enormous resources and great potential."

Bush and Putin's meeting is to take place in Ljubljana, the capital of nearby Slovenia, in a 16th century castle that once served as the summer residence of the Soviet-era Yugoslav dictator, Marshal Josip Broz Tito. Bush will seek to transform decades of "the old nuclear balance of terror" into "a real political relationship," Condoleezza Rice, the president's national security adviser, said Friday.

"We do not believe that we are any longer, with Russia, in a relationship of being mutual hostages," she said.

A man who takes pride in his ability to disarm skeptics, Bush predicted that after his tete-a-tete with Putin, "I'll be able to say I've got a pretty good feel for the man and he's got a good feel for me, and he'll see that I'm the president of a peace-loving nation, a nation that wants Russia to succeed and to do well."

But the president said he intends to express his concern about "reports of proliferation" of weapons of mass destruction on Russia's southern border.

"I think it's important for Russia to hear that our nation is concerned about the spreading of weapons of mass destruction," Bush said at the news conference. He was responding to a journalist who cited a report that Moscow might have permitted a shipment to Iran of high-grade aluminum that could be used in the manufacture of enriched uranium for use in nuclear weapons.

Bush said he would bring up that concern "in the context of explaining why it is important for us to think differently about missile defenses, to think differently about the Cold War doctrine that is codified in the ABM Treaty of 1972."

Throughout his trip to Europe this week, Bush has been touting missile defense to many skeptical leaders. But Friday, the president claimed a fresh "receptivity to a new way of thinking" about his goal.

The president won some exuberant support from Kwasniewski, who told reporters that he personally found Bush's presentation "took away all those fears that were connected with his position."

In order to build an advanced missile defense system, Bush has said, the 1972 Antiballisitc Missile Treaty must be discarded as "a relic." The pact has been the cornerstone of arms control for decades, and many leaders fear that its demise would engender a new arms race.

In Poland, Bush's pre-summit stop was meant to celebrate the nation's metamorphosis from a Soviet satellite into a flourishing democracy now aspiring to membership in the European Union.

Here in the capital, the president delivered what White House aides described as his European tour's major address, in which he described his vision of a continent where "talk of East and West (is) behind us."

Bush told the faculty and students at Warsaw University, "Here, you have proven that communism need not be followed by chaos, that great oppression can end in true reconciliation and that the promise of freedom is stronger than the habit of fear."

The White House also said that next week, the United States and Poland will sign an "open skies" agreement that by 2004 will grant U.S. airlines access to all of Poland while Polish airlines will have access to the entire United States.

In his remarks about Saturday's summit, Bush said he wants to share with Putin "a vision about Russia's role in the world and in Europe ... (and) provide assurances to Russia that our country doesn't want to diminish the nation. We want to help elevate the nation."

Bush added: "First and foremost, it's to develop a trust between us. He doesn't know me, and I don't know him very well."

But Bush will not present specific proposals, according to Rice.

----

Selected Quotes by Bush, Putin

By The Associated Press
JUNE 16, 16:04 EST
http://wire.ap.org/APnews/center_story.html?FRONTID=EUROPE&STORYID=APIS7CLRNK80

Highlights of the news conference Saturday in Brdo Pri Kranju, Slovenia, with President Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin:

MISSILE DEFENSE

The two leaders reported no breakthroughs on their disagreement over Bush's plan to deploy a shield against missile attacks, but they agreed to further discussions. Bush directed Secretary of State Colin Powell and Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld to work with Russian counterparts to ``begin discussing a new security framework.'' Putin cautioned: ``Any unilateral actions can only make more complicated various problems and issues.''

EXCHANGE OF VISITS

Putin accepted an invitation to visit Bush's ranch in Texas for an autumn summit and Bush will visit Putin at his home in Russia.

NATO EXPANSION

Bush said he favored and expected NATO's expansion, but offered no specifics about the next countries to be admitted. Putin expressed apprehension about adding new members. ``Look, this is a military organization,'' Putin said. ``It's moving toward our border. Yes, it's moving toward our border. Why?''

ECONOMIC INTERESTS

Bush said he would send Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill and Commerce Secretary Don Evans to Moscow to advance economic ties. Putin cited a joint U.S.-Russian oil pipeline as an example of commercial cooperation between the two countries. Putin said he hoped to receive a delegation of U.S. business leaders as well.

PERSONAL RELATIONS

Both men said the talks were a positive start to their relationship. ``Everybody is trying to read body language,'' Bush said. ``Mark me down as very pleased with the progress and the frank discussion.'' Putin said: ``I think that we found a good basis to start building on our cooperation,'' he said.

-------

Bush's Vision: `We Will Not Trade Away the Fate of Free European Peoples'

New York Times
June 16, 2001
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/16/world/16PTEX.html?searchpv=nytToday&pagewanted=all

See also: http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A8558-2001Jun15?language=printer

Following is an excerpt from a speech by President Bush yesterday at the Warsaw University Library in Poland, as recorded by The New York Times:

Today I have come to the center of Europe to speak of the future of Europe. Some still call this the East. But Warsaw is closer to Ireland than it is to the Urals. And it is time to put talk of East and West behind us.

Yalta did not ratify a natural divide. It divided a living civilization. The partition of Europe was not a fact of geography. It was an act of violence. And wise leaders for decades have found the hope of European peace in the hope of greater unity.

In the same speech that described an Iron Curtain, Winston Churchill called for a new unity in Europe from which no nation should be permanently outcast. Consider how far we have come since that speech. Through trenches and shellfire, through death camps and bombed-out cities, through gulags and food lines, men and women have dreamed of what my father called a Europe whole and free.

This free Europe is no longer a dream. It is the Europe that is rising around us. It is the work that you and I are called on to complete. We can build an open Europe, a Europe without Hitler and Stalin, without Brezhnev and Honecker and Ceaucescu and, yes, without Milosevic.

Our goal is to erase the false lines. Our goal is to erase the false lines that have divided Europe for too long. The future of every European nation must be determined by the progress of internal reform, not the interests of outside powers. Every European nation has struggled toward democracy and free markets. And a strong civic culture must be welcomed into Europe's home.

All of Europe's new democracies, from the Baltic to the Black Sea and all that lie between, should have the same chance for security and freedom and the same chance to join the institutions of Europe as Europe's old democracies have.

I believe in NATO membership for all of Europe's democracies that seek and are ready to share the responsibility that NATO brings.

The question of "when" may be still up for debate within NATO. The question of "whether" should not be. As we plan to enlarge NATO, no nation should be used as a pawn in the agendas of others. We will not trade away the fate of free European peoples. No more Munichs, no more Yaltas. Let us tell all those, let us tell all those who have struggled to build democracy and free markets what we have told the Poles. From now on, what you build you keep. No one can take away your freedom or your country.

Next year, NATO's leaders will meet in Prague. The United States will be prepared to make concrete historic decisions with its allies to advance NATO enlargement. Poland and America share a vision. As we plan the Prague summit, we should not calculate how little we can get away with, but how much we can do to advance the cause of freedom. The expansion, the expansion of NATO has fulfilled NATO's promise, and that promise now leads eastward and southward, northward and onward.

I want to thank Poland for acting as a bridge to the new democracies of Europe and a champion of the interests and security of your neighbors such as the Baltic states, Ukraine, Slovakia. You're making real the words, "For your freedom and ours."

All nations should understand there is no conflict between membership in NATO and membership in the European Union. My nation welcomes the consolidation of European unity and the stability it brings. We welcome a greater role for the E.U. in European security, properly integrated with NATO. We welcome the incentive for reform that the hope of E.U. membership creates. We welcome a Europe that is truly united, truly democratic and truly diverse, a collection of peoples and nations bound together in purpose and respect and faithful to their own roots. The most basic commitments of NATO and the European Union are similar - democracy, free markets and common security.

And all in Europe and America understand the central lesson of the century past. When Europe and America are divided, history tends to tragedy. When Europe and America are partners, no trouble or tyranny can stand against us.

Our vision of Europe must also include the Balkans. Unlike the people of Poland, many people and leaders in southeast Europe made the wrong choices in the last decade. There, Communism fell, but dictators exploited a murderous nationalism to cling to power and to conquer new land.

Twice, NATO had to intervene militarily to stop the killing and defend the values that define a new Europe. Today, instability remains, and there are still those who seek to undermine the fragile peace that holds. We condemn those, like the sponsors of violence in Macedonia who seek to subvert democracy.

But we've made progress. We see democratic change in Zagreb and Belgrade, moderate governments in Bosnia, multiethnic police in Kosovo, the end of violence in southern Serbia. For the first time in history, all governments in the region are democratic, committed to cooperating with one another and predisposed to join Europe. Across the region, nations are yearning to be a part of Europe. The burdens and benefits of satisfying that yearning will naturally fall most heavily on Europe itself. That is why I welcome Europe's commitment to play a leading role in the stabilization of southeastern Europe.

Countries other than the United States already provide over 80 percent of the NATO-led forces in the region. But I know that America's role is important, and we will meet our obligations. We went into the Balkans together and we will come out together. And our goal must be to hasten the arrival of that day.

The Europe we are building must include Ukraine, a nation struggling with the trauma of transition. Some in Kiev speak of their country's European destiny. If this is their aspiration, we should reward it. We must extend our hand to Ukraine, as Poland has already done with such determination.

The Europe we are building must also be open to Russia. We have a stake in Russia's success and we look forward to the day when Russia is fully reformed, fully democratic and closely bound to the rest of Europe. Europe's great institutions - NATO and the European Union - can and should build partnerships with Russia and with all the countries that have emerged from the wreckage of the former Soviet Union.

Tomorrow, I will see President Putin and express my hopes for a Russia that is truly great, a greatness measured by the strength of its democracy, the good treatment of minorities and the achievement of its people. I will express to President Putin that Russia is a part of Europe and, therefore, does not need a buffer zone of insecure states separating it from Europe.

NATO, even as it grows, is no enemy of Russia. Poland is no enemy of Russia. America is no enemy of Russia. We will seek a constructive relationship with Russia for the benefit of all our peoples. I will make the case, as I have to all the European leaders I have met on this trip, that the basis for our mutual security must move beyond cold war doctrines.

Today we face growing threats from weapons of mass destruction and missiles in the hands of states for whom terror and blackmail are a way of life. So we must have a broad strategy of active nonproliferation, counterproliferation and a new concept of deterrence that includes defenses sufficient to protect our people, our forces and our allies, as well as reduce reliance on nuclear weapons.

And finally I'll make clear to President Putin that the path to greater prosperity and greater security lies in greater freedom. The 20th century has taught us that only freedom gets the highest service from every citizen, citizens who can publish, citizens who can worship, citizens who can organize for themselves without fear of intimidation and with the full protection of the law.

This, after all, is the true source of European unity. Ultimately, it's more than the unity of markets. It is more than the unity of interests. It is the unity of values. Through a hard history with all its precedents of pain, Europe has come to believe in the dignity of every individual, in social freedom tempered by moral restraint and economic liberty balanced with humane values.

The revolutions of 1989, said Pope John Paul II, were made possible by the commitment of brave men and women inspired by a different and, ultimately, more profound and powerful vision - the vision of man as a creature of intelligence and free will immersed in a mystery which transcends his own being and endowed with the ability to reflect and the ability to choose, and thus capable of wisdom and virtue.

This belief successfully challenged Communism. It challenges materialism in all its forms. Just as man cannot be reduced to a means of production, he must find goals greater than mere consumption. The European ideal is inconsistent with a life defined by gain and greed and the lonely pursuit of self. It calls for consideration and respect, compassion and forgiveness, the habits of character on which the exercise of freedom depends.

And all these duties and all these rights are ultimately traced to a source of law and justice above our wills and beyond our politics, an author of dignity who calls us to act worthy of our dignity. This belief is more than a memory. It is a living faith. And it is the main reason Europe and America will never be separated.

We are products of the same history, reaching from Jerusalem and Athens to Warsaw and Washington. We share more than an alliance. We share a civilization. Its values are universal, and they pervade our history and our partnership in a unique way. These trans-Atlantic ties could not be severed by U-boats. They could not be cut by checkpoints and barbed wire. They were not ended by SS-20's and nuclear blackmail. And they certainly will not be broken by commercial quarrels and political debates. America will not permit it. Poland will not allow it.

This unity of values and aspirations calls us to new tasks. Those who have benefited and prospered most from the commitment to freedom and openness have an obligation to help others that are seeking their way along that path.

That is why our trans-Atlantic community must have priorities beyond the consolidation of European peace.

We must bring peace and health to Africa - a neighbor to Europe, a heritage to many Americans, a continent in crisis and a place of enormous potential. We must work together to shut down the arms trafficking that fuels Africa's wars, fight the spread of AIDS that may make 40 million children into orphans and help all of Africa share in the trade and promise of the modern world.

We must work toward a world that trades in freedom, a world where prosperity is available to all through the power of markets, a world where open trade spurs the process of economic and legal reform, a world of cooperation to enhance prosperity, protect the environment and lift the quality of life for all.

We must confront the shared security threats of regimes that thrive by creating instability, that are ambitious for weapons of mass destruction and are dangerously unpredictable.

In Europe, you are closer to these challenges than the United States. You see the lightning well before we hear the thunder. Only together, however, can we confront the emerging threats of a changing world.

Fifty years ago, all Europe looked to the United States for help. Ten years ago, Poland did, as well. Now we and others can only go forward together. The question no longer is what others can do for Poland, but what America and Poland and all of Europe can do for the rest of the world.

In the early 1940's, Winston Churchill saw a world war and a cold war to a greater project. Let the great cities of Warsaw and Prague and Vienna banish despair, even in the midst of their agony, he said. Their liberation is sure. The day will come when the joy bells will ring again throughout Europe and when victorious nations, masters not only of their foes, but of themselves, will plan and build in justice and tradition and in freedom a house of many mansions where there will be room for all.

To his contemporaries who lived in a Europe of division and violence, this vision must have seemed unimaginable. Yet our fathers, yours and mine, struggled and sacrificed to make this vision real. Now it is within our grasp.

Today a new generation makes a new commitment. A Europe and an America bound in a great alliance of liberty, history's greatest united force for peace and progress and human dignity. The bells of victory have rung. The Iron Curtain is no more. Now we plan and build the house of freedom, whose doors are open to all of Europe's peoples and whose windows look out to global challenges beyond.

Our progress is great. Our goals are large, and our differences, in comparison, are small.

An America in calm and in crisis will honor this vision and the values we share. Poland in so many ways is a symbol of renewal and common purpose. More than a half a century ago from this spot, all one could see was a desert of ruins. Hardly did a single unbroken brick touch another. This city had been razed by the Nazis and betrayed by the Soviets. Its people were mostly displaced.

Not far from here is the only monument which survived. It is the figure of Christ falling under the cross and struggling to rise. Under him are written the words, "Sursum corda," "Lift up your hearts." From the determination in Polish hearts, Warsaw did rise again, brick by brick. Poland has regained its rightful place at the heart of a new Europe and is helping other nations to find their own.

"Lift up your hearts" is a story of Poland. "Lift up your hearts" is a story of a new Europe. And together let us raise this hope of freedom for all who seek it in our world.

God bless.

----

Bush-Putin Bond Is Goal of First Meeting

By Peter Baker and Steven Mufson
Washington Post Foreign Service
Saturday, June 16, 2001; Page A16
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A7235-2001Jun15.html

MOSCOW -- President Bush came to office suspicious of the leader of the Kremlin, worried that he could not be trusted. Rather than meet with him, Bush kept his distance at first, ordering a review of U.S. policy toward Moscow that dragged on for months.

Like father, like son. President George Herbert Walker Bush eventually overcame his early misgivings about Mikhail Gorbachev and worked in the second half of his term with the Soviet leader to cut nuclear arms and end the Cold War.

The question now on the table is whether President George W. Bush will forge a similar working relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin. After a standoffish and sometimes tense five months, Bush and Putin will meet for the first time today for an abbreviated summit with abbreviated expectations. Neither side expects the two-hour session in Slovenia to yield any substantive agreements, particularly on the issue of missile defense, so the two presidents are focused mainly on trying to establish a personal bond that could lead to more serious talks later this year.

"This will be an opportunity for the two men to get to know each other and an opportunity to sketch out a broad vision for the relationship," said Bush's national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice.

"The main thing is not to expect any breakthrough results from this summit," said Sergei Yastrzhembsky, a senior aide to Putin. "It opens a possibility for a personal acquaintance between the two presidents. The history of world diplomacy has demonstrated more than once that a personal relationship helps overcome insurmountable obstacles."

Yet recent history has also shown that major powers have national interests that come first -- in this case, on issues such as missile defense, NATO expansion and nuclear proliferation. Indeed, the emphasis on personal relationships between U.S. and Russian presidents at times has gotten them into trouble. The elder Bush came under fire for sticking with Gorbachev even after it became clear that the Soviet Union was crumbling; likewise, then-President Bill Clinton was criticized for embracing Boris Yeltsin while overlooking his government's corruption.

Moreover, the two current presidents may not find much in common beyond generational ties and a shared obsession with physical fitness. "They are totally different personalities," said a Russia specialist who helped the Bush administration prepare for the meeting. "This isn't going to be a backslapping type of relationship."

Bush, the 54-year-old former oilman, baseball team owner and governor, has rarely ventured beyond U.S. shores, while Putin, 48, spent a career as a mid-level KGB secret police spy in East Germany and government functionary in Russia before emerging from the shadows to take over the presidency 18 months ago.

Bush and Putin have spent the months since Bush's inauguration circling each other warily. Bush expelled 50 Russian diplomats accused of spying in the aftermath of the Robert P. Hanssen arrest, and Putin responded in kind. But both took care not to use incendiary rhetoric, and let the moment pass without irreparable repercussions.

Still, Bush at first seemed to go out of his way to diminish Russia's importance, downgrading its status in the National Security Council and State Department hierarchies and rebuffing requests for a meeting with Putin. It did not go unnoticed in Moscow that Bush found time to sit down with the leaders of Britain, Germany, Mexico, Canada, Armenia, Azerbaijan and even the 100-square-mile Caribbean island of St. Kitts while seemingly ignoring Putin.

But facing fierce international opposition to his plans to build an anti-missile shield, Bush pivoted with a May 1 speech in which he reached out to Russia and described it as "not our enemy but a country in transition with an opportunity to emerge as a great nation."

Now, according to Igor Bunin, an analyst at the Center for Political Technologies in Moscow, "we're re-starting from zero."

"For both presidents, it's the most important meeting . . . they will have ever had up to that point," added Michael A. McFaul, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington. "For Bush, this is his big opportunity to set the agenda and even the optics for U.S.-Russia relations. For Putin, it establishes the bilateral importance of U.S.-Russia relations from before."

Bush and Putin may agree on issues such as the Middle East, the Balkans and combating international terrorism. But they face serious disagreements over proposed NATO expansion to the Baltics, Russian arms sales to Iran, U.S.-led international sanctions on Iraq, the continuing war in Chechnya and Russia's crackdown on independent television.

The dominant issue, however, promises to be Bush's missile defense plan, which Russia has opposed on grounds that it will destabilize the nuclear balance. Bush aides lately have suggested bringing Russia in on development of the system, an attempt to win its acquiescence and potentially defuse West European opposition.

"The [Bush] administration wants to come to Slovenia with a more fleshed-out position of what that means," said a Russia expert close to the U.S. side. "It wants to give something more concrete to Putin than the Russians have received so far and see how he reacts."

The administration has stated that it wants cooperation on a "layered" missile defense system that could include Russian S-300s, the equivalent of the Patriot tactical anti-missile launchers, or radars based on Russian soil for better surveillance of countries such as Iraq or North Korea.

On the other hand, said one person who has advised Bush, "The president will reiterate the point that the administration is willing to go it alone. These consultations can't drag on forever."

Putin has said he is open to talks on missile defense and as part of the discussion wants to explore deeper cuts in nuclear warheads. "There are grounds for them to find common language," said Valery Solovei, an analyst with the Gorbachev Foundation.

But he faces strong domestic pressure not to give anything away. "There are some basic things that cannot be traded off and most important is not to undermine the existing arms control regime," said Andrei Kokoshin, a former secretary of the security council.

Underlining all this is the continuing debate over Russia's role in the post-Cold War world. Still armed with the nuclear force that made it a superpower but an economy smaller by some measures than Portugal's, Russia wants to be treated with respect. "We want to restore our self-identity," Bunin said. "And we want a certain taste of superpower [status]."

In Washington, too, with a new government, the view of Russia has changed to one less romantic and paternalistic. Zbigniew Brzezinski, who was President Jimmy Carter's national security adviser, said, "I think the administration has got rid of the delusional optimism of the Clinton era and views Russia realistically; namely, that it is neither a serious threat nor a genuine partner."

Mufson reported from Washington.

----

Ethics of Key Bush Officials Targeted
Democrats to Probe Financial Dealings

By Mike Allen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, June 16, 2001; Page A01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A8230-2001Jun15?language=printer

Democratic officials said yesterday that they plan to mount a sustained effort to attack the ethics of financial dealings by leading Bush administration officials, and are considering using the party's new majority in the Senate to call hearings.

Democrats said they had resisted such a strategy for the past five months because of polls indicating voters are turned off by political bickering, even though many party activists have been eager to turn the tables on the Bush administration following years of Republican investigations of the Clinton White House.

But Democratic Party officials said they have been emboldened by recent disclosures about the finances of some members of the new administration, and many hope they can use the cases to portray the Bush White House as beholden to special interests.

Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.) launched the effort yesterday by requesting a congressional hearing into the propriety of a meeting by Karl Rove, Bush's senior adviser, with the chief executive of Intel Corp. at a time when Rove owned more than $100,000 in stock in the company.

"This is exactly the type of situation that you would have investigated had it occurred in the Clinton administration," Waxman, the ranking Democrat on the Government Reform Committee, wrote in a letter to the chairman, Rep. Dan Burton (R-Ind.).

Burton did not immediately say whether he would hold a hearing.

Democrats say they also are focusing on the failure of Treasury Secretary Paul H. O'Neill to complete the sale of his $100 million in stock and options in Alcoa Inc., of which he was chairman before he joined the administration. O'Neill promised to sell his holdings during a television interview on March 25.

Dan Bartlett, a deputy assistant to President Bush, said the administration hopes Democrats will not engage in "politically motivated fishing expeditions."

"We understand that there have been past, partisan battles over investigations, but these were battles and investigations this president and this administration were not involved in -- this president was off in Texas being governor," Bartlett said. "We understand that the temptation to retaliate may be there, but we would urge members from both parties to try to keep what was in the past, in the past."

During the swearing-in of his White House aides on his first business day in office, President Bush said he expected every member of his administration to behave legally and ethically. Then he added, "This means avoiding even the appearance of problems."

Now, Democrats say they hope to use those words against him. After news accounts about Rove's March 12 meeting with Intel chief executive Craig R. Barrett and two Intel lobbyists appeared this week, the Democratic National Committee scheduled conference calls with talk radio hosts and state party officials in an effort to draw attention to the matter.

White House officials said Rove had been waiting for months for clearance from ethics lawyers to sell his individual stocks, and has since done so. The officials said Rove talked to the Intel executives about ways the company could support the president's policies and referred them elsewhere when they began to discuss a merger in the semiconductor industry.

On the O'Neill matter, Michele A. Davis, a Treasury spokeswoman, said the treasury secretary began divesting his Alcoa stock in April and will sell all of it by next Friday. "It's a very large amount of stock to sell, so they're doing it in pieces," Davis said. "You want to be careful about volume on any given day."

For now, the top feature on the Democratic Party's Web site is the "O'Neill/Alcoa Stock Tracker," which purports to graph the soaring value of the treasury secretary's holdings and shows his photo in the middle of a big bag of money.

Several Democratic officials said they recognize the possibility of causing a public backlash. Doug Schoen, who polled for President Bill Clinton, said the party should be cautious and would be better off focusing on issues such as health care.

"That meeting undeniably had the appearance of a conflict of interest," Schoen said. "At the same time, I don't think there's been any showing that there was an impropriety. For most voters, who owns what stock is a pretty abstract question, absent some showing of malfeasance."

House Minority Leader Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.) expressed concern about going too far. "We've had enough, in my view, of the kind of ongoing, never-ending investigation that went on in the Clinton administration," he told radio reporters yesterday.

Nevertheless, several Democratic officials said the party is working on ways to keep attention on administration ethics over the next weeks and months.

For instance, officials said energy hearings being held by Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (D-Conn.), the new chairman of the Governmental Affairs Committee, could include an examination of whether Rove's former stake of more than $100,000 in Enron Corp., a Houston energy conglomerate, could have affected the administration's energy policy. White House officials said Rove was not involved in developing the energy policy, although he helped determine how it would be marketed.

A Democratic official maintained that the "sheer breadth and width of Karl Rove's stock holdings make this a target-rich opportunity for us."

"Couple that with the fact that his hand is in everything Bush does," the official said. "If the Rove stuff dies down, O'Neill will kick up."

Jim Jordan, executive director of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, said the cases "underscore the biggest weakness of this administration, which is that it is too closely tied to special interests."

"This gives the lie to the administration's contention that this is a different kind of government, or more ethical and mature," Jordan said. "In all the Clinton investigations, there was no suggestion that people were acting to personally enrich themselves. This is a different kind of scandal." Democrats maintain that Rove put himself in an untenable position simply by scheduling the meeting with Intel and said they plan to raise questions about his extensive holdings until June 7 of stocks that could have been affected by administration policies on defense, energy and health care.

A financial disclosure form released by the White House on June 1 showed Rove owned holdings worth more than $100,000 each of Boeing Co., one of the nation's three largest defense contractors; General Electric Co., a supplier for nuclear and fossil fuel power generators, among myriad other products; and Pfizer Inc., a pharmaceutical manufacturer.

A White House official said Rove offered to sell his individual stocks before the inauguration, but the Office of Government Ethics directed him not to buy or sell anything. The official said Rove made more than a dozen requests to ethics lawyers and finally was told that one of his options for his holdings was to sell his stocks.

Lawyers advised Rove to apply to the Office of Government Ethics for a certificate of divestiture, which allows deferral of capital gains taxes on sales that are made to avoid conflicts. The official said Rove was given his certificate on June 6 and sold his stocks June 7. Another official said Rove's holdings would have been worth much more if he had been able to sell them when he first asked to.

"This is a situation where bureaucracy got the best of the process," said Bartlett, the White House official. "But in the meantime, Karl was diligent in being careful to not put himself in a position of conflict of interest."

-------- us nuc waste

DON'T GET FOOLED AGAIN
Nuclear Power Still Expensive, Still Dirty, Still Dangerous

By KAREN CHARMAN,
June 16, 2001
Progressive Populist
http://www.populist.com/01.12.charman.nuke.html

Before President George W. Bush took office, the idea of building more nuclear reactors would have been dismissed as wishful fantasy on the part of the nuclear industry and its most hardcore supporters. Until relatively recently, the nuclear industry was widely considered, if not dying, then seriously and chronically ill.

Legendary cost overruns on building the first generation of reactors -- which had been sold on the promise that nuclear power would be "too cheap to meter" -- created financial fiascos for utilities and state economies that were said to threaten American competitiveness. In February 1985, Forbes magazine declared the American experience with nuclear power "the largest managerial disaster in business history." Mainly due to the economics, more nuclear plants were canceled than the 103 reactors that are operating in the US now. On top of that, serious accidents at Three Mile Island and Chernobyl made nuclear energy a pariah among the public.

But the Bush administration has managed to breathe new life into the nuclear industry. So much so that the Nuclear Energy Institute, the industry's main public relations and lobbying arm, chose the slogan "A Flourishing Renaissance" for its annual convention in Washington, D.C. in May. The media is filled with stories about the nuclear industry's revival, and with rolling blackouts in California that may spread to other parts of the country, the nuclear option has been hurled back onto the table.

But the public would do well to consider a few facts about nuclear power that its boosters are either failing to mention or are, let's say, being less than candid about. It is also worth examining the circumstances that have brought about the nuclear industry's sudden and miraculous ascension from purgatory.

Atomic Economics

At a time of soaring energy costs, we are told that nuclear power, at 1.83 cents per kilowatt hour compared with 2.07 cents for coal, 3.52 for natural gas, and 3.8 cents for oil, is now the cheapest source of energy. But as creative accountants know, cost calculations can vary greatly: It depends what you count. The above figure represents only the current operating cost of a nuclear power plant -- the cost of the fuel to run the reactors plus maintenance on the plants. It does not include all the really expensive stuff associated with nuclear power that the public gets to pay for.

One of the most recent public handouts to the nuclear industry came via energy "deregulation," which was supposed to make energy markets more efficient by allowing people to choose the kind of power that supplied electricity to their homes and businesses. A good idea in theory, but utilities were saddled with huge debts -- mainly from building nuclear power plants -- and it was not politically possible to lift their monopolies and let them sweat it out in the market on their own, says Karl Rabago, managing director of the Rocky Mountain Institute and a former public utilities commissioner in Texas.

Ironically, Rabago says, it is nuclear power that started the chain reaction that has led to the current energy debacle in California, which is fueling calls for more nuclear power: "Up until the time we started bringing nuclear power into rates, the electricity industry was enjoying declining costs and increasing economies of scale. Nuclear power turned everything upside down."

He cites the cost of the Comanche Peaks nuclear power station in Texas as an example. It went from initial estimates of $750 million to $12 billion by the time it was completed. Every state that deregulated passed on these debts -- billions of dollars in "stranded costs" -- to ratepayers in the form of a special transition charge on their power bills.

Besides picking up the excessive cost of building the things, we also get to pick up the tab on the mounting stockpile of deadly radioactive waste that is generated by the fission process. To understand what this means, a short lesson in nuclear physics may be in order.

When the uranium fuel goes into the reactor core it is mildly radioactive. In the core, the fuel is bombarded by neutrons which split the uranium atoms and create the nuclear chain reaction that produces the heat and steam that turn a turbine to then produce electricity. After awhile, all of the fissionable material in the uranium fuel is used up, or "spent." But the neutron bombardment makes the fuel intensely radioactive -- two and a half million times more radioactive, according to Marvin Resnikoff, a nuclear physicist with Radioactive Waste Management Associates in New York City.

American nuclear power plants are in the process of creating an estimated 85,000 metric tons of spent fuel that is so deadly it must be completely isolated from the environment for tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of years. A Nevada state agency report put the toxicity in perspective: even after 10 years out of the reactor, an unshielded spent fuel assembly (the thing that holds the fuel) would emit enough radiation to kill somebody standing three feet away from it in less than three minutes.

Nuclear power plants were not built to store all of the waste that they would generate during their operating lives, but nuclear proponents thought somebody would come up with a technological solution before it really became a problem. The first strategy was to reprocess the fuel, which would cut down on the amount of "high level waste" from the reactors. But one of the downsides with reprocessing is that separating the uranium out leaves behind a large quantity of plutonium that can be used to make nuclear bombs.

In the interest of preventing the proliferation of nuclear weapons, former President Jimmy Carter halted reprocessing in the late '70s. No technological solution to decontaminate the waste has yet appeared. So, it has been piling up at nuclear plants around the country, and many are having to move their waste out of the now overcrowded cooling pools that were built to temporarily hold the spent fuel and place it in special "dry casks" on their premises.

Our Waste

Back in the '50s, the US government pledged that the public would become the proud owners of the nuclear industry's toxic trash heap. Under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, the Department of Energy (DOE) was given the arbitrary deadline of January 1998 to start collecting reactor waste, but DOE still doesn't have anywhere to put it. It had been known for some time that DOE would not meet the January 1998 deadline, and the nuclear industry is getting a little impatient that DOE has not made good on what the industry regards as the public's end of the deal. This sense of corporate entitlement was reflected in a comment reported in the March 1995 issue of Electric Light & Power that former Nuclear Energy Institute president Philip Bayne made at the 1995 annual meeting of the American Nuclear Society: "It's very simple. They have our money. We have their waste. We want them to come and get it."

Actually, it is not as simple as Bayne would like us to believe. The money he referred to is not the industry's money, it's the nuclear waste fund, which is paid to electric utilities by ratepayers. Nevertheless, a number of nuclear utilities have filed suit against DOE seeking billions in damages for not picking up "our" waste on time. Exelon Corp., the nation's largest nuclear utility, has reached a settlement with DOE that allows it to withhold up to $80 million over the next 10 years from the nuclear waste fund to offset the costs of storing the spent fuel from one of its power plants onsite.

For nearly 20 years, DOE has been trying to find a suitable place to build an underground storage site to house the high level waste from the nation's commercial reactors. Up through fiscal year 1999, the latest figures available, DOE says we have spent $6.3 billion. The total cost of dealing with 70,000 metric tons of high level waste, the maximum currently allowed in one repository, is estimated at $49.2 billion.

In the early '80s, DOE spotted Yucca Mountain, a north-south ridge of volcanic tuff located on the edge of the Nuclear Test Site in the Nevada desert about 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. DOE was also considering sites in Washington state, Texas and Utah, but according to Joe Strolin, the planning division administrator with Nevada's Agency for Nuclear Projects, only Nevada lacked the political clout to get itself removed from the list. Politics aside, the geology of Yucca Mountain is telling us that it is a terrible place to stick such a large quantity of the most long-lived and deadly substances known to humankind.

Webster's New World Dictionary defines tuff as "a porous rock, usually stratified, formed by consolidation of volcanic ash, dust, etc." Atomic bomb testing in the Pacific that ended nearly 50 years ago has already proved just how porous the mountain is. Chlorine-36, a rare radioactive element that could have only come from the bomb testing, has been found in the aquifer beneath Yucca Mountain. Scientists have also discovered that the groundwater under the mountain moves very quickly, transporting minerals that are highly corrosive to the nickel alloy that DOE plans to use for the waste containers.

Yucca Mountain is located in a geologically active area of old volcanoes that is prone to earthquakes. In June 1992, an earthquake registering 5.6 on the Richter scale hit approximately eight miles south of Yucca Mountain, causing about $1 million of damage to DOE facilities in the area. California Institute of Technology researchers have also discovered that the ground around Yucca Mountain is expanding at a much faster rate than was previously predicted. Scientists think this is probably due to magma movement beneath the surface, which could increase the likelihood of earthquakes and volcanoes. According to the US Geological Survey, Nevada is the third most active region in the country for earthquakes, behind Alaska and California.

DOE's response has been to try to engineer its way around the problems, or when it can't do that, change the rules. For example, DOE discovered the waste containers cannot be buried directly in the floor or walls of the tunnels it plans to build because they contain too much of that corrosive water. Now DOE plans to cover the waste packages with titanium drip shields in approximately 100 miles of tunnels -- at a cost of about $4 billion. Back in 1992, DOE scientists acknowledged that levels of radioactive gases exceeding what the feds allowed would escape from the mountain. "So in the Energy Policy Act of 1992, DOE got Congress to write in an exemption for Yucca Mountain, so that they didn't have to meet that standard," Strolin said. DOE and NRC are also currently trying to get Congress to waive the groundwater contamination standard of 4 millirems of total radiation exposure per individual, because they know that will be exceeded once the waste canisters start to leak.

Nuclear proponents have long argued that once there is a place to put the high level waste, the waste problem is solved. But in its haste to solve the nuclear waste dilemma, DOE appears to be ignoring the main principle behind burying it. "The concept of geological disposal is simple. This stuff is so nasty, we don't want to rely on anything manmade to try to hold it. So the idea is to rely primarily on the geologic environment for the waste isolation capability," Strolin said. "That means finding a site in a geologically stable area that's been stable for millions of years, and because of its past history, you can have good confidence it's going to remain stable and secure for the next several million years. Yucca Mountain is not such a place."

In mantra-like unison, nuclear proponents claim that the waste disposal question is not a technical problem but a political problem. Yucca Mountain is a perfectly good site, they say, and only politics have held up its formal selection as the nation's nuclear burial ground. No doubt the good people of Nevada do not want the stigma of being the caretaker of the largest quantity of the nation's most lethal substances. But considering what we are planning to put inside it, the fact that scientists have raised questions about earthquakes, volcanoes, and quickly moving, corrosive groundwater in connection with this site should be enough to disqualify it.

DOE is expected to make its recommendation on Yucca Mountain toward the end of the year. It has already indicated it favors the site, and with the nuclear industry's new and improved status, and the Bush administration's ardent political support, DOE is almost certain to approve Yucca Mountain.

Despite the industry's tantrums, there isn't a pressing need to move the waste, and many in the environmental community say the waste would be better off staying at nuclear power plants where it can be monitored to make sure that any problem with a container is fixed before it starts to leak. But beyond where we might put this toxic trash, is the disturbing issue of how it will get there. The plan is to ship it down the nation's highways and rail lines over a period of 30 years on proposed routes that are half a mile from the homes of 50 million Americans.

"Mobile Chernobyl," as opponents have dubbed it, presents a number of problems. At the very least, those unlucky enough to be stuck in traffic next to a gamma-emitting waste cask will be zapped with radiation doses equivalent to one chest x-ray an hour, according to the Nuclear Information & Resource Service, an anti-nuclear watchdog group. The exposure presents particular risks to pregnant women and their fetuses, children, the elderly, and people with compromised immune systems.

We can also expect nuclear road accidents. According to Department of Transportation data, nearly 100,000 accidents released toxic material in the US and its territories between 1987 and 1997. DOE studies predict one accident out of 343 shipments, and considering that collecting the nation's nuclear garbage will take around 90,000 shipments, more than 260 accidents are anticipated.

And what might happen in the event of an accident involving a high level waste shipment? By DOE's calculations, a realistic but not even worst-case scenario that includes a high-speed crash and fire emitting a relatively small amount of radiation in a rural area would contaminate 42 square miles and take 462 days to clean up at a cost of $620 million. Resnikoff, of Radioactive Waste Management Associates, says the cost could rise to $19.4 billion, depending on how populated the area is and how thoroughly it is cleaned up. George Burke, a spokesman for the International Association of Fire Fighters -- whose members would be the first to respond to a nuclear road or rail accident -- says there is no nationally coordinated emergency response strategy. The task would be left to local fire departments, most of which he says are "woefully unprepared."

Taxpayers Bear Risk

Besides endowing us with their waste, the nuclear industry and the government have also bequeathed to us the lion's share of the cost of a catastrophic reactor accident, should one, God-forbid, occur. In 1957 the Price-Anderson Act was passed to limit a nuclear utility's liability for an accident, currently to $7 billion. Price-Anderson is up for renewal next year, and there is talk of raising the industry's liability to $10 billion. But that is still a small fraction of what it would cost to deal with a Chernobyl, which is currently estimated at more than $350 billion.

Nuclear proponents claim that the many redundant safety systems -- known as "defense-in-depth" -- are adequate to prevent a major accident. But David Lochbaum, a nuclear engineer at the Union of Concerned Scientists, says that in reality, defense-in-depth is a sham: "It becomes a shell game, because if you find a problem, you discount it because you have, say, two back-ups." The US Nuclear Regulatory Commission does not require all the equipment in a nuclear facility to be checked, a task that would probably be impossible because of the complexity of the plants. And while the NRC argues that its inspections are thorough enough, Lochbaum disagrees. He uses the metaphor of faulty tires on a car to describe the NRC's inspection process. "If you saw the metal belts showing through a steel-belted tire, you'd check the other three tires to see if they are equally worn. The NRC's process is that after you fix the one tire, you don't look at the others. You just assume they are okay."

In 1985, the NRC itself testified in Congress that there was a 45% chance of a severe reactor accident over the following 20 years. Lochbaum says only luck has so far prevented it. How bad does the government acknowledge an accident could be? According to a 1982 study by the Sandia National Laboratory, one of the labs run by the DOE, a meltdown that breaches the containment at the Limerick nuclear plant outside Philadelphia could kill 74,000 people within a year, result in 34,000 subsequent cancer deaths, and give another 61,000 people a range of radiation-related injuries.

But not to worry. We are now told that the new generation of reactors the nuclear industry wants to build are "inherently safe" and "accident-proof" (of course, this is the same message we heard before the Three Mile Island accident).

The most popular of these new and improved reactors is the Pebble Bed Modular Reactor. The concept for the pebble bed dates back to the 1950s and gets its name from the fuel, which is in the form of billiard ball-sized uranium pellets encased in graphite. This design uses helium, or in case of an accident, convective air instead of water to cool the reactor and is said to be so safe that it does not require a steel-lined concrete containment building. To date, only two experimental pebble bed reactors have been built, one in Germany and one in China. Exelon Corp. is considering building one in South Africa with that country's public utility, Eskom.

While there is little information available about the pebble bed design, Lochbaum says some of what he has seen so far sets off alarm bells. The biggest problem is the lack of a containment structure, because despite claims that this reactor would be "meltdown proof," graphite catches fire. A graphite fire burned for 10 days at Chernobyl before it could be put out, and though that was not the cause of the accident there, it made it harder to deal with. Lochbaum says that a fire in a pebble bed reactor could lead to a meltdown, because what is normally used to put out a fire also stops airflow, which is needed to keep the reactor from overheating. A design fix exists: installing huge tanks of either carbon dioxide or nitrogen, which would flood the space and extinguish the fire. But, he says, that would be very expensive and probably remove one of the main incentives of building this design, which is much cheaper than those currently in operation.

Nuclear Air and Water

Nuclear power is currently widely touted as a source of clean, pollution-free energy. And if you don't count what you can't see, smell, or taste, that might be true. Unfortunately, radiation can't be seen, smelled or tasted (unless somebody gets a high enough dose -- radiation poisoning -- which typically leaves a metallic taste in the mouth). But radiation's invisibility does not render it non-existent. Contrary to common belief, as part of their normal operations, nuclear reactors routinely emit radioactivity into the air and water with largely unmeasured consequences to human health and the environment.

Debby Katz, president of the Citizen's Awareness Network (CAN), a Massachusetts-based group that formed in response to concern about the now shut Yankee Rowe reactor in Western Massachusetts, says both the nuclear industry and the public health establishment repeatedly stonewall the public on health concerns over radiation releases by reactors. Her community is host to two nuclear reactors just 17 miles apart, Yankee Rowe and Vermont Yankee outside of Brattleboro, Vermont.

After noticing alarming increases in various types of cancer, Down's syndrome and birth defects, CAN began examining the records of Yankee Rowe and found that in the 1960s and 1970s, it had released 20,000 curies of radioactive tritium into the Deerfield River that ran through their valley. CAN engaged a graduate student from the Harvard School Public Health, who found that the amount dumped into the river was "orders of magnitude greater" than what people would be exposed to from normal background radiation. Relying on reactor release records, CAN also discovered that Vermont Yankee released 360,000 curies of radioactive isotopes into the air and water since it began operating, and the now shut Haddam Neck reactor in Connecticut released more than 120,000 curies of tritium into the Connecticut River.

In describing the exposure patterns for the people in the Deerfield river valley, CAN's website says: "Our community was exposed for 31 years. Our children swam in that river. Over 500,000 people a year use the river. In drought, farmers pumped water from the river to irrigate their crops. Air inversions blanket the river valley over 34% of the time, trapping the airborne contamination in our valley. The river is used for white-water rafting. Spit and spume from the rapids are dispersed into the adjacent community."

In 1991 at the urging of CAN and local physicians, the Massachusetts Department of Public Health (MDPH) began investigating rates of illness in the area. MDPH did conclude there were enough cases of in breast cancer, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and Down's syndrome to be considered abnormal ("statistically significant"). Linking such maladies to an environmental factor is extremely difficult, and Katz says the department made no attempt to try to explain why the community was experiencing the elevated rates of illness. The report also said that residents' exposure to tritium from the river was "several orders of magnitude lower than the dose received from all natural sources of radiation."

Katz says the department seemed more interested in trying to downplay what they found and that they diluted the results by excluding people who should have been counted and by including people from communities outside of the contamination pathway. They also got somebody who had not been involved in collecting the data to write up the final report, which she says introduced errors that have still not been corrected. CAN's own researchers found higher than normal incidences of brain tumors and multiple myeloma, a rare blood cancer. "It was really amazing. You could say they were just clueless, and on one level that may be true," she said. "But on another level, this is a kind of systematic bureaucratization of a process to stymie people and make them eventually walk away."

Robert Knorr, the deputy director for environmental epidemiology in the department's bureau of environmental health assessment, maintains that the department tried very hard to address the community's concerns by working with the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, the Harvard School of Public Health and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. With the information they have been able to gather, he says "nothing was sticking its head out that would tell us that this is a real problem, so we were left with the limitations of the science in trying to somehow find some answers for the community." By contrast, Knorr was part of a team that did find a significant link between leukemia cases and radiation emissions at the Pilgrim nuclear power plant near Boston in the late '70s and early '80s.

Radiation (Like Toxic Sludge) is Good for You

The industry and most public health authorities insist that nuclear power plants are safe because the radiation releases are too small to have any effect on anybody's health or the environment. In fact, some are even starting to say that it's good for us. The theory of hormesis -- that a little radiation is actually healthy because it boosts the immune system -- is gaining favor among nuclear proponents.

Just in time, too, because whether we swallow hormesis or not, the public is in for much more radiation exposure as the nation's old and contaminated nuclear weapons facilities and nuclear power plants are dismantled. Some of the radioactive materials they contain -- metals, concrete, and soil, among other things -- are being, or will be, "recycled" into a wide range of materials. These materials will make their way into everything from pots and pans, car chassis, braces on kids' teeth -- even artificial hip joints and IUDs -- to building materials in houses, furniture, computer equipment, and children's toys.

Nobody knows exactly how much of this material currently exists. The best estimates are on metals, which are said to account for the largest amount of radioactive material destined for recycling. The US's 123 commercial nuclear power plants (some of which are already closed down) are expected to contribute between 1.4 million to 2 million tons to the radioactive scrap metal heap. On top of that a recent government report noted that over the next few decades, more than a million tons of radioactive scrap metal are expected to be recovered from weapons facilities.

The NRC is in the process of writing rules for the "unrestricted release" of these materials, meaning that there would be no requirement to label, track or monitor the impact of this material as it moves out into our daily lives. Also, the Department of Transportation is changing its rules, so that this material can move freely (the new rules are expected to be finalized in July).

Environmental groups, the metal industry, and the Paper, Allied-Industrial and Energy Workers International Union (PACE), which represents a lot of workers who would be engaged in recovering or working with this material, are vehemently opposed to the plan. Radioactive materials have been released on an ad hoc basis for years, and the Steel Manufacturers Association reports 50 incidents involving materials released for recycling that were more contaminated than what the government considers safe, including two cases where companies had to spend about $20 million to clean up equipment that became contaminated.

It remains to be seen whether the steel industry, the environmental community or the public can stop the nuclear establishment from dumping this portion of its low-level waste into general commerce. One option is to try to keep it isolated in facilities licensed to deal with radioactive waste. But both DOE and NRC are looking at ways to cut costs, and "recycling" the waste is definitely a lot cheaper for the nuclear waste generators. In January this year, the Environment News Service reported that NRC chairman Richard Meserve said that releasing contaminated solid waste materials into everyday commerce is necessary to ensure the continued viability of the nuclear power industry, as well as DOE's clean-ups.

In 1986 and again in 1990, the environmental community blocked NRC's attempts to deregulate contaminated materials for unrestricted recycling, but now it may be a lot harder to stop. Other countries face mountains of nuclear garbage, and the European Commission and the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency are setting recycling standards. International transport regulations are also being amended to allow the free flow of unlabeled radioactive scrap and products made from it.

Experience with nuclear technology reveals it to be incredibly expensive, dirty and dangerous, with a legacy that we and future generations will have to deal with, essentially forever. The nuclear industry and its supporters are attempting to emotionally blackmail us into deepening our commitment to nuclear power. But the issues surrounding nuclear power are much more complex than the current simplistic arguments being made on its behalf. Soaring energy costs and threats of looming blackouts -- not to mention the growing evidence of global warming's environmental catastrophe -- are providing us a real opportunity to reassess our current energy habits and choose smarter, environmentally and economically sustainable energy sources. When considering nuclear power, we would do well to remember the old adage: "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."

Karen Charman is an investigative journalist specializing in agriculture, health and the environment. This originally appeared at TomPaine.com.

-------- MILITARY

-------- africa

UN Halts Aid Deliveries in Angola

JUNE 16, 10:04 EST
http://wire.ap.org/APnews/center_story.html?FRONTID=AFRICA&STORYID=APIS7CLMEU00

LUANDA, Angola (AP) - The United Nations has halted all its aid flights in Angola after a ground-to-air missile narrowly missed two of its planes in the second attack on aid aircraft this month.

The U.N. World Food Program announced late Friday an indefinite suspension of aid flights in the war-devastated country and warned of an ``unprecedented humanitarian catastrophe'' if it is unable to resume food deliveries next week.

The program provides vital aid to about 1 million people in Angola, where a civil war between the government and the UNITA rebel group has driven nearly 4 million people - about one-third of the population - from their homes.

On Friday afternoon, an anti-aircraft missile exploded close to two Hercules cargo planes which were ferrying food to Kuito, a rural city about 350 miles southeast of the capital Luanda, the WFP said.

The missile caused no injuries nor damage to the aircraft, which were each carrying 17 tons of food. The planes abandoned their mission and returned to their base.

The WFP said it did not know who fired the missile.

It added that Kuito, where more than 200,000 people are dependent on aid, had food reserves for only six days.

Government officials were not immediately available for comment.

Earlier this month, UNITA claimed that its troops fired a missile which hit a WFP plane over eastern Angola on June 8. One of the plane's engines was badly damaged by that missile but the crew managed to land safely.

Much of rural Angola is inaccessible because of skirmishes between UNITA and the army and because of land mines. Aid agencies have to use aircraft to reach outlying cities.

The United Nations blames UNITA - a Portuguese acronym for the National Union for the Total Independence of Angola - for the 1998 collapse of a U.N.-brokered peace accord signed four years earlier.

The war first erupted after the country's 1975 independence from Portugal.

-------- arms sales

Former Rising Star on Wall Street Is Arrested in Arms Sale Inquiry

New York Times
June 16, 2001
By TERRY PRISTIN
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/16/nyregion/16GUNS.html?searchpv=nytToday

An undercover investigation into suspected arms sales led to the arrest this week of a man who was once a rising star on Wall Street and a promising player in the resurgence of Harlem.

On Tuesday, Kevin Ingram, who was named one of the top 25 African- American "movers and shakers" on Wall Street by Black Enterprise magazine in 1996, was arrested by federal agents in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., after agreeing to launder $2.2 million that had been described to him as proceeds from arms shipments, according to court papers filed in Federal District Court in Miami.

He was charged in a two-and-a- half-year sting operation that also brought the arrest of two suspected arms dealers from Jersey City who inspected a Stinger missile at a West Palm Beach, Fla., warehouse for possible sale to an unnamed foreign country, according to the court documents.

In 1999, according to the court documents, Mr. Ingram and one of the Jersey City men, Diaa Mohsen, laundered nearly $350,000 in two wire transactions by transferring the money from the United States to an account in London.

Last week, after being approached by an undercover agent, Mr. Ingram arranged for a pilot, Walter Kapij, of Weathersfield, Conn., to take $2.2 million to Amsterdam on a chartered Lear jet. On Tuesday, agents handed them two bags of cash at the airport in Fort Lauderdale and arrested them.

Mr. Ingram's lawyer, Richard G. Lubin of West Palm Beach, said Mr. Ingram would plead not guilty at his arraignment next month. He was released from jail yesterday on a $250,000 bond.

According to the court documents, the Jersey City men - Mr. Mohsen and Mohammed Rajaa Malik, also known as Mike Malik - said they were acting as intermediaries for foreign buyers. They held numerous meetings with undercover agents posing as arms dealers in New Jersey, in Florida and at the TriBeCa Grill restaurant in Manhattan. During those meetings they promised to buy a laundry list of high-tech military weapons, offering to pay for part of the shipment in heroin, the documents said.

Mr. Ingram ran the mortgage trading practice at Goldman Sachs from 1992 to 1996, when he joined Deutsche Bank as head of its mortgage-backed securities department, making deals involving hundreds of millions of dollars.

Seeking to play a role in the resurgence of Harlem, Mr. Ingram had plans in 1999 to reopen Minton's Playhouse, the birthplace of bebop, and to expand and renovate Wells Famous Home of Chicken and Waffles, a restaurant and nightclub at 132nd Street and Adam Clayton Powell Jr. Boulevard that drew an international after-hours crowd in the 1940's.

The Upper Manhattan Empowerment Zone, an economic development program in Harlem, had agreed to lend Mr. Ingram's development company $570,000 to renovate Minton's, on 118th Street between Adam Clayton Powell Jr. and Frederick Douglass Boulevards, but it withdrew the offer last year after Mr. Ingram failed to raise additional capital, according to Terry C. Lane, the agency's president. The Wells project is also at a standstill and the restaurant is closed.

The Upper Manhattan Empowerment Zone, which had agreed to a $375,000 loan for the Wells construction, has begun legal proceedings to recover $200,000, the amount that had been disbursed.

In January 1999, Mr. Ingram was forced to resign from Deutsche Bank under pressure after his division suffered costly losses.

He then helped found TruMarkets Inc., an online bond trading venture that was able to attract some prominent Wall Street figures as board members, including Herbert Allison, a former president of Merrill Lynch. But the company sought bankruptcy protection in March.

-------- balkans

Forces Exchange Fire in Macedonia Despite Cease-Fire

New York Times
June 16, 2001
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-Macedonia.html

SKOPJE, Macedonia (AP) -- European leaders threw their weight Saturday behind a peace plan pushed by Macedonia's president, amid reports of new skirmishes and worries about the arming of civilians against ethnic Albanian insurgents.

European Union leaders meeting in Goteborg, Sweden promised more aid if President Boris Trajkovski's peace plan succeeds. They also said they will send an EU envoy to be based in the Macedonian capital, Skopje, to help shore up the talks.

Meanwhile Saturday, Macedonian media reported an exchange of infantry fire near the village of Aracinovo, a rebel stronghold on the outskirts of Skopje, although rebels declared a cease-fire Friday and the government had promised ``military restraint.'' There was no word on casualties.

Despite the violence, the leading ethnic Albanian politician in Macedonia expressed optimism about talks to end the crisis and head off a full-scale war in this Balkan country.

``We are pushing this process forward,'' Arben Xhaferi said. He and other politicians representing Macedonia's majority Slavs and the ethnic Albanian minority held more talks on Saturday.

Trajkovski's plan calls for a cease-fire, amnesty for most rebels who disarm voluntarily and greater inclusion of ethnic Albanians in state bodies and institutions.

A Macedonian government official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Trajkovski also is willing to remove references to ethnicity or religion from the constitution and add Albanian as an optional state language.

EU officials disagreed Saturday over who they should send as a Macedonian peace envoy but said their foreign ministers will try to agree on a candidate when they meet June 25 in Luxembourg.

The EU members also suggested they were moving closer to agreement among themselves on Trajkovski's request for NATO troops to help collect weapons if the insurgents agree to disarm.

Representatives from the 19 NATO nations were expected to meet Wednesday in Brussels, Belgium, to consider that request.

The militants are demanding a full deployment of NATO peacekeepers in Macedonia before accepting any peace proposal. But EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana said that no consideration was being given to a large-scale NATO operation.

The militants, known as the National Liberation Army, took up arms in February in a fight they say is for broader rights.

Macedonian authorities contend the rebels are bent on carving up the country and have led several offensives to dislodge them from their strongholds.

They also recently began arming civilian police reservists, a move that has worried both Macedonian Slavs and ethnic Albanians. There were reports that guns were going mainly to Slavic supporters of the prime minister's party.

On Saturday, police spokesman Stevo Pendarovski admitted there had been ``certain problems'' with some of the recently mobilized reserves in the Skopje area.

Pendarovski said some of the reservists had been dismissed and returned their weapons, and said the government would explain the problems Monday.

Also Saturday, the government's interethnic Crisis Management Body began working on coordinating military and police efforts against the insurgents, as well as inter-ethnic confidence-building measures, relations with international organizations and media campaigning.

Engineers also restored running water from a reservoir controled by the rebels to Kumanovo, a town of 100,000 to which rebels have cut off water for the past 11 days, Macedonian television reported.

The rebels allowed the engineers to work in return for supplying food and other aid to civilians in rebel-held villages, according to the report.

-------- colombia

Colombia Frees FARC Rebels in Landmark Swap

New York Times
June 16, 2001
By REUTERS
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/world/international-colombi.html

REBEL ENCLAVE, Colombia (Reuters) - The Colombian government freed 11 FARC rebels from a maximum security prison on Saturday in exchange for 29 guerrilla-held soldiers and police, in the second-stage of a landmark prisoner swap aimed at reviving the country's flagging peace negotiations.

The rebels, one of them limping, touched down in a Red Cross helicopter somewhere in a Switzerland-sized enclave ceded to the 17,000-member Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia more than two years ago to lure them to the negotiating table.

The freed prisoners, who seemed in good health, were met by FARC commanders and escorted away in a large-scale rebel march by camouflage-clad fighters.

``When you are in prison it is like being buried alive,'' Fermin Betancur, 37, told Reuters. He has been a FARC member for 18 years and spent 21 months and eight days in jail.

It was the first time the government has released FARC prisoners in the history of Colombia's 37-year war.

Elsewhere in the enclave, the FARC handed over soldiers and policemen, who were covered in mosquito bites and pale after years under the thick jungle canopy, to the Red Cross and the government's top peace negotiator, Camilo Gomez.

At a military base hours away, mothers, daughter and wives of the freed men waited after a sleepless Friday night. They broke down weeping and laughing when the 29 men finally arrived. ``Thank you Lord, thank you my God for this, I'll never grow tired of saying thank you,'' cried one mother, her voice hoarse.

SOLDIERS TO BE RELEASED

Another nine soldiers and up to four more guerrillas are expected to be released in coming days under the terms of the June 2 agreement signed by the government and FARC leaders.

Once a total of 15 FARC prisoners are released, the rebels -- who are fighting to impose a Marxist state -- have agreed to free another 100 prisoners.

FARC rebels led Reuters to a secret spot in the jungle on Friday, where the 29 now-freed soldiers were being held. Speaking in hushed voices after up to three years of confinement in makeshift bush jails, the men were pained to leave behind their 400-odd comrades still FARC captivity.

``I'm happy because I'm going to see my Mom, but sad because I'm leaving my brother behind,'' Hebert Torres, an army private, told Reuters. ``No words can describe it.''

Coming amid intensifying fighting in the chaotic war that involves Colombia's military, outlawed right-wing paramilitary groups and rebels, the prisoner swap is a victory for President Andres Pastrana, entering his last year in office.

It was the first concrete accord to emerge after more than two years of talks between FARC and the government, and the only humanitarian agreement in a war that has claimed 40,000 lives in the past decade.

Although the armed forces chief that warned FARC was using the swap to free senior commanders it needs to win the war, no high-ranking rebels were included in the exchange.

Still, the U.S. government -- which is pouring more than $1 billion into Pastrana's ``Plan Colombia'' anti-drug offensive -- said earlier in June it too was skeptical of FARC intentions. U.S. officials accuse the FARC of direct involvement in the global cocaine trade and doubt rebels are serious about peace.

Government sources said all 15 FARC rebels were slated to be freed from maximum security prisons on Saturday, but legal complications delayed the release of three guerrillas.

Sources said one FARC guerrilla refused to take part in the prisoner swap, saying he was close to completing his prison term and did not want to return to rebel ranks.

Earlier this month, the FARC released a gravely ill police colonel and three other officers, after holding them for 14 months in jungle and mountain prison camps. It was the first stage of the prisoner swap and the government released no rebels in exchange.

Col. Alvaro Acosta, who came to symbolize the plight of the men imprisoned by the FARC, returned to his family a paraplegic and in a deep depression. He tried to commit suicide three times during his captivity.

-------- drug war

Cannabis Legalization Sought in UK

New York Times
June 16, 2001
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-Britain-Cannabis.html

LONDON (AP) -- Braving torrential rain, thousands gathered in a park in London on Saturday to call for the legalization of marijuana.

Organizers estimated that 30,000 people attended the Cannabis Freedom Festival in the Brixton area of south London.

Participants heard speeches calling for the decriminalization of cannabis, listened to bands from Europe, Africa and Brazil, absorbed the verses of ``poets for pot'' and browsed stalls offering hemp ice cream, hemp clothing and a cookbook entitled ``Cooking with Ganja.''

There were no reports of arrests.

``We're very pleased with the turnout,'' festival coordinator Andy Cornwell said. ``There's growing support from all walks of life.''

On Friday, police said they would no longer charge people found in possession of a small amount of marijuana in the south London district where the rally took place.

Scotland Yard said officers would release users with a warning, rather than taking them to a station to be charged, so police could concentrate on arresting crack cocaine dealers and violent offenders in the high-crime area.

If the pilot program is successful it may be expanded to other areas of London, Scotland Yard said.

-------- iran

Turning a Friendlier Face to Iran

New York Times
June 16, 2001
By LEE H. HAMILTON and JAMES SCHLESINGER
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/16/opinion/16HAMI.html?searchpv=nytToday

In the presidential election this month, Iranians voted overwhelmingly in favor of reform and democracy. The landslide victory of Mohammad Khatami, the candidate identified with reform, provides an opportunity for the United States to respond to the Iranian people's desire for change. The current stalemate in American- Iranian relations does not serve overall American interests. The United States should relax its economic sanctions against Iran and take other steps to foster an improved relationship, without weakening efforts to advance Middle East peace and prevent terrorism and the proliferation of nuclear weapons.

Our current policy is focused on important American security interests - combating terrorism and containing nuclear weapons - but largely neglects our geopolitical, energy and economic interests. The sanctions, driven by the desire to isolate and punish Iran, have scant international support and have made it more difficult to advance our interests in the region around Iran.

Major nations, including Russia and China, are cultivating Iran as they compete for influence in the Middle East and Central Asia. Unilateral sanctions are shutting us out of this competition while encouraging potential strategic alliances to develop among Russia, China and Iran. The sanctions are also a major source of friction in our relations with Europe and Japan.

A less confrontational approach to Iran would make it easier for the United States to develop more effective and timely policies in the Middle East, since America and Iran share some common interests: for example, concern about Saddam Hussein in Iraq and the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Our current policy also has substantial economic costs. American companies are missing opportunities to invest in Iran and develop its vast oil and gas resources. At a time when we need to ensure more diverse and reliable sources of energy, Iran's natural resources could be of great benefit to the United States and the world. Iran is not a likely exporter of oil to the United States, but easing the sanctions would allow American development to increase Iran's production, raising its exports to Asia and thus helping to stabilize oil supplies and prices worldwide.

It would be a strategic blunder to ignore the Iranian people's clear call for reform by simply maintaining and renewing existing unilateral sanctions. And an opening to Iran now would make it harder for those Iranian leaders who oppose reform to make the United States a scapegoat for Iran's problems.

How to move forward and get beyond the current stalemate? A recently completed three-year Atlantic Council study, which we helped lead, concludes that American engagement is best begun by allowing the private sector to invest in Iran and make American products and ideas available to Iranians. This would require that economic sanctions be relaxed, a step that need not be contingent upon the actions of Iran or any other nation.

Additional steps should, however, depend on Iran's responses. The current political climate in Iran precludes direct government-to-government relations or the implementation of a specific plan for normalization, so realistically we should not expect extraordinary short-term results. The relationship is likely to remain difficult for some time. Nevertheless, if both nations are willing to compromise, what is impossible to envisage today could become a reality tomorrow: a relationship between the United States and Iran that permits the "dialogue of civilizations" that Mr. Khatami has called for and that meets our common interests.

Lee H. Hamilton, director of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, was chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee from 1993 to 1995. James Schlesinger, senior adviser at Lehman Brothers, was energy secretary and defense secretary under Jimmy Carter.

-------- japan

Japan Minister Departs for US Meeting

New York Times
June 16, 2001
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-Japan-US-Tanaka.html?searchpv=aponline

TOKYO (AP) -- Foreign Minister Makiko Tanaka departed Saturday for Washington, where she is to meet Secretary of State Colin Powell and other top officials as well as visit a school she attended as an exchange student.

On her first official trip to the United States since taking office April 26, Tanaka was to meet with Powell and National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice on Monday, a Foreign Ministry spokesman said on condition of anonymity.

Tanaka listed friction over the heavy U.S. military presence on Okinawa and the proposed U.S. missile defense shield as the main topics for discussions with Powell.

Tanaka was also expected to pressure Washington to return to the Kyoto Protocol, a 1997 international agreement to curb global warming. President Bush has rejected the pact, even though it was approved by his predecessor, Bill Clinton.

On Sunday, Tanaka was to visit a school in Philadelphia where she studied as an exchange student, the spokesman said.

Tanaka's trip to Washington is regarded as setting the stage for the summit between Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi and President Bush set for June 30 at Camp David.

At home, Tanaka was sharply criticized by political rivals for missing a meeting with Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, who visited Tokyo last month to discuss the U.S. missile shield idea.

Tanaka is also locked in a bitter feud with employees at the ministry who have leaked an embarrassing stream of comments Tanaka made in private criticizing the U.S. missile shield and questioning Tokyo's security alliance with Washington.

Tanaka is scheduled to return to Japan on Tuesday.

-------- nato

President Urges Expansion of NATO to Russia's Border

New York Times
June 16, 2001
By FRANK BRUNI
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/16/world/16PTEX.html?searchpv=nytToday&pagewanted=all

WARSAW, June 15 - President Bush called today for an Atlantic Alliance that would stretch all the way to Russia's borders, delving more emphatically and aggressively than any of his predecessors into a matter guaranteed to make Moscow nervous.

On the day before his first meeting with President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, Mr. Bush used a speech in the capital of this former Soviet bloc country to urge a broad, steady expansion of NATO into the countries of Eastern Europe that are not now in the alliance.

He sought to reassure the Russian government that this was not a confrontational strategy by declaring that neither the United States nor Europe were enemies of Russia - and that Russia was indeed a part of Europe.

"All of Europe's new democracies, from the Baltic to the Black Sea and all that lie between, should have the same chance for security and freedom and the same chance to join the institutions of Europe as Europe's old democracies," Mr. Bush said, seemingly envisioning a day when even the European Union might expand that far.

The president defined Poland as the "center of Europe" rather than a country closer to the eastern boundary of the current alliance.

Referring to the steady expansion of the alliance, which will be discussed in detail next year at a meeting in Prague, Mr. Bush said, "The question of `when' may still be up for debate within NATO."

He added, "The question of `whether' should not.

"As we plan to enlarge NATO, no nation should be used as a pawn in the agendas of others. We will not trade away the fate of free European peoples. No more Munichs. No more Yaltas."

Those phrases referred to historic pacts that assigned European countries to different superpowers' spheres of influence and captured an East-West paradigm that Mr. Bush, in his most detailed and sweeping remarks yet about the future of the relationship between the United States and Europe, declared moribund.

"As we plan the Prague summit," he said, "we should not calculate how little we can get away with, but how much we can do to advance the cause of freedom."

In the meantime, he added, referring to his next meeting, in Slovenia, "I will express to President Putin that Russia is a part of Europe and, therefore, does not need a buffer zone of insecure states separating it from Europe. NATO, even as it grows, is no enemy of Russia. Poland is no enemy of Russia. America is no enemy of Russia."

Three former Soviet bloc countries - the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland - joined NATO in 1999, and the 10 central and eastern European countries that are seeking admission next year include former Soviet allies like Bulgaria and Romania. The 10 countries also include the Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, once Soviet republics. Russia has long been opposed to having those neighboring nations absorbed into the Atlantic Alliance.

Mr. Bush did not single out and endorse any specific candidates today. He did not say exactly how many candidates in all should be added to NATO next year.

But he did go so far as to mention a country beyond that list of 10, saying, "The Europe we are building must include the Ukraine, a nation struggling with the trauma of transition." Ukraine, too, is a former Soviet republic.

Mr. Bush's remarks, which lasted 26 minutes, significantly longer than usual and by far his most extended public comments since he arrived on Tuesday in Europe, were delivered to hundreds of professors, students, government officials and diplomats at Warsaw University.

Those people were obviously just one of Mr. Bush's many audiences. The president was speaking, as well, to Mr. Putin and alerting him that the United States would not defer to or be dissuaded by Russian anxieties. Russia, Mr. Bush seemed to say, could become a friendly partner to his world vision or it might find itself alone.

The president was also speaking to European allies and once again trying to lay down markers and exert his will, as he has tried to do on global warming and missile defense, without equivocation.

And he was speaking, as a president always does, even in the first year of his term, to voters at home. Important Midwest swing states are densely populated by Polish-Americans and Roman Catholics, and Mr. Bush's address was rife with religious sentiments and adulatory references to John Paul II, the first Polish pope.

He cast god and religion as the forces that successfully challenged Communism and talked about the belief in a divine "author of dignity" as "the main reason Europe and America will never be separated."

"We are products of the same history, reaching from Jerusalem and Athens to Warsaw and Washington," Mr. Bush said. "We share more than an alliance. We share a civilization. Its values are universal, and they pervade our history and our partnership in a unique way."

Mr. Bush also made a point of mentioning his father, former President George Bush, who strongly supported Poland's democratic transition in 1989. The fondness with which many Poles remember the former president guaranteed his son a warmer greeting here than he had received in Belgium or Sweden, two earlier stops on a five-day five-nation trip.

But the current president also chose Poland for its symbolic significance as a former Soviet bloc country that has made a successful transition to democracy and capitalism.

Mr. Bush's national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, who accompanied him, marveled at the differences between the Poland of more than a decade ago, which she visited as a foreign policy expert in the first Bush administration, and the Poland that she saw today.

As Mr. Bush ended his speech late this afternoon, Ms. Rice could be seen wiping tears from her eyes. She had said at an earlier news conference that she found it "really extraordinarily moving" to see "the Polish flag flying next to the NATO flag" at an event that she and the president attended.

Over the course of a long day, Mr. Bush visited the Warsaw Ghetto Memorial, a plaza in the general area where the Nazis detained hundreds of thousands of Jews in the early 1940's before transporting them to death camps. He also talked extensively with the government leaders.

At a news conference before his speech and in the university speech, Mr. Bush was careful to mention repeatedly that support for including more eastern European countries in European institutions was not meant as a provocation to Russia.

He and administration officials said one main message for Mr. Putin on Saturday would be a desire to work more closely with Russia and to have its cooperation and input on a missile shield.

"We want Russia to be a partner and an ally, a partner in peace, a partner in democracy, a country that embraces freedom, a country that enhances the security of Europe," Mr. Bush told reporters.

Phil Gordon, an expert on Europe who worked on the National Security Council in the Clinton administration, said that there was "a fine balancing act that the administration is trying to pull off." He noted that although Mr. Bush was clearly supporting including a Baltic state in NATO, the president "doesn't say anything about the timetable."

"I think the momentum behind the Baltic states has been extraordinary over the last six months," Mr. Gordon added. He said the state most likely to gain entry was Lithuania, in part because it has the smallest Russian minority in its population and its membership would not upset Russia as much as the including Latvia, which has a larger Russian minority.

Mr. Bush's speech looked even further into the future, albeit vaguely. "Our goal is to erase the false lines that have divided Europe for too long," he said. "Every European nation that struggles toward democracy and free markets. And a strong civic culture must be welcomed into Europe's home."

But he was careful to assert that "the Europe we are building must also be open to Russia."

"We have a stake in Russia's success," he added, "and we look forward to the day when Russia is fully reformed, fully democratic, and closely bound to the rest of Europe."

---

Profiles of the nine official NATO candidate countries

Saturday June 16, 6:30 PM
Agence France Presse
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/010616/1/z3ym.html

LJUBLJANA, June 16 (AFP) - The englargement of the US-led North Atlantic Treaty Organization to include ex-communist nations from the former Soviet bloc was expected to be a point of contention at Saturday's first summit between US President George W. Bush and Russian leader Vladimir Putin.

Herewith are brief profiles of the nine countries which were accepted as candidates for NATO membership at a May 1999 summit in Washington and which hope to receive invitations to join the alliance at a NATO summit in Prague in November 2002.

SLOVENIA: Also a front-runner for membership of the European Union, Slovenia just missed out on an invitation to enter NATO in 1997. It is seen as a favorite to join in 2002, especially as NATO allies are likely to want to embrace a former Yugoslav state in order to expand security in the Balkans. Although small, Slovenia's 9,000-strong army is considered to be in good shape.

SLOVAKIA: The replacement of strongman Vladimir Meciar with a reformist government in 1998 removed converns over democracy which had held back Slovakia's chances. Strategically located between NATO members Poland and Hungary and with a 38,600-strong army in decent condition, Slovakia is also seen as a likely choice in 2002.

LITHUANIA: Often considered the best prepared of the three Baltic states, with an army of 12,700 troops. Opposition by Moscow has been seen as the main stumbling block to NATO membership for the Baltics, although this is not officially recognised.

LATVIA: Only has 5,050 troops and has been slow to increase defence funding to the NATO-recommended level of 2.0 percent of gross domestic product, but observers say Latvia has nonetheless made strides in the past couple of years. Riga has also taken steps to improve treatment of its Russian-speaking minority, comprising over one third of its 2.4 million people, which has sparked displeasure in Moscow and concern in the EU.

ESTONIA: Has a small army of 4,800 troops, built from scratch after the collapse of the Soviet Union like in its Baltic neighbours. It has a high level of inter-operability with NATO, especially after frequent participation in international peacekeeping missions.

BULGARIA: Has gained points by pursuing reform of its military, which stands at nearly 80,000 troops. The country's Balkan location is a strategic advantage, but the country is behind on economic reforms and EU membership talks.

ROMANIA: Widely viewed as too slow to reform its 207,000 strong army to be ready for quick NATO membership.

MACEDONIA: Also considered by analysts as not having fully readied its 16,000-strong army to meet NATO standards. But NATO's current involvement in helping broker a deal to end an ethnic conflict may help convince Alliance members to make a stronger strategic commitment.

ALBANIA: Viewed by analysts as slow to reform it 47,000-strong military to NATO standards. But it has a strategic Balkan location and Tirana provided strong support to NATO operations in the 1999 Kosovo air operation.

-------- new zealand

New Zealand Aims to Scrap Air Defense

JUNE 18, 01:11 EST
By RAY LILLEY
Associated Press Writer
http://wire.ap.org/APnews/center_story.html?FRONTID=AUSANT&STORYID=APIS7CMOR1G0

WELLINGTON, New Zealand (AP) - When it comes to military matters, New Zealanders are more likely to hear from the minister of disarmament than the minister of defense these days.

Having angered the United States and other allies in the 1980s by banning visits by nuclear-powered or armed warships, New Zealand now has opted to be the first advanced nation to virtually scrap its air defenses.

The left-of-center government announced last month that it is junking the air force's combat jets, turning it into a transport service. The small army, meanwhile, is being remade into a peacekeeping force and the navy cut to just two oceangoing warships.

The army also has been instructed to do a feasibility study on setting up a peace school at which soldiers would sit in seminars with aid workers and peace campaigners to discuss methodology and share experiences.

New Zealand may be small and far away from just about everywhere, but the Labor Party government believes it can set an example to the world on defense.

Opponents of the cutbacks contend the government is really pursuing total disarmament by stealth, cloaking its true aim with talk about peacekeeping because most New Zealanders want a strong defense.

``These are peaceniks trying to run the armed forces,'' said defense commentator Graeme Hunt. ``Every other center-left government in the world - except New Zealand - is spending more on defense.''

``We have a naive belief that if we run down our armed forces, others will too,'' Hunt said.

Prime Minister Helen Clark insists the changes are justified because there is virtually no chance of New Zealand being attacked. She denies she is leaving the country almost defenseless, and she rejects the notion the government wants to withdraw into isolationism.

New Zealand is investing in the army to carry out peacekeeping missions with the United Nations and other world bodies, she said. ``This defense strategy is the very opposite of being isolationist.''

While the government is buying new vehicles and other equipment for the army, defense analysts say little of the money is going for weapons or front-line combat gear despite an urgent need for such items.

``The army is an orphan army now ... and they're deeply concerned about their combat viability,'' said David Dickens, director of the independent Institute for Strategic Studies.

Many legislators in the governing party were deeply influenced by the opposition to New Zealand's military involvement in the Vietnam War in the 1960s and the movement in the 1980s against nuclear weapons and power.

Matt Robson, the government's minister for disarmament, said disarmament and arms control are ``just as important'' as what the country does with the armed forces. Outsiders who say the country is isolationist ``are misleading their people and misleading the world,'' he said.

Robson has sharply criticized the country's traditional allies, deriding Australia as a lackey of the United States and calling Washington's foreign policy a disaster.

``It does seem to be an attitude of `We're the top dog on the block, we'll make the rules,''' he said of the United States earlier this year.

Green Party legislator Keith Locke, a pacifist who proposed the peace school for the army and is dubbed the party's ``Un-armed Forces'' spokesman, insists New Zealanders support the defense cuts.

``I've always said ... when the dust settled a significant majority of people would be behind the defense changes and I think that is coming to pass,'' he said.

But opinion polls indicate that just under 60 percent of New Zealanders believe the country needs strong defenses and must play a full role in defense alliances with the United States and Australia.

New Zealand has a long and proud military tradition, having sent troops to aid Britain during the two world wars and taking part in the Korean and Vietnam wars.

Military analysts and former defense chiefs argue the government's policy will leave New Zealand defenseless and alienate allies.

``We're really becoming a passive onlooker, and they (allied nations) will conclude we have no plans to work on collective security in a time of trouble,'' said Gerald Hensley, a retired senior defense official.

-------- puerto rico

Bush Will Ask Congress To Cancel Vote on Vieques
Navy Secretary Defends Decision on Training Site

By Roberto Suro
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, June 16, 2001; Page A03
http://washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A7072-2001Jun15?language=printer

The Bush administration will ask Congress to cancel a referendum on the Navy's use of the Puerto Rican island of Vieques as a bombing range, the new secretary of the Navy announced yesterday.

Despite intense opposition on Capitol Hill, Navy Secretary Gordon England stood by the administration's decision to end all training exercises on Vieques by May 2003. At a Pentagon news conference, England said the Navy will spend the next two years developing computer simulation technology and searching for other firing ranges for the Atlantic Fleet.

In a rare break with the White House, Senate Minority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) yesterday joined the growing number of legislators objecting to the administration's plan. "At this point I disagree very strongly with the decision," Lott said.

Lott, usually one of President Bush's most steadfast congressional allies, also expressed personal discontent with the way the issue had been handled. "I've had basically no contact with the administration over it," he told reporters at the Capitol.

The decision to change policy on Vieques was made by England and Karl Rove, Bush's closest political adviser, at a White House meeting Wednesday afternoon. The move caught top military officers and senior members of the House and Senate Armed Services committees by surprise. Some have interpreted it as an attempt to win Hispanic votes at the expense of military readiness.

England, who took office three weeks ago, said he agreed with Navy and Marine officers who describe Vieques as the "crown jewel" of training grounds, the only place where large-scale amphibious landings can be rehearsed with aerial and naval gunfire using live ammunition. The Pacific Fleet conducts similar but smaller exercises on an uninhabited island off the California coast.

The Navy and congressional supporters of exercises on Vieques insist they have been unable to find another site that offers vast spaces where no commercial air or sea traffic would interfere with military operations. England said he would not try to duplicate the facilities on Vieques, but instead would look for other ways to provide training.

"I feel most of our efforts in the past have been to find a direct substitute for Vieques," England said. "My approach is to find a suitable alternative. [A] suitable alternative can be other means and techniques, using more than one base, for example, incorporating technology. So we will look at all different types of alternatives to satisfy this requirement."

England indicated that he hopes to develop a combination of computer simulations and separate, smaller-scale exercises of various fleet operations, according to a senior defense official. That would require a change in Navy and Marine Corps training policy, which emphasizes the need for coordinated, simultaneous training using live ammunition.

The Navy has used Vieques for such training since World War II, and most recently the island has served as the site of final preparations for flotillas going on station in the Persian Gulf. Protests against the exercises flared two years ago after a civilian security guard was killed on the training range by an errant bomb.

As part of a deal struck last year between the Clinton administration and the government of Puerto Rico, a U.S. commonwealth, the Navy agreed to limit its activities on Vieques and to use only nonexplosive ammunition until the island's 9,500 residents could vote in a referendum on whether the Navy should resume full training or leave the island altogether. Congress approved the agreement, giving it the force of law, which is why the administration must seek legislation to cancel the referendum.

Congress also authorized spending $40 million on public works to improve the economy and living conditions on Vieques, in hopes of winning the island's assent for continued Navy training. So far, the government has spent just $6 million of that sum.

England said he decided that the referendum, now scheduled for November, was "very bad public policy," both because it was the wrong way to make national security decisions and because it appeared the Navy was likely to lose.

However, he added, "if we do not get the legislative relief, we will certainly follow the law and we will work to win the referendum."

-------- u.n.

UN Halts Aid Deliveries in Angola

New York Times
June 16, 2001
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-Angola-UN.html?searchpv=aponline

LUANDA, Angola (AP) -- The United Nations has halted all its aid flights in Angola after a ground-to-air missile narrowly missed two of its planes in the second attack on aid aircraft this month.

The U.N. World Food Program announced late Friday an indefinite suspension of aid flights in the war-devastated country and warned of an ``unprecedented humanitarian catastrophe'' if it is unable to resume food deliveries next week.

The program provides vital aid to about 1 million people in Angola, where a civil war between the government and the UNITA rebel group has driven nearly 4 million people -- about one-third of the population -- from their homes.

On Friday afternoon, an anti-aircraft missile exploded close to two Hercules cargo planes which were ferrying food to Kuito, a rural city about 350 miles southeast of the capital Luanda, the WFP said.

The missile caused no injuries nor damage to the aircraft, which were each carrying 17 tons of food. The planes abandoned their mission and returned to their base.

The WFP said it did not know who fired the missile.

It added that Kuito, where more than 200,000 people are dependent on aid, had food reserves for only six days.

Government officials were not immediately available for comment.

Earlier this month, UNITA claimed that its troops fired a missile which hit a WFP plane over eastern Angola on June 8. One of the plane's engines was badly damaged by that missile but the crew managed to land safely.

Much of rural Angola is inaccessible because of skirmishes between UNITA and the army and because of land mines. Aid agencies have to use aircraft to reach outlying cities.

The United Nations blames UNITA -- a Portuguese acronym for the National Union for the Total Independence of Angola -- for the 1998 collapse of a U.N.-brokered peace accord signed four years earlier.

The war first erupted after the country's 1975 independence from Portugal.

--------

Angola Aid Plane Fired on, U.N. Says

New York Times
June 16, 2001
By REUTERS
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/16/world/16ANGO.html?searchpv=nytToday

UNITED NATIONS, June 15 - A missile was fired today at United Nations World Food Program planes delivering emergency aid in Angola, the second such attack this month, the United Nations said.

In the latest incident, two World Food Program aircraft, each carrying 17 tons of corn from Catumbela in eastern Angola to Kuito, the capital of central Bié Province, were fired on as they neared Kuito, said a United Nations spokesman, Manoel Almeida e Silva.

The pilot of one of the aircraft "saw an explosion in the air which he identified as a missile," he said. "It is not confirmed yet who did this or why," he added.

The planes were forced to return to Catumbela, and the program has suspended all cargo flights in Angola until a thorough investigation can be carried out, he said.

The World Food Program feeds about a million people across Angola.

Decades of civil war in the oil- and diamond-rich Angola, pitting UNITA rebels against the government in the capital, Luanda, has killed about a million people and forced 2.5 million from their homes, according to the United Nations.

Last week, an antiaircraft missile struck an engine of a World Food Program jet ferrying food to eastern Angola, forcing it to make an emergency landing. The Boeing 727 involved in that incident was en route from the Luanda to Luena, in Moxico province, in the east.

-------- OTHER

-------- energy

Energy Disruptions Brighten Future of Coal, a Fossil of a Fuel

New York Times
June 16, 2001
By DOUGLAS JEHL
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/16/politics/16COAL.html?searchpv=nytToday

GILLETTE, Wyo., June 15 - Switch on a light somewhere in the country and the odds are one in two that it will be powered not by oil, natural gas, uranium, water or anything else but by coal, that Industrial Revolution-era fuel that seems, at least for now, to have reclaimed a 21st century future.

Only a year ago, coal was widely considered a fuel of the past, vilified by environmentalists for its links to acid rain and global warming. But power disruptions and an administration that has put a greater focus on energy security than environmental protection have given coal a new lease on life.

And now, to great joy in places like Gillette, in Campbell County, which might be called the new capital of coal, utilities have begun to reconsider switching from gas to coal, giving the industry and miners like Colt Johnson, 36, a much longer lease on life.

"What I try to explain to my kids is that without coal, we wouldn't have lights," Mr. Johnson said.

About 52 percent of the nation's electricity is generated by coal, a figure that has been fairly consistent over the last 5 years, but is a big increase over 10 years ago. And this year, the nation's coal production is expected to reach a record of more than 1.1 billion tons. About one-quarter of that will come from Wyoming, where coal is low in sulfur and close to the surface, giving the state two big advantages as the industry tries to maintain its share in the country's energy supply.

This is what has happened in the last year: Natural gas prices have soared, frightening those who saw that fuel as a kind of panacea for electricity. The Bush administration has backed away from imposing restriction on carbon dioxide, a move would have dealt new setbacks to the industry. And the support for coal has proved politically formidable, with Congressional Democrats from coal states in Appalachia and Republicans from the Rockies joining forces to fend off the industry's foes.

The political support has been strengthened by the fact that the concerns of environmentalists have been focused less on coal mines than on oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

Coal's brighter future is a product in large part of a task force headed by Vice President Dick Cheney, a Wyoming native, which ruled out proposals that might have relegated coal to secondary status and issued a report with no plans to wean the country from the fossil fuel.

"If rising U.S. electricity demand is to be met, then coal must play a significant role," the task force said last month, projecting that coal would continue to account for about 50 percent of electricity generation for at least the next 20 years.

Of the new electric generation planned for the United States from now to 2005, as much as 16 percent is to come from coal, according to the Edison Electric Institute, the industry's main trade group. The is a major increase from a year ago when no coal-fired plants were on the drawing board, and it is a sign that coal, whose reserves are estimated to be enough to power the country for the next 275 years, is anything but dead.

Because the burning of coal is a major contributor to global warming, scientists say, responsible for about one-third of American emissions of heat-trapping gases, the industry's future may still be fragile.

For now, the Bush administration has rejected imposing strict controls on the emissions of carbon dioxide, a major byproduct of burning coal and major contributor to global warming. But some top officials in the industry say the only question controls is not if, but when.

"We have our work cut out for us in terms of addressing environmental issues," said Gary J. Goldberg, president and chief executive officer of the Kennecott Energy Company, one of the country's largest coal producers. "Ultimately, there's going to have to be some kind of a target in terms of Co2 reduction, and if we can't get there voluntarily, we'll have to get there somewhere else."

But even as the Bush administration and the industry pump money into projects designed to promote so- called clean-coal technology, the basic work of stripping back the earth, gouging out the coal, and loading it on rail cars bound for power plants is thriving as never before in places like Wyoming's Powder River Basin, of which this town is the center.

"The ugly head of environmentalism has been pushed down," said David Haddix, 40, a major-equipment operator at Kennecott's Cordero Rojo mine, about 30 miles southeast of Gillette, and where antelope and deer vie for space with huge trucks at one of the largest coal mines in the country.

In the last decade, since the 1990 amendments to the Clean Air Act, the coal industry has already weathered major changes. With power plants required by the amendments to reduce emissions of sulfur dioxide, which contributes to acid rain, and nitrous oxide, a heat-trapping gas and an ingredient of smog, some installed equipment known as scrubbers. Others switched their supply from sources like West Virginia and Kentucky, where coal is high in these chemicals, particularly sulfur, to new sources like Wyoming, where the low-sulfur content of the coal reduces polluting emissions.

Over all, those changes have brought about a major geographic shift in the mining of coal, so that the Western United States, not the East, is the country's biggest supplier. The emissions of pollutants from burning coal have plunged, government statistics show, with emissions of sulfur dioxide per kilowatt hour down as much as 35 percent since 1989.

But there has been no reduction in emissions of carbon dioxide, the so- called greenhouse gas. In the presidential campaign, President Bush promised to regulate carbon dioxide emissions, but reversed that plan in March, citing energy concerns.

But because the coal-fired power plants account for about 30 percent of emissions of carbon dioxide in the United States, environmentalists like David Hawkins of the Natural Resources Defense Council say they believe that further restrictions are inevitable.

"What is happening in terms of coal's resurgence may be a very short-term phenomenon," Mr. Hawkins said. "If the coal industry wants to establish a viable strategy for maintaining its existing role in the energy structure, it's going to have to address these questions about global warming."

The Bush administration and the industry are spending hundreds of millions of dollars on the development of technologies designed to make the burning of coal environmentally cleaner. The most promising is to turn the coal into gas before it is burned, so that the carbon is separated, minimizing the contribution to global warm. The carbon would be stored deep underground, to minimize any contribution to global warming.

A handful of coal companies, including Kennecott, have joined in this effort, enlisting in projects like one founded by the Pew Center for Global Climate Change, in Washington, to address the problem. But most others have not, and that has frustrated those who think that coal's lease on life will be no more than temporary unless the industry agrees to some plan for reducing the emissions of heat trapping gasses.

Still, people like Mr. Haddix, a miner for 18 years, said they see environmentalists as their biggest foe. "I do enjoy our environment," Mr. Haddix said. "I like to hunt, fish, hike and camp. But on the other hand, I like having lights and watching the Colorado Avalanche."

Cost has also contributed to the shift of mining to Wyoming, where it is immensely less expensive to mine coal from huge seams near the surface than in Appalachia, where coal lies deep underground. Just as important is the fact that Western coal is much lower in sulfur.

Since 1999, the overall production of coal from states west of Missouri has eclipsed that from the East.

The energy crisis facing California, with a quadrupling in the cost of natural gas, has been a major factor in the utilities' decisions to shift their plans from gas to coal.

Still, people like Mr. Ginsberg, the coal company executive, say they are uneasy. "The coal industry has no free pass," Mr. Ginsberg said, "and we must continue to demonstrate the sustainable role coal can play in our country's affordable energy future as we work to continue to reduce emissions from coal-fired generation."

-------- environment

[Some very interesting educating is happening at this site. et]
The Next Industrial Revolution

GreenWave.com is your site for information on The Next Industrial Revolution.
http://www.greenwave.com/

This revolution is about investing in our natural capital, increasing resource efficiency, and designing a future that produces no waste or pollution, while maximizing profits. GreenWave Radio, hosted by Carey and Chandler, is the voice for The Next Industrial Revolution.

This Week's Interview - Kert Davies of GREENPEACE. Listen to what GREENPEACE has to say about global warming.

Recent Interviews - How Your Home Town Can Fight Back!

- June 14, 2001 -- In a Wall Street Journal editorial, 1 of the 11 scientists for the National Academy of Sciences speaks out about how the media has misunderstood their report on Global Climate Change. Read more... http://www.greenwave.com/news/3249

- Register and Win this week's prize [a solar-powered radio], and while you're at it, subscribe to the GreenWave e-letter!

http://www.greenwave.com/products/win/

----

ABROAD AT HOME - The Closed Mind

New York Times
June 16, 2001
By ANTHONY LEWIS
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/16/opinion/16LEWI.html?searchpv=nytToday

What President Bush has been telling European leaders this week can be readily summed up: I am not going to do anything about global warming because it needs more scientific study. But I am going to act urgently to develop a missile defense system although none have any proven scientific basis and every test so far has failed.

In that odd couple of messages the allies got a fair introduction to the veritable George W. Bush: a man of strong opinions stubbornly held, in defiance of reason as most Europeans would define it. They also saw a man of charm, easy in human relations and adept politically, but with a certitude not earned by experience or accomplishment.

"I hope the notion of a unilateral approach died in some people's minds here today," Mr. Bush said after talking with NATO leaders about his missile defense project. "Unilateralists don't come around the table to listen to others and to share opinion."

Yes, Mr. Bush listened - but only with the ear, not with a mind open to other ideas. No one sitting around that NATO table could have had any illusion of being able to persuade him that it is folly to abandon the most important barrier against a renewed nuclear arms race, the 1972 Antiballistic Missile Treaty, so he can pursue the will-o'-the-wisp of missile defense.

There is a rigidity in George W. Bush, verging on arrogance, that Americans have seen on a number of issues in his first five months as president. A striking example is his attitude on the environment.

He began by having his environment administrator, Christie Whitman - to her evident embarrassment - withdraw a Clinton administration rule limiting the amount of arsenic in drinking water. Then his secretary of agriculture, Ann M. Veneman, suspended a regulation banning roads in many roadless areas of our national forests.

Those and other moves brought an outcry from Americans who want to protect our natural surroundings - and protect themselves from dangerous substances. Many of those who worried were in the suburban districts that voted for Mr. Bush.

The president reacted to the political problem by putting on a show of concern for the environment. He traveled to the Everglades. He posed amid Sequoia trees in California.

But his real position on the environment has not changed at all. In the Sequoia appearance he said the federal government must show more deference to states and private groups in conservation efforts - which is code for scuttling federal enforcement.

In recent weeks there have been other anti-environment moves. The Army Corps of Engineers proposed relaxing rules against the destruction of wetlands. The Forest Service issued draft regulations that would eliminate the priority for ecological sustainability in forest use plans.

The administration announced that it would, after all, support the Clinton plan for roadless forest areas. But it quietly made a crucial concession in court to timber and other interests that had sued against the plan: It conceded that they would suffer irreparable injury from it.

In short, the emollient Bush words about loving the environment did not match the reality of the administration's destructive actions. Mr. Bush's position is still based on a simple proposition: What is good for drillers and developers is good for the country. That same fixed preference for business now over the health of future generations underlay his denunciation of the Kyoto Protocol on global warming.

A single proposition also underlies Mr. Bush's determination to destroy the ABM treaty. He does not believe in treaties limiting weapons of mass destruction, even though they have manifestly worked well, because they limit our freedom of action - as if somehow mutual security diminished American manhood. .

That is the president the European leaders met. Most, though disagreeing, treated him deferentially. For the last 50 years, European politicians have always cozied up to American presidents. They simply feel too dependent for their security on the dominant member of the alliance.

But European military experts, environmentalists and many ordinary citizens are not so polite. They are frightened of George W. Bush.

----

195 Fluoride facts, horror stories and cover-ups

by Floyd Maxwell,
BASc Principal,
http://www.just-think-it.com
http://www.just-think-it.com/f-facts.htm

3 Fluoride facts, horror stories and cover-ups from
Inter-view.net/~sherrell/ind.htm

Airborne fluorides have caused more worldwide damage to domestic animals than any other air pollutant. From Inter-view.net/~sherrell/ind.htm

Water fluoridation is the ideal solution for industry's fluoride waste disposal problem. Like the tall smoke stack introduced a decade earlier, it diverts and disperses pollutants far and wide. Chemicals that would cost $7,000 per tanker to dispose of are sold instead to cities at $265 to at least $722 per ton. Consequently, the phosphate fertilizer manufacturers invest millions of dollars in grants and lobbying of government officials to promote water fluoridation. - "Fluoridation: License to Dump Toxic Waste In The Name of Public Health", Health Action Network, Fluoride Report No. 4, Jan (1997) From Inter-view.net/~sherrell/ind.htm

Contaminated with arsenic, lead, barium, cadmium, and mercury, no analyses of fluorosilicic acid are performed at the source, and only rudimentary analyses are performed at water treatment plants prior to their injection into public water systems. In many artificially fluoridated areas, the lead and copper content of the water exceeds EPA/Safe Drinking Water Act standards. This occurs because of the caustic nature of fluorosilicic acid and its capacity to leach copper and lead from soldered pipe joints and brass fixtures. - "Fluoridation: License to Dump Toxic Waste In The Name of Public Health", Health Action Network, Fluoride Report No. 4, Jan (1997) From Inter-view.net/~sherrell/ind.htm

4 Fluoride facts, horror stories and cover-ups
from various other web sites

Fluoride in any form -- drops, tablets, or vitamins -- has never been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (as required by law since 1938). http://emporium.turnpike.net/P/PDHA/fluoride/unappfda.htm

According to Dr Dean Burke, former chief biochemist at the National Cancer Institute, more that 50 000 Americans a year are dying of cancer caused by fluoridated drinking water. http://www.ro.co.za/water.htm

The lethal dose of NaF (an artificial fluoride) is 50 times smaller than that of CaF2 (a naturally-occurring fluoride). - Dr. Hardy Limeback, biochemist and Professor of Dentistry, University of Toronto, former consultant to the Canadian Dental Association http://www.earthlife.org.za/factsheets/fs-flouride.htm

In 1998 Guan et al. gave similar doses of fluoride as used by the Mullenix group and found that several key chemicals in the brain -- those that form the membrane of brain cells, were substantially depleted in rats given fluoride, as compared to those who did not receive fluoride.

30% of industrial waste from semiconductor plants is fluorine-containing waste. http://www.okibusiness.com/oki/otr/html/nf/otr-160-13.html http://members.tripodasia.com.sg/tungsing/

"There were statutory limits on the amounts of certain potentially harmful ingredients, such as arsenic, fluorine, lead and mercury, which could be included in animal feed." http://62.189.42.105/report/volume13/chaptef2.htm

4 Fluoride facts, horror stories and cover-ups from
Fluoridation.com

Children under three should never use fluoridated toothpaste. Or drink fluoridated water. And baby formula must never be made up using Toronto tap water. Never. In fluoridated areas, people should never use fluoride supplements. We tried to get them banned for children but (the dentists) wouldn't even look at the evidence we presented. http://www.fluoridation.com/news.htm#Toronto Star From Fluoridation.com

Fluoride is a carcinogen by any standard we use. - Dr. William Marcus, Ph.D, EPA Scientist, Food & Water Journal, Summer 1998 From Fluoridation.com

Fluorides are general protoplasmic poisons, probably because of their capacity to modify the metabolism of cells by changing the permeability of the cell membrane and by inhibiting certain enzyme systems. - Journal of the American Medical Association, Sept 18, 1943, Editorial From Fluoridation.com

As a toxicologist involved in fluoride research for over ten years, I was stunned by the Calgary Regional Health Authority's glib comments proclaiming water fluoridation safe. The 'fifty years' of studies about fluoride safety, do not exist. The "ongoing intensive research on fluorides and fluoridation', does not exist, certainly none investigating safety. - Dr. P. Mullenix, Ph.D. From Fluoridation.com

5 Fluoride facts, horror stories and cover-ups from
NoFluoride.com

The federal maximum contaminant level (MEL) for lead is 15 parts per billion (ppb), 5 ppb for arsenic but 4,000 ppb for fluoride. From NoFluoride.com

If you have cereal with milk and a Coke, you have overdosed on fluoride. You have exceeded the American Dental Association's recommended daily dose by 230%. From NoFluoride.com

Fluoride advocates don't want you to know that the chemicals used for fluoridation are not pharmaceutical quality. They are derived from the waste byproducts of fertilizer manufacturing and contain heavy metals such as lead and arsenic. Chemifloc Ltd., a fluoridation chemical manufacturer, clearly states this in a letter reprinted here: http://www.nofluoride.com/chemifloc.htm From NoFluoride.com

NSF, the corporation that developed drinking water standards, stated that the "most common contaminant in [fluoridated water] is arsenic" http://www.nofluoride.com/nsf.htm From NoFluoride.com

The City of Auburndale Florida was so concerned about the health of workers handling fluoridation chemicals that they stopped their fluoridation efforts. http://www.nofluoride.com/auburndale_fla_water.htm From NoFluoride.com

36 Fluoride facts, horror stories and cover-ups from
http://Sightings.com/health/fluoride1.htm

Fluoride is a very potent poison. It's a registered pesticide, used for killing rats or mice. From Sightings.com/health/fluoride1.htm

In British Columbia, only 11% of the population drinks fluoridated water, as opposed to 40-70% in other Canadian regions. Yet British Columbia has the lowest rate of tooth decay in Canada. In addition, the lowest rates of dental caries within the province are found in areas that do not have their water supplies fluoridated. From Sightings.com/health/fluoride1.htm

In 1986-87, the largest study on fluoridation and tooth decay ever was performed. The subjects were 39,000 school children between 5 and 17 living in 84 areas around the country. A third of the places were fluoridated, a third were partially fluoridated, and a third were not. Results indicate no statistically significant differences in dental decay between fluoridated and unfluoridated cities. From Sightings.com/health/fluoride1.htm

According to a Sierra Club study, people in unfluoridated developing nations have fewer dental caries than those living in industrialized nations. From Sightings.com/health/fluoride1.htm

A World Health Organization survey reports a decline of dental decay in Western Europe, which is 98% unfluoridated. They state that western Europe's declining dental decay rates are equal to and sometimes better than those in the U.S. From Sightings.com/health/fluoride1.htm

A 1992 University of Arizona study yielded surprising results when they found that "the more fluoride a child drinks, the more cavities appear in the teeth." From Sightings.com/health/fluoride1.htm

Research does not support the effectiveness of fluoridation for preventing tooth disease. Also, purported benefits are supposedly for children, not adults and senior citizens. At about age 13, any advantage fluoridation might offer comes to an end, and less than 1% of the fluoridated water supply reaches this population. Finally, fluoridation has never been proven safe. On the contrary, several studies directly link fluoridation to skeletal fluorosis, dental fluorosis, and several rare forms of cancer. This alone should frighten us away from its use. From Sightings.com/health/fluoride1.htm

May 1993 - Kodiak, Alaska (Old Harbor): The population was warned not to consume water due to high fluoride levels. They were also cautioned against boiling the water, since this concentrates the substance and worsens the danger. Although equipment appeared to be functioning normally, 22-24 ppm of fluoride was found in a sample. [Floyd: i.e. 22 to 24 times more than was supposed to be] From Sightings.com/health/fluoride1.htm

"As is normal, the solution to pollution is dilution. You poison everyone a little bit rather than poison a few people a lot. This way, people don't know what's going on." From Sightings.com/health/fluoride1.htm

Fluoride could only be legally disposed of at a great cost to industry. As Dr. Bill Marcus explains, "There are prescribed methods for disposal and they're very expensive. Fluoride is a very potent poison. It's a registered pesticide, used for killing rats or mice. If it were to be disposed of, it would require a class-one landfill. That would cost the people who are producing aluminum or fertilizer about $7000+ per 5000- to 6000-gallon truckload to dispose of it. It's highly corrosive." From Sightings.com/health/fluoride1.htm

A spill in Annapolis, Maryland, placed thousands at risk, but official reports reduced the number to eight. Perhaps officials are afraid they will invite more lawsuits like the one for $480 million by the wife of a dialysis patient who became brain-injured as the result of fluoride poisoning. From Sightings.com/health/fluoride1.htm

Not all fluoride poisoning is accidental. For decades, industry has knowingly released massive quantities of fluoride into the air and water. Disenfranchised communities, with people least able to fight back, are often the victims. Medical writer Joel Griffiths relays this description of what industrial pollution can do, in this case to a devastatingly poisoned Indian reservation: "Cows crawled around the pasture on their bellies, inching along like giant snails. So crippled by bone disease they could not stand up, this was the only way they could graze. Some died kneeling, after giving birth to stunted calves. Others kept on crawling until, no longer able to chew because their teeth had crumbled down to the nerves, they began to starve..." They were the cattle of the Mohawk Indians on the New York-Canadian St. Regis Reservation during the period 1960-1975, when industrial pollution devastated the herd - and along with it, the Mohawks' way of life. Mohawk children, too, have shown signs of damage to bones and teeth." Mohawks filed suit against the Reynolds Metals Company and the Aluminum Company of America (Alcoa) in 1960, but ended up settling out of court, where they received $650,000 for their cows. Fluoride is one of industry's major pollutants, and no one remains immune to its effects. In 1989, 155,000 tons were being released annually into the air; and 500,000 tons a year were disposed of in our lakes, rivers, and oceans. From Sightings.com/health/fluoride1.htm

In 1977, Dr. John Yiamouyiannis and Dr. Dean Burk, former chief chemist at the National Cancer Institute, released a study that linked fluoridation to 10,000 cancer deaths per year in the U.S. Their inquiry, which compared cancer deaths in the ten largest fluoridated American cities to those in the ten largest unfluoridated cities between 1940 and 1950, discovered a 5% greater rate in the fluoridated areas. From Sightings.com/health/fluoride1.htm

According to a National Toxicology Report, due in 1980 but not released until 1990, out of 130 male rats that ingested 45 to 79 ppm of fluoride, 5 developed osteosarcoma, a rare bone cancer. There were cases, in both males and females at those doses, of squamous cell carcinoma in the mouth. Both rats and mice had dose-related fluorosis of the teeth, and female rats suffered osteosclerosis of the long bones. Footnote: in 1986 the EPA *increased* the dosage of Fluoride from 2.4ppm to 4ppm. From Sightings.com/health/fluoride1.htm

"It is difficult to see how EPA can fail to regulate fluoride as a carcinogen in light of what NTP has found. Osteosarcomas are an extremely unusual result in rat carcinogenicity tests. Toxicologists tell me that the only other substance that has produced this is radium. The fact that this is a highly atypical form of cancer implicates fluoride as the cause. Also, the osteosarcomas appeared to be dose-related, and did not occur in controls, making it a clean study." - the opinion of a federal scientist who preferred to remain anonymous, released on February 22, 1990 in the Medical Tribune, an international medical news weekly received by 125,000 doctors. From Sightings.com/health/fluoride1.htm

Public health officials such as Dr. Gray in British Columbia and Dr. Colquhoun in New Zealand found no benefit from fluoridation. When they reported these results, they immediately lost their careers. From Sightings.com/health/fluoride1.htm

As Ralph Nader once said, if they admit they're wrong on fluoridation, people would ask, and legitimately so, what else have they not told us right? From Sightings.com/health/fluoride1.htm

Most of western Europe has rejected fluoridation on the grounds that it is unsafe. In 1971, after 11 years of testing, Sweden's Nobel Medical Institute recommended against fluoridation, and the process was banned. The Netherlands outlawed the practice in 1976, after 23 years of tests. France decided against it after consulting with its Pasteur Institute and West Germany, now Germany, rejected the practice because the recommended dosage of 1 ppm was "too close to the dose at which long-term damage to the human body is to be expected." Dr. Lee sums it up: "All of western Europe, except one or two test towns in Spain, has abandoned fluoride as a public health plan. It is not put in the water anywhere. They all established test cities and found that the benefits did not occur and the toxicity was evident." From Sightings.com/health/fluoride1.htm

There is also a moral issue in the debate that has largely escaped notice. According to columnist James Kilpatrick, it is "the right of each person to control the drugs he or she takes." Kilpatrick calls fluoridation compulsory mass medication, a procedure that violates the principles of medical ethics. From Sightings.com/health/fluoride1.htm

Only a small margin separates supposedly beneficial fluoride levels from amounts that are known to cause adverse effects. Dr. James Patrick, a former antibiotics research scientist at the National Institutes of Health, describes the predicament: "[There is] a very low margin of safety involved in fluoridating water. A concentration of about 1 ppm is recommended...in several countries, severe fluorosis has been documented from water supplies containing only 2 or 3 ppm. In the development of drugs...we generally insist on a therapeutic index (margin of safety) of the order of 100; a therapeutic index of 2 or 3 is totally unacceptable, yet that is what has been proposed for public water supplies..." From Sightings.com/health/fluoride1.htm

July 1993 - Chicago, Illinois: Three dialysis patients died and five experienced toxic reactions to the fluoridated water used in the treatment process. The CDC was asked to investigate, but to date there have been no press releases. From Sightings.com/health/fluoride1.htm

The Journal of the Canadian Dental Association states that "Fluoride supplements should not be recommended for children less than 3 years old." Since these supplements contain the same amount of fluoride as water does, they are basically saying that children under the age of three shouldn't be drinking fluoridated water at all, under any circumstances. From Sightings.com/health/fluoride1.htm

December 1991 - Benton Harbor Michigan: A faulty pump allowed approximately 900 gallons of hydrofluosilicic acid to leak into a chemical storage building at the water plant. City engineer Roland Klockow stated, "The concentrated hydrofluosilicic acid was so corrosive that it ate through more than two inches of concrete in the storage building. From Sightings.com/health/fluoride1.htm

July 1991 - Porgate, Michigan: After a fluoride injector pump failed, fluoride levels reached 92 ppm and resulted in approximately 40 children developing abdominal pains, sickness, vomiting, and diarrhea at a school arts and crafts show. From Sightings.com/health/fluoride1.htm

November 1979 - Annapolis, Maryland: One patient died and eight became ill after renal dialysis treatment. Symptoms included cardiac arrest (resuscitated), hypotension, chest pain, difficulty breathing, and a whole gamut of intestinal problems. Patients not on dialysis also reported nausea, headaches, cramps, diarrhea, and dizziness. The fluoride level was later found to be 35 ppm; the problem was traced to a valve at a water plant that had been left open all night. From Sightings.com/health/fluoride1.htm

Another concern is that fluoride is not found only in drinking water; it is everywhere. Fluoride is found in foods that are processed with it, which, in the United States, include nearly all bottled drinks and canned foods.34 Researchers writing in The Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry have found that fruit juices, in particular, contain significant amounts of fluoride. In a recent study, a variety of popular juices and juice blends were analyzed and it was discovered that 42% of the samples examined had more than l ppm of fluoride, with some brands of grape juice containing much higher levels - up to 6.8 ppm! From Sightings.com/health/fluoride1.htm

Cooking can greatly increase a food's fluoride content. Peas, for example, contain 12 micrograms of fluoride when raw and 1500 micrograms after they are cooked in fluoridated water From Sightings.com/health/fluoride1.htm

It's interesting to note that in the 1950s, fluoridated toothpastes were required to carry warnings on their labels saying that they were not to be used in areas where water was already fluoridated. Crest toothpaste went so far as to write: "Caution: Children under 6 should not use Crest." These regulations were dropped in 1958, although no new research was available to prove that the overdose hazard no longer existed. From Sightings.com/health/fluoride1.htm

How safe is all this fluoride? According to scientists and informed doctors, such as Dr. John Lee, it is not safe at all. Dr. Lee first took an anti-fluoridation stance back in 1972, when as chairman of an environmental health committee for a local medical society, he was asked to state their position on the subject. He stated that after investigating the references given by both pro- and anti-fluoridationists, the group discovered three important things: "One, the claims of benefit of fluoride, the 60% reduction of cavities, was not established by any of these studies. Two, we found that the investigations into the toxic side effects of fluoride have not been done in any way that was acceptable. And three, we discovered that the estimate of the amount of fluoride in the food chain, in the total daily fluoride intake, had been measured in 1943, and not since then. By adding the amount of fluoride that we now have in the food chain, which comes from food processing with fluoridated water, plus all the fluoridated toothpaste that was not present in 1943, we found that the daily intake of fluoride was far in excess of what was considered optimal..." From Sightings.com/health/fluoride1.htm

Large numbers of people in Japan, China, India, the Middle East, and Africa have been diagnosed with skeletal fluorosis from drinking naturally fluoridated water. In India alone, nearly a million people suffer from the afffliction. From Sightings.com/health/fluoride1.htm

According to a 1989 National Institute for Dental Research study, 12% of children living in areas fluoridated at 1 ppm develop dental fluorosis, that is, permanently stained, brown mottled teeth. Up to 23% of children living in areas naturally fluoridated at 4 ppm develop severe dental fluorosis. From Sightings.com/health/fluoride1.htm

The publication Health Effects of Ingested Fluoride, put out by the National Academy of Sciences, reports that in areas with optimally fluoridated water (1 ppm, either natural or added), dental fluorosis [that is, permanently stained, brown mottled teeth] affected 8 to 51% of the population. Recently, a prevalence of slightly over 80% was reported in children 12-14 years old in Augusta, Georgia. From Sightings.com/health/fluoride1.htm

The American Journal of Public Health says that "...brittleness of moderately and severely mottled teeth may be associated with elevated caries levels." In other words, in these cases the fluoride is causing the exact problem that it's supposed to prevent. Yiamouyiannis adds, "In highly naturally-fluoridated areas, the teeth actually crumble as a result. These are the first visible symptoms of fluoride poisoning." From Sightings.com/health/fluoride1.htm

In May 1992, 260 people were poisoned, and one man died, in Hooper Bay, Alaska, after drinking water contaminated with 150 ppm of fluoride. The accident was attributed to poor equipment and an unqualified operator. Was this a fluke? Not at all. Over the years, the CDC has recorded several incidents of excessive fluoride permeating the water supply and sickening or killing people. From Sightings.com/health/fluoride1.htm

Japan has reduced the amount of fluoride in their drinking water to one-eighth of what is recommended in the U.S. From Sightings.com/health/fluoride1.htm

Today, common fluoride levels in toothpaste are 1000 ppm. Research chemist Woodfun Ligon notes that swallowing a small amount adds substantially to fluoride intake. Dentists say that children commonly ingest up to 0.5 mg of fluoride a day from toothpaste. [Floyd: Equivalent to drinking half a quart of fluoridated water] From Sightings.com/health/fluoride1.htm

39 Fluoride facts, horror stories and cover-ups from
http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

There is no arguing that fluorides are deadly poisons. No scientist will argue the point, as it is universally accepted. Among the hazards of fluoride are dental fluorosis, skeletal fluorosis, sterility, birth defects, cancer and brain damage. From http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

In 1930, the world's first major air pollution disaster happened in Belgium's Meuse Valley, where thousands of people became violently ill, and sixty people died. The world's foremost authority on the issue, Kaj Roholm, concluded airborne fluorides were responsible. From http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

As late as 1970, the US Department of Agriculture stated that airborne fluorides "caused more worldwide damage to domestic animals than any other air pollutant. From http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

There was plenty of public uproar over fluoridation fifty years ago, but money not only talks in America, it dictates. Today, the average American has no idea of fluoridation's history, or the fact that there still is no credible data that shows fluoridation reduces tooth decay, and overwhelming, indisputable evidence that fluoride is a deadly poison. From http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

Harold Hodge, one of fluoridation's pioneers and a toxicology expert, whose epidemiological research was influential in giving fluoridation the green light, himself stated that there should be at least a 100-fold margin in the dietary use of a potentially toxic agent. The PHS adopted a two-to -one margin, although plenty of credible evidence shows that fluoride at one part per million (what most Americans drink) causes many health ailments, including cancer. From http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

"Mr. Speaker, despite my best efforts, and from the evidence before my committee, I cannot find any public evidence that gave me the impression that the AMA, the Dental Association (ADA), or several other health agencies, now recommending the fluoridation of water, had done any original work of their own. These groups were simply endorsing each other's opinions. - a 1952 US Congressman From http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

I sometimes wonder if the Aluminum Company of America and its many subsidiary companies might not have a deep interest in getting rid of the waste products from the manufacture of aluminum, because these products contain a large amount of fluoride. In this connection it is interesting to know that Oscar Ewing, who now heads up the Federal Security Administration, and the firm of attorneys he was with -- Hubbard, Hill and Ewing - represents the Aluminum Company of America - a 1952 US Congressman From http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

Since 1993, the ADA (American Dental Association) has had to drop ten organizations from its list of fluoridation supporters, including the EPA. From http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

In David Kennedy's "How to Save Your Teeth", he devotes chapter seven to the fluoride issue. Kennedy is a dentist, and so was his father. Kennedy grew up believing the fluoridation propaganda. His eyes were opened when he read of a three-year-old child dying from the fluoride treatment his dentist gave him in 1974. A typical dentist's treatment is to apply topical stannous (tin) fluoride gel to the child's teeth, then have the child drink water, swish it around in his mouth, then spit it out. That is similar to the "swish" fluoride program that was popular in the early days of fluoridation. The unfortunate three-year-old boy, on his first trip to the dentist, was handed the water by the dental hygienist, who did not tell him what to do with the water that he was being given. The child drank the water. The fluoride gel on his teeth went into his stomach, three times the dose necessary to kill him. The child immediately began vomiting and complaining of dizziness and headaches. The dentist downplayed the child's reaction, saying that his fluoride treatment was normal. The mother was not comforted by the dentist's assurances, and she was sent to a pediatric care unit in the same building. The care unit ignored the mother's frantic pleas to attend to her son. For over two hours, she waited for somebody to attend to her son, as he lapsed into a coma. When the medical staff finally got around to seeing the son, they injected adrenaline into his heart and he was rushed to a hospital, where they waited for another hour. The boy again lapsed into a coma, then the doctors attempted to pump his stomach, and he died of cardiac arrest. The only mistake was the boy drinking the water instead of spitting it out. From http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

The German General Staff had approved a comprehensive population control plan to use on subject populations. It amounted to mind control, and an essential plan element was to "medicate" the water supplies, mainly with sodium fluoride. From http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

I want to make this very definite and very positive -- the real reason behind water fluoridation is not to benefit children's teeth. The real purpose behind water fluoridation is to reduce the resistance of the masses to domination and control and loss of liberty. - Charles Eliot Perkins, US govt appointed scientist, in a 1954 letter From http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

Any person who drinks fluoridated water for a period of one year or more will never again be the same person, mentally or physically. - Charles Eliot Perkins, US govt appointed scientist From http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

The first nerve gas, Soman, is a fluorinated chemical. From http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

Sarin is a fluorinated chemical and the fluorine atom is its active ingredient. From http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

Rohypnol, the drug notorious for being used in date rapes, is fluorinated Valium, making it over twenty times as potent as normal Valium. From http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

Recently two studies in China showed a drop in IQ of children exposed to fluoride in the water supply of between 5 and 19 points. From http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

Dr. Phyllis Mullenix, a toxicologist at Children's Hospital in Boston, who also worked in neuropathology at Harvard Medical School, recently performed research into fluoride and the intelligence of rats. She found a significant diminishment of rat intelligence when subjected to fluoride in their water supply...This marked the end of her career. Mullenix' fate is common, and my book documents many instances of scientists and others arriving at the "wrong" answers, and having their careers destroyed. Other scientists who had their careers ruined for coming up with the "wrong" answer regarding fluoridation include Dr. Allan S. Gray of British Columbia and Dr. John Colquhon of Auckland, New Zealand. From http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

Fluorides are general protoplasmic poisons, probably because of their capacity to modify the metabolism of cells by changing the permeability of the cell membrane and by inhibiting certain enzyme systems. - Journal of the American Medical Association, 09/18/1943 From http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

The fluoride ion exerts its toxic effect by inhibiting the action of many enzyme systems. - Hugo Theorell, M.D., Nobel Prize winner for his research in the field of enzyme chemistry From http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

We ought to go slowly. Everybody knows that fluorine and fluorides are very poisonous substances and we use them in enzyme chemistry to poison enzymes, those vital agents in the body. That is the reason things are poisoned; because enzymes are poisoned, and that is why animals and plants die. - James B. Sumner, Director of Enzyme Chemistry, Dept of Biochemistry and Nutrition, Cornell University, and a Nobel Prize winner for his work in the field of enzyme chemistry From http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

The data indicated that drinking water with as little as 1 part per million of fluoride (the norm) shortened the life span of mice an average of 9%. This was true whether death was due to cancer or non-cancerous diseases. From http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

In experiments where the drug was added directly to suspensions of cancer tissue before inoculation into eggs or mice, sodium fluoride stimulated the growth of cancer tissue in concentrations of one part in more than 20 million [20 times less than what is added to city water supplies]. From http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

Scientists at Cambridge University (British Medical Journal, Oct 26, 1963) discovered that concentrations of sodium fluoride as low as one part in ten million inhibited the growth of a culture of human tissue. From http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

The growing weight of scientific evidence that water-borne fluorides, even at 1 PPM, have toxic possibilities must finally be recognized. - Alfred Taylor, Ph.D., Clayton Foundation, Biochemical Institute, University of Texas, 1965 From http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

The terrifying conclusion of the studies was that fluorine greatly induced a cancer tumor's growth. If doctors and the public can be made aware of this catastrophe, fluoridation shall end quickly. It will someday be recognized as the most lethal and stupid "Health Program" ever conceived by the mind of man, witch doctors and blood- letters not excepted. - Alfred Taylor, June 13, 1970 the Gothenburg Post (Sweden) August 5, 1970 the News Register (Sweden); and May 1, 1970 Norsk Folkehelselag (Norway) From http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

In 1969 the country of Sweden intended to fluoridate their water supply due to the strong advice of Professor Yngve Ericsson, a Swedish dentist who was also the senior representative on the World Health Organization's Expert Committee on Fluoridation. However, it was then found that Professor Ericsson coincidentally was the holder of two highly-profitable patents on fluoride toothpaste! - Alfred Taylor, June 13, 1970 the Gothenburg Post (Sweden); August 5, 1970 the News Register (Sweden); and May 1, 1970 Norsk Folkehelselag (Norway). From http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

In 1978, the West German Association of Water and Gas Experts rejected fluoridation for legal reasons, and because "the so-called optimal fluoride concentration of 1PPM is close to the dose at which long-term damage to the human body is to be expected". - Chemical and Engineering News, August 1, 1988 From http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

Like anybody who looks into fluoridation and is not on the payroll of a bureaucracy or corporation that promotes fluoride, Anne-Lise Gotzsche's "The Fluoride Question, Panacea or Poison" demonstrates how shamelessly political the fluoridation effort was. Science was trampled in the rush to fluoridate. Many scientists went so far overboard in their support for fluoridation that they became evangelists instead of scientists. Some went so far as to start making up the science as they went along, like the infamous Frederick Stare. Stare made up a new concept that he called "mineral nutrient fluoride," a pro-fluoridation idea so unfounded that even the PHS shot it down. Fluoridation legend Basil Bibby even recommended adding *lead* fluoride to the water supplies in 1945. Gotzsche discusses that whatever the propaganda about helping teeth, dentists' business goes up in fluoridated areas, not down. Gotzsche said that calling groups engaged in the huge international push to fluoridate water the "fluoridation Mafia" was "naive," but felt that those thinking that way could perhaps be forgiven, given the facts. From http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

Preventing tooth decay in children is the only rationale ever put forth by fluoridation's proponents. Tooth decay is unequivocally caused by processed food, and particularly by refined sugar. I have never seen anybody refute that who did not work for the sugar and food processing industries, and fluoridation's supporters always seem to ignore that issue. From http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

Instead of proposing that we eliminate most processed food from our diet as a way to eliminate tooth decay and the vast majority of American health problems, an industrial waste [Fluoride] was added to the water supply as a "preventive". From http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

All data regarding the benefit of fluoridating the water supply is suspect in one way or another. Many important variables were not accounted for in the research, like increasing dental hygiene in the West, other elements being present in the water, the fluoride content that is already in food, the extreme variability as to what constitutes a cavity and so on. Most of fluoridation's proponents worked for or were affiliated with the Public Health Service, which was dominated by fluoride-polluter ALCOA during the years that the seminal research and political action was carried out. Other "private" foundations that did original and influential fluoride research, like the Kettering Laboratory at the University of Cincinnati, also turn out to have been largely bankrolled by fluoride polluters. I have no doubt that many conflicts of interest are still hidden. The recent revelations of Harold Hodge's sickening relationship with the nuclear establishment, and their motivation to prove fluoride safe, cast grave doubts on the reliability of all pro-fluoridation research results published after 1942, which includes all studies regarding the results of artificial fluoridation. The ALCOA/Mellon- connection casts a shadow across much of the pro-fluoridation research done before 1942. It appears that fluoridation induces dental fluorosis, which should not be surprising. The first stage hardens the enamel, coinciding with making it more brittle. Then the slow disintegration of the teeth ensues. From http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

The data regarding the harm fluorine does to teeth and human biology is unequivocal, denied by nobody in the debate. What the proponents argue is that a substance well known to cause adverse health effects at two PPM, is not only safe but good for us at one PPM. I believe that in scientific history there is no known instance of such a small window of health promotion/health destruction for a "health" additive. Even one of fluoridation's greatest proponents, Harold Hodge, stated that a margin of 100-fold should be the minimum- sized window for beneficial/toxic food additives (when he was not being a fluoridation propagandist). There is plenty of suppressed evidence of the harm that 1 PPM fluoridated water causes, and even harm at concentrations of less than 1 PPM. From http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

In light of recent studies on fluoridation and intelligence, only the truest of believers in the power structure can easily dismiss the opinion of those who say that fluoridation is part of a mind control program. With recently declassified documents showing the United States doing extensive research on fluoride and the central nervous system, research that is still classified fifty years later, I think everybody who drinks fluoridated water or uses fluoridated toothpaste has every reason to be alarmed. Seeing how the nuclear establishment and large industries have managed the "science" of fluorine, I doubt you can trust any radiation research that the nuclear establishment has produced on its effect on humans, something that John Gofman has written extensively on. In disturbing instances, the very same organizations that managed the "fluoride problem" also managed the "radiation problem".
From http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

US citizens consume nearly half of the world's fluoridated water.
From http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

The most effective propaganda and indoctrination system is one where its victims do not think they are being propagandized and indoctrinated. The United States has the most effective and subtle propaganda systems that the world has ever seen, by far. From http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

In ending this [article], it comes down to common sense. Tooth decay is primarily caused by our diet, and changing our diet is the only real answer. Adding a well-known poison to the water supply to "prevent" tooth decay is not only insane, but also suicidal. It also has "coincidentally" been a great windfall for fluorine polluters, both corporate and governmental. Instead of having to bear the huge costs of disposing of their highly toxic fluoride waste, large corporations now can sell it to water suppliers and toothpaste manufacturers! Fluoridation may very well be part of a program of mind control. The situation is so stark, so dark, it is hard to look at for long. Most people have no idea about the situation, demonstrating how effective our propaganda and indoctrination systems are. From http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

I have read people discussing why Orwell's grim prophecies were wrong, and why 1984 did not happen. From my research, it looks like we are living in Orwell's world today. The fluoride situation is just one of many. Evidence of Orwell's prescience is that people do not think they live in that kind of world. The most effective propaganda and indoctrination system is one where its victims do not think they are being propagandized and indoctrinated. The United States has the most effective and subtle propaganda system that the world has ever seen, by far. From http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

Fluoridated water at 1 PPM, when used in cooking in aluminum cookware, concentrated the aluminum up to 600 PPM, whereas water without fluoride did not. From http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

During the Un-American hearings during the McCarthy days, USAF Major George R. Jordan testified to his duties of securing vast quantities of sodium fluoride and shipping it to Siberia during World War II. The Russian fluoride recipients openly told Jordan that they were "using the fluoride in the water supplies in their concentration camps, to make the prisoners stupid, docile, and subservient". From http://www.halcyon.com/wfrazier/fluoride.htm

102 Fluoride facts, horror stories and cover-ups from
http://www.bruha.com/fluoride/

The National Academy Of Sciences (NAS) stated in 1977 that, for the average individual, a retention of 2mg fluoride/day would result in crippling skeletal fluorosis after 40 years. From Bruha.com

Children, the elderly and any person with impaired kidney function (which includes many AIDS patients), are in the high risk group for fluoride poisoning and must be warned to monitor their fluoride intake. Also at high risk are people with immunodeficiencies, diabetes and heart ailments, as well as anyone with calcium, magnesium and Vitamin C deficiencies. From Bruha.com

Studies show that adults can absorb up to 0.5 mg per day of fluoride from toothpaste. From Bruha.com

Small children, even if a pea-size amount of toothpaste is used, will absorb up to 0.5 mg of fluoride per day, more if the child is younger and has less swallowing control control. Bubblegum-flavored dentifrice obviously is very inviting for children. From Bruha.com

Due to the presence of fluoride, since April 1997 all toothpaste sold in the US must carry a warning label, advising parents what to do if their child swallows more than the pea-size brushing amount. From Bruha.com

Wholesale containers of fluoride-containing toothpaste carry the poison symbol of skull and crossbones. From Bruha.com

There are NO reliable studies, conducted under ethical research guidelines, that prove the benefits of fluoride supplementation. The FDA admits to this. From Bruha.com

There are more than 500 peer-reviewed studies documenting the adverse effects of fluoride, and NONE proving the benefit of it. From Bruha.com

Dentists make higher profits in fluoridated areas and through fluoride use! As a result of mottled enamel, many more restorative measures are necessary, such as braces, bridges, etc. For the ADA/CDA, this condition is a real money-maker, because cosmetic dentistry is far more lucrative than cavity repair. In addition, there is an abundance of evidence in the scientific literature that fluoride causes a delay in the normal shedding of the "baby" teeth, and their replacement by permanent teeth. This delay has been shown to increase the number of children with malpositioned teeth. Again, braces are far more expensive than fillings. From Bruha.com

The union representing all EPA scientists in Washington has now filed a grievance demanding fluoride-free bottled water for their offices. From Bruha.com

A recent University of South Florida study found a relationship between fluoride intake during pregnancy to the yearly 1% increase in learning disabilities found in children. From Bruha.com

Studies proving that fluorides transfer through the placenta are well known. Yet Dr.Weil, Internet's Health Guru, advocates fluoride supplements for pregnant woman in his book "8 Weeks To Optimum Health". From Bruha.com

There are also several studies linking aluminum with fluoride, showing that the bioavailability of aluminum is increased in the presence of fluorides, causing aluminum in the brain to double in treated animals. According to an October 28, 1992 Wall Street Journal Article about a study conducted by Varnier JA, et al.: "Rats fed the highest doses developed irregular mincing steps characteristic of senile animals... Post mortem examination of the rat brains disclosed 'substantial cell loss in structures associated with dementia -- the neo-cortex and hippocampus'." Similar data was published by Varner, Jansen and others in Brain Research in 1998. (Note: Alzheimer's Disease, first diagnosed by Dr. Alois Alzheimer in 1907, is now the #4 killer for every person over 60 in the US. Every 2nd person over 70 will develop Alzheimer's.) From Bruha.com

The US Public Health Service estimates that 1 in 5 children have dental fluorosis. From Bruha.com

All native reservations in the US have mandatory fluoridation, resulting in very high incidents of dental fluorosis in those areas.

From Bruha.com

Fluorosis affects up to 80% of people in some areas of the US and up to 71% in Canada. From Bruha.com

Studies have been conducted directly linking bone tissue damage to children with dental fluorosis. From Bruha.com

Fluorosis is the first visible sign that destructive effects of fluoride are also occurring in bone, connective tissue, immune and enzyme functions. From Bruha.com

As a result of the original Manhattan Project logic, industries, now mainly the fertilzer and aluminum industries, have a perfect way to release their fluoride, a hazardous and toxic waste. It would cost up to $US 8,000 per truckload to dispose of it otherwise. At a rate of emissions into the air of 155,000 tons/year, in addition to an estimated 500,000 tons of emissions into lakes, ocean, rivers (not counting fluoridation) -- it's obvious that industry is saving billions and billions of dollars.

From Bruha.com

Darlene Sherrell, not only discovered that the original Roholm/Hodge fluoride safety figures had been mis-calculated and then persisted with the help of Dr. Bob Carton and Senator Bob Graham in her efforts to get the National Research Council (NAS/NRC) to adopt the new figures -- which had even been corrected by Hodge himself in 1979 -- also managed to change the law in Michigan, giving people the right to vote on fluoridation. Michigan was the first state in the US to repeal their mandatory fluoridation law. From Bruha.com

A 1944 editorial in the Journal of the American Dental Association (JADA) states: "We do know that the use of drinking water containing as little as 1.2 to 3ppm of fluorine will cause such developmental disturbances in bones as osteosclerosis, spondylosis and osteopetrosis, as well as goitre". From Bruha.com

Steyn writes in 1962 that drinking water containing as little as 1 to 2 ppm of fluorine can cause serious disturbances of general health and especially in normal thyroid gland function and in the normal processes of calcium-phosphate metabolism (parathyroid function). From Bruha.com

In 1969 Siddiqui show small visible goiters in persons 14 to 17 years of age in India to be directly related to high fluoride concentrations in drinking water. From Bruha.com

Willems et al (1972) document that sodium fluoride blocks thyroid hormone secretion. From Bruha.com

Also in 1972 Day and Powell-Jackson studied 648 people in 13 mountaineous regions in Nepal where the iodine content in the water was low and found a close relationship between fluoride intake and the incidence of goiter. From Bruha.com

In 1978 George Waldbott writes that in most cases of poisoning from fluoridated water in which he had occasion to study the action of the thyroid gland, it's function was low. He cites a case of a 33-year-old male who exhibited typical manifesta- tions of pre-skeletal fluorosis and a basal metabolism rate of -22, indicative of hypothyroidism. Within three months after the man ceased consuming fluoridated water, the thyroid function had returned to normal (BMR=0). In addition, Waldbott writes that "simultaneously, other symptoms associated with low grade fluoride poisoning -- including excessive thirst, headaches, blurred vision, arthritis in shoulders, elbows, knees, and gastrointestinal disturbances -- also disappeared." From Bruha.com

We tried to settle this ethics issue quietly, within the family, but EPA was unable or unwilling to resist external political pressure, and we took the fight public with a union amicus curiae brief in a lawsuit filed against EPA by a public interest group. The union has published on this initial involvement period in detail. Since then our opposition to drinking water fluoridation has grown, based on the scientific literature documenting the increasingly out-of-control exposures to fluoride, the lack of benefit to dental health from ingestion of fluoride and the hazards to human health from such ingestion. These hazards include acute toxic hazard, such as to people with impaired kidney function, as well as chronic toxic hazards of gene mutations, cancer, reproductive effects, neurotoxicity, bone pathology and dental fluorosis. - "Why EPA's Headquarters Union Of Scientists Opposes Fluoridation" http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/nteu_paper.htm From Bruha.com

In 1995, Mullenix and co-workers showed that rats given fluoride in drinking water at levels that give rise to plasma fluoride concentrations in the range seen in humans suffer neurotoxic effects that vary according to when the rats were given the fluoride -- as adult animals, as young animals, or through the placenta before birth. Those exposed before birth were born hyperactive and remained so throughout their lives. Those exposed as young or adult animals displayed depressed activity... - "Why EPA's Headquarters Union Of Scientists Opposes Fluoridation" http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/nteu_paper.htm From Bruha.com

Another 1998 publication by Varner, Jensen and others reported on the brain- and kidney damaging effects in rats that were given fluoride in drinking water at the same level deemed "optimal" by pro-fluoridation groups, namely 1 part per million (1ppm). Even more pronounced damage was seen in animals that got the fluoride in conjunction with aluminum. These results are especially disturbing because of the low dose level of fluoride that shows the toxic effect in rats, and rats are more resistant to fluoride than humans! - "Why EPA's Headquarters Union Of Scientists Opposes Fluoridation" http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/nteu_paper.htm From Bruha.com

Two epidemiology studies from China show decreases in I.Q. in children who get more fluoride than the control groups of children in each study. These decreases are about 5 to 10 I.Q. points in children aged 8 to 13 years. - "Why EPA's Headquarters Union Of Scientists Opposes Fluoridation" http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/nteu_paper.htm From Bruha.com

Fluoride interferes with the function of the brain's pineal gland. The pineal gland produces melatonin which, among other roles, mediates the body's internal clock. - "Why EPA's Headquarters Union Of Scientists Opposes Fluoridation" http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/nteu_paper.htm From Bruha.com

"The EPA fired the Office of Drinking Water's chief toxicologist, Dr. William Marcus, who also was our local union's treasurer at the time, for refusing to remain silent on the fluorine cancer risk issue. - "Why EPA's Headquarters Union Of Scientists Opposes Fluoridation" http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/nteu_paper.htm From Bruha.com

Regarding the effectiveness of fluoride in reducing dental cavities, there has not been any double-blind study of fluoride's effectiveness as a caries preventative. There have been many, many small scale, selective publications on this issue that proponents cite to justify fluoridation, but the largest and most comprehensive study, one done by dentists trained by the National Institute of Dental Research, on over 39,000 school children aged 5-17 years, shows NO SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES (in terms of decayed, missing and filled teeth) among caries incidences in fluoridated, non-fluoridated and partially fluoridated communities(16). The latest publication (17) on the 50 year fluoridation experiment in two New York cities, Newburgh and Kingston, shows the same thing. - "Why EPA's Headquarters Union Of Scientists Opposes Fluoridation" http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/nteu_paper.htm From Bruha.com

...In addition to our concern over the toxicity of fluoride, we note the uncontrolled -- and apparently uncontrollable -- exposures to fluoride that are occurring nationwide via drinking water, processed foods, fluoride pesticide residues and dental care products. A report in The Wall Street Journal on Dec. 21, 1998 that, according to the Centers for Disease Control, at least 22% of America's children now have dental fluorosis, is just one indication of this uncontrolled, excess exposure. For governmental and other organizations to continue to push for more exposure in the face of current levels of over-exposure coupled with an increasing crescendo of adverse toxicity findings is irrational and irresponsible at best. Thus, we took the stand that a policy which makes the public water supply a vehicle for disseminating this toxic and prophylactically useless (via ingestion, at any rate) substance is wrong. - "Why EPA's Headquarters Union Of Scientists Opposes Fluoridation" http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/nteu_paper.htm From Bruha.com

We have also taken a direct step to protect the employees we represent from the risks of drinking fluoridated water. We applied EPA's risk control methodology, the Reference Dose, to the recent neurotoxicity data. The Reference Dose is the daily dose, expressed in milligrams of chemical per kilogram of body weight, that a person can receive over the long term with reasonable assurance of safety from adverse effects. Application of this methodology to the Varner et al. data leads to a Reference Dose for fluoride of 0.000007 mg/kg/day. Persons who drink about one quart of fluoridated water from the public drinking water supply of the District of Columbia while at work receive about 0.01 mg/kg/day from that source alone. This amount of fluoride is more than 100 times (!) the Reference Dose. On the basis of these results the union filed a grievance, asking that EPA provide unfluoridated drinking water to its employees. The implication for the general public of these calculations is clear. Recent, peer-reviewed toxicity data, when applied to EPA's standard method for controlling risks from toxic chemicals, require an immediate halt to the use of the nation's drinking water reservoirs as disposal sites for the toxic waste of the phosphate fertilizer [and Aluminum] industry[s]. - "Why EPA's Headquarters Union Of Scientists Opposes Fluoridation" http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/nteu_paper.htm From Bruha.com

Thyroid activity is reduced while bathing in fluoridated water, by absorption through the skin and inhalation. http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/pfpc__1.htm From Bruha.com

The major iodine deficient areas in the country are identical to endemic fluorosis areas. http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/pfpc__1.htm From Bruha.com

One child dies every minute due to complications associated with fluorine-induced iodine deficiency. http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/pfpc__1.htm From Bruha.com

Carpal Tunnel Syndrome can often be a result of hypothyrodism. Conditions that increase tissue edema such as hypothyroidism are well-known causes of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome. In 1998, Dr. Bob Carton wrote: "Based on Roholm's work and other recent studies, there is every reason to believe that the increasing number of people with carpal-tunnel syndrome and arthritis- like pains are due to the mass fluoridation of drinking water" - EPA Scientists, 1998 http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/pfpc__2.htm From Bruha.com

Many psychoactive drugs including Prozac, Paxil and Luvox are fluorinated medications. Rohypnol, the infamous date- rape drug, is fluorinated Valium, which is about 20-30 times more potent than Valium alone. http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/green_tea___f.html From Bruha.com

Fluoride in tea is much higher than the Maximium Contaminant Level (MCL) set for fluoride in drinking water. - Green Tea & Fluoride http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/green_tea___f.html From Bruha.com

Tea leaves accumulate more fluoride (from pollution of soil and air) than any other edible plant. - Green Tea & Fluoride http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/green_tea___f.html From Bruha.com

A website by a pro-fluoridation infant medical group lists a cup of black tea to contain 7.8 mgs of fluoride -- roughly the same amount as if one were to drink 7.5 quarts of water in an area fluoridated at 1ppm. - Green Tea & Fluoride http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/green_tea___f.html From Bruha.com

Some British and African studies from the 1990's showed a daily fluoride intake of between 5.8 mgs and 9 mgs a day from tea alone [equal to drinking 5 to 9 quarts of fluoridated water per day!]. - Green Tea & Fluoride http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/green_tea___f.html From Bruha.com

Studies conducted on tea consumption in Tibetan children by Cao et al. found both dental (51.2%) and skeletal (32.83%) fluorosis, mainly as a result from drinking tea. More studies by Cao and others reported similar results, as did a study from Chile showing dental fluorosis risks in 22.1% of the children consuming tea as a main beverage. Many similar studies on tea as well as other beverages have been published in the journals of the American Dental Association (ADA) or American Medical Association (AMA) themselves. - Green Tea & Fluoride http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/green_tea___f.html From Bruha.com

Studies on hydrofluoric-acid workers from an electronics company documented that, among the influences of fluorine- containing foodstuff on fluoride content in the biological fluids, the effect of black tea and/or green tea intake was "particularly remarkable". Measuring the urine and serum levels of fluorine ion, in the case of the non-hydrofluoric- acid workers, the concentration increased to about double of the control value. Similarly in a diet test on volunteers, the concentration increased about six times. - Green Tea & Fluoride http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/green_tea___f.html From Bruha.com

In 1990 researchers at the University of Texas theorized that "the rise in incidence of dental fluorosis in North America is mainly due to the replacement of water intake by caffeine-containing beverages among the young population". - Green Tea & Fluoride http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/green_tea___f.html From Bruha.com

To make matters much worse for human health, fluorides in teas are found together with aluminum. The combination of aluminum and fluorides in tea is of urgent concern, due to the increased damage done by fluorides when in the presence of aluminum, especially neurological and renal damage). - Green Tea & Fluoride http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/green_tea___f.html From Bruha.com

The fluoride/aluminum association is of particular importance as it relates to Alzheimer's Disease. Aluminum by itself is not readily absorbed by the body. However, in the presence of fluoride ions, the fluoride ions combine with the aluminum to form aluminum fluoride, which is absorbed by the body. In the body, the aluminum eventually combines with oxygen to form aluminum oxide or alumina. Alumina is the compund of aluminum that is found in the brains of Alzheimer's disease sufferers. In the brain, proteins bind to the alumina, and "that is the key to the plaques and tangles which are the hallmarks of this terrible disease". http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/green_tea___f.html From Bruha.com

In a study by Dr. Robert Isaacson at the State University of New York, aluminum fluoride was added to the rats diet. This, contrary to normal expectations, passed through the brain barrier and gave the rats short term memory loss, smell sensory loss, unsteady gait, and loss of structures of the neo-cortex and hippocampus -- all symptoms of Alzheimer's. A Varner and Jensen study conducted with Isaacson confirmed this in 1998. http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/green_tea___f.html From Bruha.com

Toothpaste also contains a significant quantity of Aluminum (Al), more so, when packed in Al tubes. That children often ingest too much toothpaste is well established and the reason why since April 1997 a poison warning is to be placed on all fluoride-containing toothpastes in the US. It is an absolute disgrace that this is not the same in Canada, especially when the US FDA has issued several Import Alerts and customs detention orders, documenting fluoride amounts double that of permissable content originating in Canada! http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/green_tea___f.html From Bruha.com

It is only in the last two decades during which endocrinology has progressed so rapidly, that now over 150 symptoms and associations can be identified in hypothyroidism. Almost all (!) correlate with known symptoms of fluoride poisoning. http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/green_tea___f.html From Bruha.com

Most of the double-blind test results of fluoride poisoning found in Moolenburgh's study on water containing 1ppm of fluoride -- which led to the ban of fluoridation in Holland -- are now recognized symptoms of hypothyroidism. http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/green_tea___f.html From Bruha.com

The effects of fluoride on the thyroid gland have been studied so extensively, that it baffles the mind how experts on thyroid disease from Harvard or the University of Toronto can claim that fluorides do not affect thyroid gland function, especially when it has been used as medication to do just that! This stance just defies all knowledge properly gained in the last 70 years of related research. One cannot find any mention of fluorides in ANY current "official" thyroid disease related literature. http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/green_tea___f.html From Bruha.com

A toxicologist in the United Kingdom recently found that perinatal deaths in a fluoridated area was 15% higher than in neighboring non-fluoridated areas. The fluoridated area had a higher socio-economic status and would have been expected to have less perinatal deaths. The fluoridated area also had a 30% higher rate of Down's Syndrome. http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/green_tea___f.html From Bruha.com

Chile banned fluoridation because of research by the world- reknowned researcher and Nobel price winner, Dr. Albert Schatz, which showed a link to infant deaths due to fluoridation.

http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/green_tea___f.html From Bruha.com

Learning disorders such as Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) did not knowingly exist before the fluoridation of public water supplies began. In the 1950's ADHD spread rapidly among school children and gained much exposure in the medical science and health literature. In 1963 the U.S. PHS listed dozens of symptoms associated with hyperactivity and officially changed the name to "minimal brain dysfunction". By the the 1970's some leading authorities noted that this disorder appeared to lie at the root of nearly every type of childhood behaviour problem, and had become the most commonly diagnosed illness among childhood counsellors. In 1987 the American Medical Association acknowledged that brain damage had become the leading disability reported by elementary schools, and "one of the most common referral problems to psychiatry outpatients clinics". Many studies on thyroid hormones have shown that attention deficit and/or hyper- activity disorders in children are linked to changes in the levels of thyroid hormone in the blood, and that irritability and aggressive behaviour are linked to thyroid hormone levels and hypothyroidism. http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/green_tea___f.html From Bruha.com

It is important to note that mother's milk passes on neglible amounts of fluoride in very high fluoride-intake areas, as if Nature meant to protect the infant. http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/green_tea___f.html From Bruha.com

Could it be that the world-wide "iodine deficiency" (IDD) is actually fluoride excess? By comparing IDD data supplied by the WHO with fluorosis data found on MEDLINE, an answer may be found. Judge for yourself: COUNTRY IDD GOITER/FLUOROSIS India Very High Very High Nigeria High High Belgium Moderately Low Moderately Low France Low Low China Very High Very High Mexico Very High Very High Brazil High High Italy High High Tanzania Very High Very High Sudan High High http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/green_tea___f.html From Bruha.com

"Iodine deficiency" is now recognized as the most common cause of preventable brain damage and mental disability in the world today. http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/green_tea___f.html From Bruha.com

If you drink 1 cup (6oz) of green/black tea a day, with fluoride content of 5mg, you can expect Chronic Skeletal Fluorosis to appear as follows (based on a 100 lb person):

Phase 1: within 5 years (sporadic pain; stiffness in joints; osteosclerosis of pelvis and vertebral column) Phase 2: after 10 years (chronic joint pain; arthritic symptoms; slight calcification of ligaments; increased osteoclerosis/ cancerous bones; with/without osteoporosis of long bones) Phase 3 (crippling fluorosis) after 23 years (limitation of joint movement; calcification of ligaments/ neck, vert. Column; crippling deformities/spine major joints; muscle wasting;neurological defects/compression of spinal chord).

http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/green_tea___f.html From Bruha.com

As argued by Dean Burk and the attorneys who established the connection between cancer deaths and fluoridation, there is a premise in logic which states that the most obvious cause of an event must be taken as face value while one searches for alternative possibilities. Because it can be documented that fluorides were given as medication for hyperthyroid patients it should be considered the OBVIOUS cause for hypothyroidism and other thyroid-hormone function-related disorders, including ADHD, arthritis, osteoporosis, etc., especially at intake levels as high as they are. http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/green_tea___f.html From Bruha.com

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has previously estimated that levels of fluoride in/on food from the agricultural use of Cryolite plus fluoride levels in U.S. drinking water supplies results in a daily dietary intake of fluoride of approximately 0.095 mg/kg/day. For a person weighing 155 pounds, this would mean intake of 6.65mg/day from those two sources alone!. [That rate of consumption of fluoride will induce crippling fluorsis in 23 years]. http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/pesticides.htm From Bruha.com

A group of biologists and medical researchers at the University of Wisconsin in Madison, led by Warren P. Porter, recently completed a 5-year experiment putting mixtures of low levels of pesticide chemicals into the drinking water of male mice and carefully measuring the results. They reported that combinations of these chemicals -- at levels similar to those found in the groundwater of agricultural areas of the U.S. -- have measurable detrimental effects on the nervous, immune and endocrine (hormone) systems. They say their research has direct implications for humans. Porter explains, "To get a chemical into a cell you've got to have part of the chemical that's fat soluble so it can pass through the cell membrane. And part of it has to have a strong electrical charge because you need to attract the chemical to the part of the cell where you want to do the damage. The trouble is, the ways cells communicate, both within themselves and between each other, is by means of highly charged molecules, ions really. These things are being pumped across the membranes and moved around in cells. So when you take a chemical that you've designed that has a strong electrical charge and you put it in the middle of this tremendous stream of communication--I mean, a high school chemistry student could tell you there are going to be effects. There's just no way these things are not going to be biologically active. It's very important for people to understand that. This is a very real concern." [Any chemist will tell you that Fluoride is the most reactive element known to man] http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/pesticides.htm From Bruha.com

Recently a study of 4 and 5 year-old children exposed to pesticides in Mexico specifically noted a decrease in mental ability and an increase in aggressive behavior among children, indicating thyroid dysfunction. The exposed children demonstrated decreases in stamina, gross and fine eye-hand coordination, 30-minute memory, and the ability to draw a person. http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/pesticides.htm From Bruha.com

The International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology has classified fluoride as an unapproved dental medicament due to its high toxicity. From Bruha.com

The FDA considers fluoride an unapproved new (NEW!!!) drug for which there is no proof of safety or effectiveness. From Bruha.com

The fluoride in half a tube of toothpaste can kill a child. From Bruha.com

Fluoride is an acute toxin with a rating [4 - very toxic] higher than that of lead [3 to 4, moderately to very toxic], according to "Clinical Toxicology of Commercial products," 5th Edition, 1984 From Bruha.com

The EPA Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) for lead is 0.015 ppm, with a goal of 0.0ppm yet the MCL for fluoride is currently set for 4.0ppm - a ridiculous level that is over 250 times more lenient than the permissable level for lead, yet Fluoride is officially rated as more toxic! From Bruha.com

Fluoride is one of the most bone seeking elements known. From Bruha.com

The US Public Health Service has stated that fluoride makes the bones more brittle and the dental enamel more porous. From Bruha.com

Children's ingestion of fluoride from juices and juice- flavored beverages can be quite substantial and a crucial factor in developing fluorosis. From Bruha.com

Grape juice has been found to contain up to 6.8 mg/L of fluoride -- half a quart per day will cause crippling skeletal fluorosis ("arthritis") in 40 years. From Bruha.com

Fluoride can be found in water, toothpaste, mouthwash, Dentist's treatment, fluoride pills, juice, soft drinks, canned food, commercial fruit and vegetables, Teflon and Tefal coated items (such as frying pans), etc. From Bruha.com

No "optimal" fluoride intake has ever been scientifically documented. From Bruha.com

As little as 0.04 mg fluoride, per kg, per day has been proven to cause adverse health effects. For a 150 pound person, this works out to about 2.7mg per day -- the amount in one quart of milk or half a quart of grape juice! From Bruha.com

On July 9, 1998 the Manchester Guardian reported news of fluoride poisoned water in Central India, from untested wells drilled in the 1980s, causing severe arthritic damage to tens of millions of people. From Bruha.com

The US Public Health Service has stated that fluoride makes the bones more brittle and dental enamel more porous. From Bruha.com

Studies have proved that fluoride toxicity affects fertility. From Bruha.com

Fluorides lower the intelligence capacity of humans, with children, again, especially susceptible to early fluoride toxicity. IQ levels were significantly lower than children not exposed to fluorides in all age groups listed. [Li,X.S.,Zhi,J.L.,Gao,R.O.,"Effects of Fluoride Exposure on the Intelligence of Children", Fluoride, 1995] From Bruha.com

Studies proving the neurotoxicity of fluoride in rats have been conducted by Dr. Phyllis Mullinex. In 1995 Mullenix and co-workers showed that rats given fluoride in drinking water at levels that give rise to plasma levels fluoride concentrations in humans, suffer neurotoxic effects that vary according to when the rats were given the fluoiride -- as adult animals, as young animals, or thorugh the placenta before birth. Those exposed before birth were born hyperactive and remained so throughout their lives. Those exposed as young animals displayed depressed activity. From Bruha.com

Four major studies involving 480,000 children (US, 39,000; Japan, 22,000; India, 400,000; Tucson, 29,000) comparing fluoridated and non-fluoridated areas showed no significant difference in decay rates. What is proven is that a higher intake of fluoride will actually cause MORE cavities, especially for children with low dietary calcium intake. From Bruha.com

Fluoride causes cancer. In 1981, Dean Burk, for many decades Chief Chemist at the US National Cancer Institute, testified at congressional hearings, reporting that at least 40,000 cancer deaths in 1981 were attributable to fluoride. 40,000 cases that could have been prevented simply by NOT putting industry waste into the public water supply. Burk stated that fluoride causes more cancer, and causes it faster, than any other chemical. From Bruha.com

In 1996 yet another cancer related study was published showing significant positive correlation between fluoride concentration in drinking water and uterine cancer mortality. From Bruha.com

Fluorides can transform normal cells into cancerous ones, as has been shown in countless studies since Tsutui first published his data in 1984. From Bruha.com

In 1997 there were more than 80 references available linking fluoride to cancer. From Bruha.com

The FDA does not consider fluoride an essential nutrient. From Bruha.com

Many pesticides contain fluorine as an "inactive" ingredient -- serving as the adjuvant ("ferry") that delivers the agent to its target. Because they are considered "inert", listing is not required on labels. [As a Chemical Engineer, I can tell you that Fluorine is the EXACT OPPOSITE of inert. Inert means unreactive, and Fluorine is the most reactive element known to man. HF, Hydrogen Fluoride, can etch glass!] http://bruha.com/fluoride/html/pesticides.htm From Bruha.com

Q. I heard fluoride is a poison. Is this true? A. Yes. Fluoride is an acute toxin with a rating [4 - very toxic] higher than that of lead [3 to 4, moderately to very toxic]. From Bruha.com

Q. Does fluoride accumulate in the body? A. Yes. About half of each day's fluoride intake will be retained. This is what makes it so dangerous. "The dose makes the poison". All sides agree to the fact that healthy kidneys can eliminate only about 50% of daily fluoride intake. The rest gets absorbed in calcified tissues, like bones and teeth. The National Academy Of Sciences (NAS) stated in 1977 that, for the average individual, a retention of 2mg/day would result in crippling skeletal fluorosis after 40 years. From Bruha.com

Q. How does fluoride get into the water? A. Most often as a byproduct from the fertilizer, aluminum and other industries, who manage to sell this toxic waste to municipalities nationwide for human consumption. Incredible, but a fact. From Bruha.com

Q. How can my dentist say that Fluoride's good for my teeth? A. By receiving limited training on the subject and being misinformed on purpose by the ADA and CDA. Figures in ADA pamphlets contain an incredible amount of untruths, and outright fraudulent claims. If you check the references cited and numbers listed in your local libraries, you will come to the same conclusion. Most dentists never bother to take the time to study both sides of the fluoride issue. Consider this statement by the ADA in 1979: "Individual dentists must be convinced that they need not be familiar with scientific reports and field investigations on fluoridation to be effective participants and that non-participation is overt neglect of personal responsibility." There are NO reliable studies, conducted under ethical research guidelines, which prove the benefits of fluoride supplementation. The FDA admits to this! And there are more than 500 peer-reviewed studies documenting the adverse effects of it! From Bruha.com

Q. Is it true that fluoride can cause cancer? A. Yes. In 1981, Dean Burk, for many decades Chief Chemist at the US National Cancer Institute, testified at congressional hearings, reporting that at least 40,000 cancer deaths in 1981 were attributable to fluoride. 40,000 cases that could have been prevented simply by NOT putting industry waste into the public water supply. Burk stated that fluoride causes more cancer, and causes it faster, than any other chemical. From Bruha.com

Q. Is it true that fluoride can increase hip fractures? A. Yes. According to Dr. J. William Hirzy (vice-president of the NFFE LOCAL 2050, the union representing all scientists at the EPA, Washington, D.C.) there have been 5 epidemiological studies done since 1990, in three different countries, all showing increased hip fractures in fluoridated communities. Some studies have indicated a 87% higher risk of hip fractures to the elderly. From Bruha.com

Q. Does fluoridation increase Osteoporosis and Arthritis? A. Yes, most definitely. Scientists at EPA in Washington have declared that there is every reason to believe that the increasing numbers of people with carpal-tunnel syndrome and arthritis-like pains are due to the mass fluoridation of drinking water. On July 9, 1998 the Manchester Guardian reported news of fluoride poisoned water in Central India, from untested wells drilled in the 1980s, causing severe arthritic damage to tens of millions of people -- a national disaster. From Bruha.com

Q. Does fluoride cause brain damage? A. Yes. Fluorides lower the intelligence capacity of humans, with children, again, especially susceptible to early fluoride toxicity. IQ levels were significantly lower than children not exposed to fluorides in all age groups listed. (Li,X.S.,Zhi,J.L.,Gao,R.O.,"Effects of Fluoride Exposure on the Intelligence of Children", Fluoride, 1995) From Bruha.com

Q. How wide-spread is the problem of fluorosis? A. The US Public Health Service estimates that 1 in 5 children have dental fluorosis. All native reservations in the US have mandatory fluoridation, resulting in very high incidents of dental fluorosis in those areas. Realistic figures are as high as 80% in some areas in the US and up to 71% in Canada. Studies have been conducted directly linking bone tissue damage to children with dental fluorosis. Fluorosis is the first visible sign that destructive effects of fluoride are also occurring in bone, connective tissue, immune and enzyme functions. From Bruha.com

Q. What do I need to do? How can I protect myself? A. If you live in an area with fluoridated water, drink distilled water. You can have it delivered or buy it at supermarkets. You can also buy distilling or reverse osmosis systems for home use which is the only way for taking fluoride out of the water. Also, eliminate any Teflon of Tefal coated cook ware, for scratches in the surface will release PTFE, another toxic fluoride compound. Avoid fruit juices coming from fluoridated areas. All non-organic grape products are especially high in fluoride content due to the number of fertilizer and pesticide applications. Wine can contain up to 3 ppm fluoride. Avoid using any toothpaste or mouth wash containing fluoride. There are many alternatives on the market. From Bruha.com

Q. What do I need to do? How can I protect myself? A. Lobbying is required to demand fluoride content labeling on commercial products. Steps to educate the public about this proven health risk and fluoride's toxic properties must be taken immediately and health advisories issued. Water fluoridation should cease immediately and steps should be taken to reduce fluoride in food, drink and dental products. If you live in a fluoridated area, take action to stop the addition of fluoride into the water supply. Individuals ARE successful in educating legislators about the issue and have helped pass laws to stop the addition of fluoride into the water supply. From Bruha.com

Q. What about the fluoride treatment at the dental office? A. Fluoride treatments can contain between 10,000 to 20,000 ppm! Astonishingly, there is no regulated dose requirement. There are cases known of children dying in the dentist's chair. (New York Times, Jan.20, 1979: "$750,000 Given in Child's Death in Fluoride Case" about a three year old child killed by fluoride treatment in the Dentist's office.) From Bruha.com

Q. If all the harmful effects of fluoride are true, how can all this be sanctioned by the government? A. In 1939 a dentist named H. Trendley Dean, DDS, examined water from 345 communities in Texas. Dr. Dean worked for the U.S Public Health Service (PHS). He determined that high concentrations of fluoride in the water corresponded to a high incidence in mottled teeth. To many dentists this provided an answer to the problem of mottled teeth they saw in some of their patients. Dr. Dean also unexpectedly found a lower incidence of dental cavities in communities having about 1 ppm fluoride in the water supply. Among the native residents of these areas about ten percent developed the very mildest forms of mottled enamel, usually described as "beautiful white teeth". However, Dean used a technique known as "selective use of data", using data from 21 cities while completely disregarding data from 272 other locations which show an almost complete lack of correlation when plotted. (J. Colquhoun, International Symposium on Fluoridation, Porte Alegre, Brazil, September 1988). Meanwhile, a number of court cases were being launched due to fluoride contamination, mainly by the aluminum industry. In addition the Manhattan Project, the secret atomic bomb project, was in a big race to build the world's first A-bomb. A pollution incident of great magnitude occurred at a factory in New Jersey (DuPont) producing millions of tons of fluoride for the project. A major "negative PR" problem was emerging, threatening the Manhattan Project and the secrecy around it. In 1945, supposedly as a result of Dr. Dean's discovery, the PHS planned to conduct a 10-year study of fluoridation in two cities. Grand Rapids, Michigan was chosen as the city for artificial fluoridation and Muskegon, Michigan was the non-fluoridated city for comparison and cavity rates were to be compared. In 1950, after only five years into the project, due again to pressure exerted from the atomic bomb program, public health officials started to campaign for fluoridation -- hand in hand with industry looking for a solution to threatening law suits, and an American Dental Association desperate for "respect" and recognition. The campaign was based on the fact that fluoridated Grand Rapids had shown some decrease in cavity rate. Meanwhile there was also a decrease in cavity rate shown in non- fluoridated Muskegon. However, Muskegon was dropped from the study for unknown reasons. After the project was completed, only the Grand Rapids result was released and a major PR campaign promoting fluoride use started. From Bruha.com

E-mail: FFacts@just-think-it.com

-------- police

Police Join in Cincinnati Rally

New York Times
June 16, 2001
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Race-Rally.html

CINCINNATI (AP) -- About 75 people marched Saturday to draw attention to black-on-black crime in this city where rioting broke out in April after an unarmed black man was shot by a white police officer.

The crowd included police officials, officers and children -- both black and white.

It was the latest in a series of rallies following the fatal shooting of 19-year-old Timothy Thomas. His death led to three nights of rioting in Over-the-Rhine, a predominantly black, poor area of the city. Saturday's march was in another predominantly black neighborhood.

A black clergyman who has led protests against alleged police harassment of blacks questioned why political leaders were willing to rally against black-on-black violence when they haven't been at other rallies.

``It's not just what blacks do, it's what cops do. It happens in the city,'' said the Rev. Damon Lynch III.

The event was organized by Sam Malone, a Republican candidate for city council. He said the goal is to get people from across the city to work together to stop black-on-black crime.

-------- spying

Reports: Hanssen Told Wife He Spied

New York Times
June 16, 2001
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Hanssen-Death-Penalty.html

WASHINGTON (AP) -- More than 20 years ago, ex-FBI agent Robert P. Hanssen told his wife and a Catholic priest he had given information to the Soviets in exchange for money, people familiar with the case said Saturday.

Hanssen confessed to a second priest on one occasion in the early 1990s after resuming his suspected espionage activities on the Soviets' behalf, the sources said. Hanssen's wife was unaware he had gone back to turning over secrets to the Russians.

Bonnie Hanssen told the FBI that her husband confessed to giving the Soviets nonvital information in 1979 after she caught him doing something suspicious, said the sources, and that Hanssen then went to a priest who urged him to turn himself in.

When the priest changed his mind and told Hanssen to donate the $20,000 he had received to charity, Hanssen gave the money in small amounts over time in cash to the cause of Mother Teresa and promised his wife that he would cut off further contact with Moscow, said the sources, speaking on condition of anonymity.

The sources declined to describe the information they said Hanssen provided in his first round of spying, except to say it was ``something substantial.''

Mrs. Hanssen said her husband told her he was tricking the Russians, not giving them anything important in exchange for the money, the sources said.

Mrs. Hanssen has told investigators that the discussions with the first priest took place in about 1980, when the couple lived in Scarsdale, N.Y. At the time, Hanssen was working in counterintelligence in the FBI's New York office.

After a six-year gap, Hanssen resumed the alleged spying and at one point confessed about his activities to a different priest in the early 1990s, the sources said.

Mrs. Hanssen told the FBI she was stunned when her husband was arrested in February and charged with espionage activities spanning a 15-year period.

``She is absolutely noncomplicit'' in her husband's illegal activities, said one source.

Until now, the U.S. government has alleged publicly that Hanssen began spying for Moscow in 1985.

CBS, The New York Times and The Washington Post all reported on the earlier alleged spying by Hanssen.

Justice Department spokeswoman Casey Stavropoulos declined to comment, as did Hanssen's lawyer, Plato Cacheris.

Prosecutors allege Hanssen passed U.S. secrets to Moscow in exchange for $1.4 million in cash and diamonds. The FBI said it obtained original Russian documents that detailed Hanssen's activities, including letters he allegedly wrote to his Russian handlers and secret codes used to signal when and where he would drop documents.

Hanssen pleaded innocent to all charges last month.

The new disclosures come as sources close to the case say prosecutors and attorneys for Hanssen are nearing a deal in which Hanssen will reveal his secrets and the Justice Department will not seek to put him to death. Fourteen of the charges against Hanssen are punishable by death.

Under the informal agreement, a term of life imprisonment for Hanssen would depend on the government being satisfied that he is cooperating with its inquiries, two people familiar with the negotiations said Friday.

The government and Hanssen's lawyers have agreed to an Oct. 29 date for a jury trial. A plea bargain would avert that.

-------- terrorism

2 Held for U.S. Embassy Bomb Plot

New York Times
June 16, 2001
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-India-Bin-Laden.html?searchpv=aponline

NEW DELHI, India (AP) -- A Sudanese man suspected of working for Osama bin Laden was arrested along with an Indian accomplice for allegedly planning to blow up the U.S. Embassy in India, domestic news agencies reported Saturday.

Abdil Rauf Hawas, of Sudan, was arrested Friday in a residential neighborhood in New Delhi, where authorities recovered 13 pounds of the explosive RDX and some improvised bomb devices, the United News of India said, quoting a senior official of Delhi Police's Special Cell, which investigates serious crimes.

Interrogation of Hawas and his suspected accomplice, Shamim Sarvar, who was also arrested Friday, revealed they were planning to blow up the American embassy in July, UNI said, quoting Deputy Commissioner of Police Ashok Chand.

Delhi police refused to confirm or deny the report, and a message left at the U.S. Embassy was not immediately returned.

The plan was hatched two years ago on the instructions of bin Laden, who, through his contacts, asked Hawas to set up base in India and recruit others to help in the operation, Chand told UNI. Hawas, through Sarvar, hired a retired mechanical engineer and a retired nuclear scientist.

Sarvar then made several reconnaissance trips to the American embassy, posing as a student.

The group planned to park a car bomb close to the visa section of the embassy, which was considered the most vulnerable part of the high security building, Chand said, according to UNI.

Hawas and his accomplices had been assured by bin Laden's group that they would be moved to a safe country after the attack, Chand said.

Bin Laden, the United States' most wanted man, has been accused of masterminding the Aug. 7, 1998 bombings of two U.S. embassies in Africa that killed 224 people. He has been provided refuge by the Taliban militia in Afghanistan, where his operations are now based.

-------- activists

Rioters Disrupt EU Summit [three protesters were shot and wounded]

By Reuters
Saturday, June 16, 2001; Page A22
http://washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A7316-2001Jun15?language=printer

GOTEBORG, Sweden, June 15 - Anti-capitalist riots raged around a European Union summit today, overwhelming Swedish police and forcing EU leaders to abandon their hotels and drop a planned gala dinner.

Three protesters were shot and wounded, and 12 police officers were injured.

The center of this picturesque 17th century Swedish port was strewn with rocks, burning barricades and smashed shops after nearly 12 hours of violence.

The riot and other clashes were sparked by a small minority of the estimated 25,000 protesters who converged on Goteborg for the summit. Police said they arrested 600 people.

Justice Minister Thomas Bodstrom said the violence was the most difficult challenge Sweden's security forces had ever faced.

"Many of the rioters came from other countries with the intention of disrupting the summit," he said.

The 15 EU leaders condemned the riots, which have dogged international gatherings since the 1999 World Trade Organization conference in Seattle.

Protesters hurled stones and firecrackers at police, who responded with baton charges. Mounted police were dragged from their horses.

The riots were far worse than clashes Thursday in which 455 people were detained while President Bush met with the EU leaders. Bush flew to Poland this morning.

----

SWEDISH POLICE SHOOT ANTI-BUSH DEMONSTRATORS

URGENT!! SATURDAY JUNE 16
NEWS FROM SWEDEN --
CALL AND/OR COME TO THE SWEDISH EMBASSY SUNDAY AT NOON TO PROTEST
34th and Mass. Ave. NW Washington, DC
Ambassador: Jan Eliasson
phone: 202-467-2600 fax: 202-467-2603
ambassaden.washington@foreign.ministry.se

People protesting the visit of G.W. Bush and the E.U. Summit in Goteborg, Sweden have been shot by police. The latest reports are that at least 3 people have been shot, as of late Friday night. One demonstrator has been shot in the leg at Vasaplatsen and is now in the hospital. Hospital personnel have confirmed that the injury is a gunshot wound. The shooting occurred during the Reclaim the Streets party/demonstration, after several days of protests which culminated in a march today consisting of more than 25,000 people. On Thursday, police attacked a school that was serving as a convergence center for the protests, arresting over 200 people. The police justified their attack by saying that protesters had sticks and bottles for making molotov cocktails inside, but none were found (as in every other police attack on protest convergence centers, such as Washington DC in April 2000 and Philadelphia in August 2000). The protesters managed to keep the convergence center open to prepare and serve food, house protesters, and host teach-ins, despite repeated visits by police.

Oblivious to the protests outside, Bush made blunder after blunder inside the Summit, saying that there ought to be "more countries in Europe" and that 'Africa is a nation that suffers from incredible disease'. He angered European diplomats by telling the European Union (of which the U.S. is not a member) what it should and shouldn't do. He also refused to sign the Kyoto protocol, which asks nothing more than that countries agree to reduce greenhouse gas emissions so that we can continue to live on this planet. Bush's mangling of both the English language and of diplomatic relations, however, are not as important as the fact that the Summit itself represents only a very narrow band of interests ­ the moneyed interests--, and ignores the vast majority of people.

While the mainstream media attempts to demonize protesters as violent and unruly, the reality is that the protests have been non-violent. Although some people shouted, "When police attack, we fight back," no action was taken to that effect. The most 'direct action' any group of protesters have taken is when a group of about 25 from a Goteborg non-violence collective attempted to scale the wall and enter the Summit with a banner. While this action may be illegal, it can hardly be construed as violent. And when people feel so left out of the process of decision-making that they are willing to take such extreme measures (including the risk of being arrested) to get their voices heard at the Summit, it's clear that the Summit is not including the voices of the people. For the protesters are not, as the mainstream media would have us believe, a marginal minority. They represent a vast cross-section of the population, from workers to students to environmentalists to ordinary people who simply can't sit back and be passive any longer.

Media corporations attempt to sensationalize news to keep the interest of the viewer long enough to watch the advertisements. Alternative and independent media, on the other hand, have been denied both access to the summit and an outlet for their stories. And while some may argue that just because a journalist is 'alternative' does not mean that they are 'objective', it is fairly obvious that the mainstream media is not very 'objective' either. And, unlike the mainstream media, independent papers, radio stations and tv shows are not trying to sell us any products.

Journalists from small, alternative media have been prevented from attending the EU summit. A danish journalist who tried to get access to the press conferences was told that the swedish national security police (SÄPO) stopped the process. Earlier this week Yelah.net reported that the reason SÄPO did this was because of a so called 'lack of space' for journalists.

On Thursday, Daniel Breece was hit in the head with a whip by [horseback]-riding police while taking pictures and screaming [that he was a member of the] press." (IMC Sweden)

This is Bush's first trip overseas as acting president of the U.S., having obtained the presidency in December through highly questionable means. Today he is in Warsaw, where he faces more anti-Bush protests.

For updates, look for your nearest Independent Media Center. Try http://www.indymedia.org and http://sweden.indymedia.org

----

Protesters Arrested at U.S. Embassy

New York Times
June 16, 2001
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-Slovenia-Summit-Protests.html?searchpv=aponline

LJUBLJANA, Slovenia (AP) -- Police arrested more than 20 people Saturday after a scuffle at the U.S. embassy and beat Italian activists trying to enter the country to join protests during the meeting of the U.S. and Russian presidents.

Later, riot police faced off against nearly 1,000 anti-globalization protesters who had marched to the Russian embassy Saturday afternoon. Police brought in armored cars and a water cannon, but a woman planted herself in front of the convoy.

Protests by groups opposed to American and Russian policies took place as President Bush and President Vladimir Putin met in a 16th century manor outside Brdo Pri Kranju, about 18 miles north of the Slovenian capital.

Shortly before the two presidents arrived separately at Ljubljana's airport, 22 members of the environmental group Greenpeace were arrested after five of them jumped the fence at the U.S. Embassy here.

Two of the protesters chained themselves to the stairs leading into the embassy building. Another tried to climb the flagpole and remove the U.S. flag before he was apprehended and handcuffed by embassy guards wearing civilian clothes.

Outside the compound, the other activists chained themselves together and held up a banner reading: ``Stop Star Wars.''

Slovene riot police rushed to the scene, cut the chains and took the protesters into custody, police spokesman Miran Koren said.

Twelve were from Austria, six from Slovakia, two from Britain and the others from the Czech Republic and Spain, Koren said.

Before the protest, a Greenpeace activist, Mike Townsley, said his group was angry over ``the collapse of the weapons control treaties,'' principally the 1972 Anti-ballistic Missile treaty which Bush has branded a relic of the Cold War.

Slovene authorities have stepped up security here and along the borders to prevent extremists from entering the country to cause trouble during the one-day meeting.

On Saturday, Slovene authorities stopped a bus carrying about 40 members of Italian-based anti-globalization group, Ya Basta, after it crossed the Italian side of the border.

Koren, the police spokesman, said Slovene border guards ordered the bus to return to Italy. When several of the activists tried to leave the bus to protest the order, Slovene guards pounded them with nightsticks to force them back inside, according to a filmed report broadcast by Slovene television.

``We just wanted to go to Ljubljana peacefully,'' one of the Italians shouted at police. ``If that is not possible, give us a written reason.'' Slovene television did not report his name.

Koren said the bus remained in the 100-yard-wide ``no man's land'' between the Italian and Slovene border control stations, blocking traffic.

Meanwhile, Amnesty International collected signatures in downtown Ljubljana for petitions against capital punishment in the United States and Russia.

The organization had planned to send its petitions by fax to Brdo castle where the American and Russian leaders were meeting. However, after sending 30 copies, someone disconnected the line, Amnesty International members said.

Bush's five-nation tour of Europe, which began Tuesday in Madrid, Spain, has been dogged by protests -- mostly against his missile defense plan and his rejection of the 1997 international agreement to curb greenhouse gas emissions.

--------

Seoul Activists Burn U.S. Flag

New York Times
June 16, 2001
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-SKorea-US-Protest.html?searchpv=aponline

SEOUL, South Korea (AP) -- Activists burned an American flag and the effigy of a U.S. missile Saturday to protest Washington's plan to build a missile defense system, which they say is hurting stability on the divided Korean peninsula.

Dozens of students later hurled garbage and brandished wooden sticks at riot police in sporadic street clashes. Police fought back with plastic shields and batons.

A mob of demonstrators stomped on a policeman. But no serious injuries were reported. At least one student was hauled off by police for questioning. Traffic was blocked for hours.

About 2,000 students, labor activists and civic group members marched in downtown Seoul, demanding a better social welfare system and protesting layoffs amid government-pushed corporate restructuring.

``We oppose (President) Kim Dae-jung, who is ruining the lives of workers,'' they chanted.

Shoving matches first erupted when police confiscated an effigy of President Kim that workers had intended to burn.

The protesters included activists who oppose the Bush administration's missile defense program, saying it was jeopardizing reconciliation on the divided Korean peninsula.

The communist North, along with Russia and China, vehemently opposes the U.S. missile shield project.

``Let's repel the MD (missile defense) and advance national reunification,'' the protesters chanted.

They set fire to a large U.S. flag and a tall effigy of an American missile, together with a photograph of President Bush, who arrived in Slovenia on Saturday for a first-time meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin. The meeting was expected to focus on the missile defense plan.

Also Saturday, the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions vowed to step up its struggle to win wage increases and fight the government's corporate restructuring that it says is causing mass layoffs.

The threat came after the government decided Friday to arrest the confederation's leadership, accusing them of organizing illegal strikes at the nation's metal, chemical, aviation and hospital industries.

Operations at Asiana Airlines, South Korea's second-largest airline, remained crippled for a fifth straight day as union members continued their strike Saturday.

After overnight talks failed to resolve wage disputes with the union, the airline canceled 34 of its 69 scheduled international flights and 173 of 217 domestic flights on Saturday.

U.S. officials say they need a new missile defense system to protect U.S. territory and their allies from missile threats from such rogue states as North Korea.

----

Landless Leader Found Murdered

JUNE 16, 19:09 EST
http://wire.ap.org/APnews/center_story.html?FRONTID=CSA&STORYID=APIS7CLUE480

SAO PAULO, Brazil (AP) - The bullet-riddled body of a regional leader of Brazil's landless farmers' movement was found Saturday on a roadside near the Paraguayan border, police said.

The body of Valdecir Padilha, 31, was found in the municipality of Itaquirai with three gunshot wounds to the chest and one in the neck, news agency Agencia Estado reported.

Police in nearby Navirai, 540 miles west of Sao Paulo, said they were investigating Padilha's death.

Padilha was doing community service at Itaquirai hospital as a sentence for leading several invasions of large farms and ranches in the area for the Landless Farmworkers Movement.

Police said they found motorcycle tire marks and parts of a car headlight and rear-view mirror at the site.

The landless movement spearheads large-scale occupations of land it considers unproductive in order to pressure the government into speeding up its agrarian reform program.

In recent years, it has also taken to invading banks and other public institutions to press its demands, which include the settlement of some 4 million landless families it claims to represent.

In Brazil, the richest 20 percent of the population owns about 90 percent the land, while the poorest 40 percent holds just 1 percent.

More than 1,000 Brazilians have lost their lives in land disputes over the past decade, according to the Land Pastoral, a Roman Catholic group that advocates land reform.


------- OneList (submissions from subscribers)

------- Depleted Uranium Keeps On Killing!