NucNews - September 16, 2005


-------- NUCLEAR 


-------- accidents and safety

SOMALIANS DIE FROM TOXIC REMAINS OF TSUNAMI

By: S. Rowan Wolf, September 16, 2005 Maavak.net

http://www.maavak.net/rwolf/rwolf035.html

This Work is licensed under a Fair Share Creative Commons License

On December 26, 2004 a massive tsunami struck. For days the world watched horrifying scenes of the devastation, the search for survivors, the identification of the dead. The world poured out donations to speed the needed disaster response to the region. One would think that the natural disaster would be bad enough, but an older man made horror swept in with the towering tsunami - toxic and radioactive waste - which is sickening hundreds (if not thousands) of Somalian's. An ongoing utilization of Somalia (and other poor nations) as a dumping ground for toxic and radioactive waste dumping is a devastating aftermath of the tsunami.

There have been spotty reports on this issue, but it is largely being kept off the headlines. Most of the recent reports stem from a U.N Environmental Programme report released in March of 2005.

    The impact of the tsunami stirred up hazardous waste deposits on the beaches around North Hobyo (South Mudug) and Warsheik (North of Benadir). Contamination from the waste deposits has thus caused health and environmental problems to the surrounding local fishing communities including contamination of groundwater. Many people in these towns have complained of unusual health problems as a result of the tsunami winds blowing towards inland villages. The health problems include acute respiratory infections, dry heavy coughing and mouth bleeding, abdominal haemorrhages, unusual skin chemical reactions, and sudden death after inhaling toxic materials.

Toxic and radioactive waste? Where did that come from? Well it is a long story that is short on specifics. Prior to the late 1980's, rich nations regularly dumped their toxic and radioactive wastes into the ocean. With increasing awareness about the damage caused to marine environments and life, and to humans eating from those damaged environments, international controls began to be implemented to stop the practice. Much of the waste was sludge (frequently contaminated), and other toxic wastes (barrels of chemicals and radioactive materials). New procedures came into play which increased the cost of disposal. Third World nations (and the oceans off their shores) became a cheap dumping ground.

According to the U.N.E.P., 90% of the toxic waste is generated by the rich nations. The production of hazardous waste is an increasing problem, and its disposal is more an more frequently crossing international borders.

Somalia (and its ocean area) became a prime site for dumping when civil war and the collapse of the government created an environment of economic and political chaos. There was virtually no organized control, and various groups of war lords were open to some money in exchange for some "trash" being buried in their domain. It is reported that, at least in Italy, the Mafia may actually been directly involved in the commerce in illegal waste dumping in Somalia.

While few names are being named (either in older or more recent reports), it is clearly implied that it is private corporations who were primarily involved - not nations and the Mafia. Private corporations seeking to evade the costs of cleanup of their own waste, or the proper disposal of it in the U.S., Canada, or Western Europe, took the deadly stuff where they thought no one would ever notice. Or if someone did notice, it could never be tracked back to them.

Then the tsunami struck and wrenched the leaking mess from the seabed and onto the shores of Somalia. There it has contaminated water supplies, seeped into the soil, and blows around free. It sits there, a sad testament to greed and lack of accountability. The people sicken with symptoms characteristic of chemical poisoning and radiation sickness. This is not going to just go away. It will effect those now living, and it will certainly effect the next generation (and beyond).

Not only that, but another disaster lurks - scientists are predicting another tsunami within a year. While another tsunami lurks waiting for a major fault shift to set it off, a potentially more lethal threat lies in the mess resting on the seabed.

To save Somalia from the ravages of others toxic waste, a massive environmental cleanup is necessary. Not just the beaches and burial spots need cleaning, but the remaining dump zone sitting off Somalia's coast. It is clear that it is not just Somalia impacted here, and the UN has called for an investigation into the illegal dumping. In my opinion, that investigation should include locating where materials have been dumped and who dumped them. Those who engaged in the dumping (whether corporations or nations) should be held directly accountable for the cleanup and the effects of their practices.

3/12/05 Arabic News.com, Dangerous wastes effecting Somalia due the tsunami
http://www.arabicnews.com/ansub/Daily/Day/050312/2005031207.html

3/16/05, Green Left Weekly, SOMALIA: EU toxic dumping a post-tsunami disaster
http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/2005/619/619p19pl.htm

U.N. Environmental Program, Tsunami Reports - Somalia
http://www.unep.org/tsunami/reports/TSUNAMI_SOMALIA_LAYOUT.pdf

3/04/05 Al Jazeera, Tsunami exposes Somalia toxic waste
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/97DF29AD-FE2B-4980-9580-F40409F56EA2.htm

3/04/05 Clayton, Times Online, Somalia's secret dumps of toxic waste washed ashore by tsunami
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,18690-1509979,00.html

3/02/05 BBC, Waves 'brought waste to Somalia'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4312553.stm

3/15/05 Ryu, VOA, Waste Dumping off Somali Coast May Have Links to Mafia, Somali Warlords
http://www.voanews.com/english/2005-03-15-voa34.cfm

3/09/05 VOA, Somalia Calls for UN Investigation of Toxic Waste
http://www.voanews.com/english/2005-03-09-voa29.cfm

Trade & Environment Database, Somali Waste Imports 
http://www.american.edu/projects/mandala/TED/SOMALIA.HTM


-------- australia

Uranium exploration planned despite mining ban

Friday, 16 September 2005 Australia Broadcasting

http://www.abc.net.au/news/items/200509/1461922.htm?northwestwa

A Perth-based explorer says it will begin exploratory drilling for uranium later this month despite the Western Australian Government ban on its mining.

Redport says it will be the first company to probe for yellowcake in Western Australia in several years when drilling starts at its Lake Maitland deposit, 130 kilometres south-east of Wiluna.

Malcolm Mason from Redport says the main aim of the drilling program is to further define the nature of the core deposit, which will form the basis of a pre-feasibility study.

Mr Mason says the company is well aware of the State Government's strong stance on the mining of uranium, but it remains optimistic about the future.

"Nuclear power is now much more accepted than it used to be," he said.

"Our belief is that a change in the world's attitudes and a change in Australia here will force a change and that will happen, well we hope, maybe within three of four years."

----

Katherine lobby group to fight nuclear dump plans

Friday, September 16, 2005 Australia Broadcasting

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200509/s1461870.htm

Katherine residents have formed a lobby group to fight Federal Government plans to build a nuclear waste facility south of the Northern Territory town.

A small but vocal crowd met last night.

The group argues the proposed site at Fishers Creek is inappropriate on environmental, social and economic grounds.

Sharon Hill, from the Katherine Catchment Landcare Group, says the Northern Territory should not have to bear a national responsibility.

"This is a fairly emotive situation ... I've recently had to use or radioactive medical equipment to assist me with an illness that I had and I believe I have a responsibility to at least come up with some solution for the storage of that waste," Ms Hill said.

"I'm into waste management as well because we've got waste management issues here in Katherine too but I think there has to be an appropriate site in Australia.

"And considering the Northern Territory's producing 1 per cent of the nuclear waste, how could we be totally responsible for that?"

----

Uranium exports criticised

September 16, 2005 The Australian

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,16622381%255E1702,00.html

AUSTRALIAN uranium is akin to exporting disease, international anti-nuclear campaigner Helen Caldicott said.

Dr Caldicott, paediatrician and Nobel Peace prize nominee, today called on the federal government to halt uranium mining, saying the mineral was a medical time bomb.

"The nuclear industry is about cancer and we are talking about nuclear waste that lasts over 25 million years," she told a Federal Parliamentary inquiry in Sydney into the future of Australia's uranium industry.

"We should not be mining uranium because what we are actually doing is exporting a disease ... that is the legacy that this industry will bequeath to future generations."

Australia has about 40 per cent of the world's uranium resources and supplies about 20 per cent of the world stocks.

While Western Australia and Queensland have banned uranium mining, it is still allowed in the Northern Territory and South Australia.

Dr Caldicott today warned against exporting the mineral, saying the gamma radiation emitted from mined uranium damaged ordinary body cells.

"All it takes is a single mutation in a single cell," she told the inquiry.

"The incidence of testicular cancer is rising, cancer in general is rising; we spend millions of dollars every year trying to cure cancer and we spend countless hours waiting for people to die."

Because politicians were often scientifically ignorant they underestimated the profound medical ramifications of mining uranium, Dr Caldicott said.

"Decisions made on a purely economic basis are inappropriate," she said.

"We are talking about something that is going to affect people and other species for the rest of time."

Richard Broinowski, a former ambassador to South Korea and a nuclear proliferation expert, told the inquiry the Government must ensure the standards for monitoring, regulating and reporting on the industry are substantially improved.

Commercial considerations govern Australia's policies towards the extraction and export of uranium, Prof Broinowski said.

"We are looking at the short term, the expedient and the commercial - we are not looking at the long term," he said.

The professor called on the Government to revise the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and update its safeguards on uranium exports.

"The erosion of our standards has increased the likelihood that nuclear material will find its way into nuclear weapons," he said.

"The safeguards have been modified because of commercial needs ... the system is broke, it needs fixing." 


-------- britain

British Energy to extend nuclear plant's life

Fri 16 Sep 2005 Scotsman

http://business.scotsman.com/utilities.cfm?id=1948032005

BRITISH Energy is to extend the operating life of its Dungeness nuclear power station in Kent by ten years to 2018.

The Scots firm said the decision to extend the life of the 1110-megawatt plant, which was commissioned in 1985, was not indicative of the potential for extensions at its other nuclear power stations, which include Torness in East Lothian, due to close in 2023.

Britain's nuclear power stations are ageing and will be shut down over the next 20 years unless their operating lives are extended.

British Energy chief executive Bill Coley said: "This decision is based on a comprehensive technical and economic evaluation of Dungeness and is important in supporting the UK's security of electricity supply and climate change goals for the reduction of CO2 emissions."

The Government has said it will keep open the option of building new nuclear plants, despite opposition from environmentalists on safety grounds.


-------- business

Partnership Formed to Build Nuclear Plants

By MATTHEW L. WALD
September 16, 2005 NY TIMES

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/16/business/16nuke.html

WASHINGTON, Sept. 15 - After a gap of three decades in orders for nuclear power plants, two companies interested in building new ones announced Thursday that they had formed a partnership intended to create a new business model for the industry.

Areva, a French-owned nuclear company with links to the reactor technology developed by Westinghouse and Babcock & Wilcox, and Constellation Energy, a Baltimore company that operates five reactors in Maryland and New York, said they would work together to manufacture, construct and then operate a reactor, and would retain partial ownership, selling the rest to a utility company or other investor.

The two companies enlisted Bechtel, an architect-engineering firm with extensive nuclear experience, to join the project, called UniStar Nuclear.

Almost all the nuclear reactors in operation in this country were built when a utility ordered the parts from a manufacturer, hired a company to build the plant and then learned on its own to run it, a system that contributed to huge cost overruns and operating problems.

In July, Congress approved sweeping energy legislation that offers substantial subsidies for building new reactors. Even before that, many companies expressed interest in building reactors because the primary competing fuel, natural gas, had become so expensive and because of uncertainty about future regulations regarding coal plants.

The new model is intended to cut the risk to investors, who were badly hurt in the 1980's when delays and technical problems pushed the price of some reactors to 8 or 10 times the original estimates. The goal is to build groups of identical reactors, taking advantage of economies of scale.

In another step to limit risk, Areva said it would use a new procedure developed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to have a reactor design approved before construction. The company would use a 1,600-megawatt design that is under construction in Olkiluoto, Finland. That plant is being built in partnership with Siemens, the German nuclear company.

When America's existing reactors were ordered, the practice was to seek a license while construction was under way. Regulators would then order design changes after the welders and concrete pourers had done their work, and no two plants ended up alike.

"UniStar Nuclear will pioneer a path that will help bring a new generation of nuclear power plants a major step closer to reality," said Michael J. Wallace, executive vice president of Constellation. "At the heart of UniStar Nuclear is a one-stop shopping approach to developing and deploying nuclear power plants. UniStar will provide an unprecedented level of certainty for energy companies and others contemplating new plants."

Areva is an owner of two French nuclear power companies, and in recent years its has bought Exxon Nuclear, the Yankee Atomic Engineering Company and the nuclear division of Babcock & Wilcox. Areva has 8,000 employees in the United States and is the largest provider of services to nuclear plants in this country.

Constellation named two possible sites for a new reactor: Calvert Cliffs, Md., where it has two reactors, and Nine Mile Point, near Oswego, N.Y., where it has two more. Ground could be broken by 2010, with operation in 2015, the partnership said.

The reactor is described as "evolutionary," meaning that it would be built on the same general lines as current reactors, but with improvements to make it simpler and more reliable.

For example, while most reactors have two sets of emergency pipes and pumps, the Areva design has four, to ensure that the reactor can keep running while one set is out of service for maintenance or repair. It has 47 percent fewer valves and 16 percent fewer pumps.

The youngest nuclear plant in the United States entered service in 1995. The last plant ordered, not counting those canceled before completion, was in 1973.

Rising construction costs, the 1979 accident at Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania and the 1986 explosion at Chernobyl in the Ukraine, as well as cheap natural gas, combined to make the utilities look to other sources. But the day of cheap fuel is gone, and the accidents are decades in the past. Many industry executives said they want to build more plants if there can be some assurance of controlling the costs.

----

AREVA venturing out

The News & Advance, Lynchburg, Virginia (September 16, 2005)

http://pepei.pennnet.com/news/display_news_story.cfm?Section=WIREN&Category=HOME&NewsID=125252

Sep. 16--Taking another step toward its goal of building new nuclear power plants in the United States, AREVA announced Thursday a joint venture with Baltimore-based electricity supplier and distributor Constellation Energy.

The new company, Annapolis-based UniStar Nuclear, will offer a "one-stop shop" for utilities interested in building new nuclear plants, Constellation Energy executive vice president Mike Wallace said in a conference call with reporters.

UniStar will market a 1,600-megawatt "evolutionary power reactor" design in the United States based on AREVA's European pressurized water reactor.

One plant already is under construction in Finland. Another will be built in France. UniStar Nuclear hopes to sell at least four such plants to U.S. utilities.

"We believe that could be as early as 2008 and we will be ready," AREVA chief executive officer Tom Christopher said in the conference call.

Wallace said construction on new plants could begin as early as 2010. The plants could begin operating by 2015.

Energy-services firm AREVA employs about 8,000 people nationwide, including 1,700 people in the Lynchburg area. Part of the company's work is upgrading and maintaining some of the 104 nuclear power plants currently operating in the country.

Already, 200 engineers in Lynchburg are working on converting the European reactor design to American specifications and seeking approval from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).

AREVA plans to hire another 200 engineers next year to work in Lynchburg and Charlotte, N.C., and another 100 in 2007, said company spokeswoman Susan Hess.

Christopher said in a July interview that a contract to build a new plant would mean a $2 billion to $3 billion investment in AREVA, including $400 million to $500 million of work subcontracted to local manufacturers.

Wallace stressed that the creation of UniStar Nuclear was not an announcement that a new plant definitely would be built.

Building a new plant hinges on NRC approval of the plant's design, and an electric utility buying a plant. Several utilities have already expressed interest in building new plants, including Dominion expanding its North Anna nuclear site in Louisa County.

AREVA also has competition from Atlanta-based GE Energy and Pittsburgh-based Westinghouse Electric, both of which have designed their own "next generation" nuclear plants.

Opponents of nuclear power, such as the environmental-advocacy group Greenpeace, have criticized building new plants in Europe, particularly in France, which generates about 75 percent of its electricity through nuclear power.

In the United States, however, proponents of new nuclear plant construction recently received a boost in the form of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, which includes loans and tax credits attached to building new plants.

Constellation Energy operates five power plants in Maryland and New York, Wallace said. He identified two sites -- Calvert Cliffs in Maryland and Nine Mile Point in New York -- as possible future locations for the new plants.

Constellation had picked those sites as future locations for nuclear plants to be built through NuStart Energy, a consortium that includes GE Energy and Westinghouse Electric, but Wallace said NuStart now would not seek to build at those sites.

In addition to Constellation Energy and AREVA, San Francisco-based Bechtel Power Corporation is a partner in UniStar Nuclear, according to the company. It will provide architecture and engineering services. 


<a name="du"></a>

-------- depleted uranium

How Long Can The Pentagon Lie About Depleted Uranium?
The Pentagon's duplicity about the dangers of depleted uranium has been exposed by a government-funded study confirming that radiation causes cancer.

Christopher Bollyn, American Free Press - Rense.com
September 16, 2005

http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m15840&l=i&size=1&hd=0

LIVERMORE, California - The U.S. government's duplicity about the harmful effects of depleted uranium appears to have no limits. While the Pentagon tells U.S. military personnel that the health risks from inhaling depleted uranium are low, a study - sponsored by the Dept. of Defense - confirms that even low-level radiation causes cancer.

A government-funded study has confirmed what nuclear experts have known for decades: Any dose of ionizing radiation poses serious health risks.

The National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences published a report in June 2005 confirming that ionizing radiation (IR) causes cancer. The consensus opinion of the 17 independent scientists who signed the report was that exposure to radiation from medical x-rays and nuclear medicine is directly linked to cancer.

The report, the seventh in the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation series, or BEIR VII, studied the health effects of exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation, the kind received by thousands of Americans every day in x-rays, mammograms, computed tomography (CT) scans, and other procedures of nuclear medicine.

The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) is a private, nonprofit institution created in 1863 to provide science and technology advice to the government.

Medical x-rays and nuclear medicine account for nearly 80 percent of the man-made radiation exposure in the United States, according to BEIR VII, which focused on the health effects of radiation from medical sources.

The study concluded: "There is a linear dose-response relationship between exposure to ionizing radiation and the development of radiation-induced solid cancers in humans."

Solid cancers are defined as cellular growths in organs such as the breast or prostrate, as opposed to leukemia, a cancer of the blood.

"The scientific research base shows that there is no threshold of exposure below which low levels of ionizing radiation can be demonstrated to be harmless or beneficial," Richard R. Monson, chairman of the BEIR committee, said. "The health risks," he said, "particularly the development of solid cancers in organs, rise proportionally with exposure."

Asked why this story has received so little attention in the media, Marion Fulk, a retired staff scientist from the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, said: "I don't think the media understands the importance of this. And some of the TV stations are owned by companies that are invested in the nuclear industry."

Fulk, who has survived skin cancer, said that as a result of tritium pollution from the national lab, children born in Livermore are 6 times more likely to have skin cancer than other children.

BEIR scientist William C. Dewey, Emeritus Professor of Radiation Oncology at the University of California, San Francisco, told AFP that 80 percent of the funding came from government agencies that did not see the report until it was completed.

"We had a meeting with the sponsors when it was finished," Dewey said. Asked if the Dept. of Defense accepted the report's conclusions, Dewey said, "As far as I know they've accepted it.

"This is the exactly the kind of independent scientific report that needs to be done with depleted uranium," Dewey said.

To determine the degree of damage caused by the larger alpha particles, like those emitted by DU inside the human body, the absorbed dose is multiplied by a factor of 20. Inhaled DU is extremely harmful because the source of radiation is internal.

Furthermore, the DU particle continues to emit alpha particles over a very short distance, about 50 microns, the distance of about two human cells. The critical target for ionizing radiation is the individual cell.

"The alpha does a tremendous amount of damage in a very short track," Fulk said. "It breaks more bonds and causes more damage in a local area."

The BEIR report confirms the findings of John W. Gofman, the first director of the Biomedical Research Division at the Livermore National Laboratory.

In the early 1960s, the Atomic Energy Commission asked Gofman to evaluate the health effects of all types of nuclear activities. By 1969, Gofman had concluded that human exposure to IR was much more serious than previously recognized. The AEC, however, was not pleased and by 1973 his laboratory research on chromosomes and cancer was de-funded.

"Medical radiation is a highly important cause (probably the principal cause) of cancer mortality in the United States," Gofman wrote in 1999. "Medical radiation, received at very low and moderate doses, is an important cause of ischemic heart disease.

"Ionizing radiation is firmly established by epidemiologic evidence as a proven cause of almost every major type of human cancer," Gofman wrote. "Some of the strongest evidence comes from the study of medical patients exposed to x-rays."

X-rays and other forms of IR are a proven cause of chromosomal mutations. The biological damage comes from electrons that are kicked out of their normal orbits within human cells. "Endowed with biologically unnatural energy," Gofman wrote, these wild electrons damage chromosomal DNA and create various species of free radicals.

Free radicals are made and found primarily in the mitochondria, Fulk said. The resulting dysfunction of the mitochondria causes a host of neuromuscular diseases, he said, including: Parkinson's, Hodgkin's, Lou Gehrig's, and Diabetes II.

About 20 percent of cancers are caused by virus, bacteria, and parasites, Fulk said. To boost the immune system and give the body an extra chance to fight back, Fulk recommends a vitamin regimen rich in "free radical gobblers."

Gofman wrote that over 50 percent of the deaths from cancer, and over 60 percent of the deaths from ischemic heart disease, are x-ray induced. "The proof is so solid that it is accepted by even the industries and professions which irradiate people."

"If one can identify a single agent which is a necessary co-actor in a high fraction of cases of cancer and ischemic heart disease, one can make real progress in preventing these diseases by reducing exposure to that cause," Gofman wrote. "The evidence strongly indicates that medical radiation is such an agent.

"Since its introduction in 1896, medical radiation has become a necessary co-actor in most fatal cases of cancer and ischemic heart disease," Gofman concluded. "Reduction of exposure to medical radiation can and will reduce mortality rates from both cancer and ischemic heart disease."

Gofman's 1995 book Preventing Breast Cancer presents evidence to support his thesis that medical radiation is a necessary co-actor in about 75 percent of breast cancer cases.

THE PENTAGON'S DUPLICITY

The government agencies who sponsored the BEIR VII report act as if they had never seen it. The BEIR report was sponsored by the U.S. departments of Defense, Energy, and Homeland Security, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - agencies who consistently deny that exposure to DU poses a serious threat to human health.

Deployment Quarterly, a magazine produced by the Pentagon, citing a study done by a major defense contractor, reported last winter that "chemical and radiological risks to human health from inhaling depleted uranium aerosols in a perforated vehicle are low."

"Exposure levels to depleted uranium in military scenarios are safe," Lt. Col. Mark Melanson, director of the Capstone Depleted Uranium Program, said. "Troops in, on, or near armored vehicles when they are struck with DU munitions have the highest potential for intake and exposure, and we've seen that the intake and doses they receive are below U.S. peacetime standards for radiation and not high enough to cause lasting effects on individuals from their heavy metal toxicity."

The $6 million DU capstone study, however, was prepared for the U.S. government by Battelle, a major nuclear contractor based in Columbus, Ohio. Battelle manages several nuclear facilities for the Dept. of Energy, including the Oak Ridge, Brookhaven, Idaho, and Pacific Northwest National Laboratories.

In 1979, Battelle conducted a study of DU weapons and found that more than 30 percent of the bulk mass of a DU penetrator was reduced to nano-sized particles, one-tenth of a micron or smaller, on impact. These airborne particles remain suspended until inhaled or rained out. Inside the body, these extremely small particles are able to penetrate the nucleus of the human cell where they do extreme damage.

Battelle certainly knows very well how aerosolized DU works in the body. It has a subsidiary called Ventaira Pharmaceuticals that develops aerosol devices to deliver medications through the lungs.

The disclaimer in Battelle's Capstone DU report says that neither the U.S. government nor Battelle are responsible for the "accuracy, adequacy, or applicability of the contents" or "any consequences of any use, misuse, inability to use, or reliance upon the information."

Neither the Pentagon nor Battelle responded to repeated inquiries about the Capstone DU report.

"SCIENTIFIC PROSTITUTES"

"Scientific prostitutes" is what Fulk calls scientists who have a vested interest in the nuclear industry and whitewash the dangers of ionizing radiation. Fulk, who worked with the pioneers of the nuclear industry since the 1940s, has always opposed open-air testing of nuclear devices.

"Cancer is just the tip of the iceberg of the damage done the biological system caused by ionizing radiation," Fulk said. "There is no safe x-ray or safe level of IR of any kind."

"I think the public should be informed so they can make an informed decision about being exposed," Fulk said. "All I want is this crap cleaned up because it's a wicked business. What I'm trying to do is to prevent this from happening in the first place."


-------- india 

US official to travel to India to work on nuclear deal

Fri Sep 16, 2005 10:44 AM ET (AFP)

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20050916/pl_afp/indiausnucleariran_050916144416

NEW DELHI - India and the United States will pursue work together on their nuclear cooperation deal, US Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns said after New Delhi clarified it does not wish Iran to have nuclear weapons.

Burns, in an interview on Indian news channel NDTV, said he would visit India next month to push cooperation between the two countries.

"I'll be traveling to India in a month or so's time to work with my colleague, Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran, and our ambassador, David Mulford, will work with us as well," Burns said on Friday.

He emphasized the US commitment to the deal in the wake of criticism of India in the US Congress for its growing energy and other economic ties with Iran, which has been accused of secretly trying to build nuclear weapons under cover of a civilian energy program.

Indian Foreign Minister Natwar Singh had angered US legislators over what they saw as anti-US remarks when he held talks in Tehran with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad last week.

Questioning India's motives, some US legislators warned that if New Delhi did not support any bid by Washington to refer Iran to the Security Council, the administration should freeze its landmark agreement to expand nuclear cooperation with India.

But Burns, who last visited India in June of this year, said he was reassured by what he had heard in New York this week.

"We've been told by the Indian government that in fact the position of the government is that it does not wish Iran to have a nuclear weapon, it does wish Iran to return to negotiations," said Burns on NDTV.

"These are positive comments and as long as we can be working together on this issue then I can think we can convince the Congress of the United States that we ought to go forward with the civil nuclear cooperation deal."

The nuclear pact, which can only be implemented after Congress amends certain US laws, is part of a bold strategic partnership announced by President George W. Bush after talks with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in July.

The US and European powers have warned they will push for Iran's nuclear case to be sent to the Security Council -- which could impose sanctions -- if Tehran does not halt all nuclear fuel work and resume negotiations with the European Union.

Bush expressed concern over Iran's nuclear program in talks with Singh and Chinese Presidentu Jintao this week.


-------- iran

Iran may offer to open its nuclear activities

9/16/2005 12:32 PM (AP)
	
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2005-09-16-un-nuclear_x.htm
	
VIENNA � Iran may offer to put its nuclear activities under broader international supervision when its president addresses the U.N. General Assembly this weekend, European officials and diplomats said Friday.

Speaking to The Associated Press a day before Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's scheduled speech, the officials were guarded about the chances that Ahmadinejad might announce a new freeze on uranium conversion just weeks after Tehran resumed the practice � and sparked the present crisis over its atomic program.

Divulging some details of a closed meeting Thursday on the sidelines of the U.N. summit in New York, the officials and diplomats said members of the Iranian president's team told the foreign ministers of Britain, France and Germany that Tehran's right to develop and apply the nuclear cycle was not up for debate. Uranium conversion, a precursor to uranium enrichment, is part of that cycle.

All those agreeing to discuss the topic demanded anonymity because of the confidentiality of the meeting.

Iran says it is interested in enrichment only to generate power, but the United States says Tehran wants to create weapons-grade uranium as part of a nuclear arms program � an accusation repeated Friday by the spokesman for the U.S. mission in Vienna.

"Iran has used its nuclear program as a cover and pretext for efforts to acquire nuclear weapons capability," said Matthew Boland of the mission, which deals with the International Atomic Energy Agency and Iran's nuclear dossier.

Washington has been a key force in trying to marshal enough support at Monday's board meeting of the Vienna-based IAEA for referring Iran to the U.N. Security Council, which could consider sanctions. Boland said "the board must live up to its obligations" and ask for council involvement unless Iran stops its "provocative (nuclear) activities."

Momentum for Security Council action grew after Tehran last month rejected economic and other incentives offered by Britain, France and Germany � negotiating on behalf of the EU � and resumed uranium conversion. The Europeans say Tehran broke its word by unilaterally restarting that activity while still discussing ways to reduce international suspicions about its nuclear agenda.

But the U.S.-European effort for Security Council involvement has run into trouble due to stubborn resistance from council members Russia and China, as well as by India, Pakistan and other key nations.

Diplomats and European officials said the Security Council option formally remained, but an idea was gaining favor of giving Iran a deadline of several weeks to comply with international demands meant to reduce suspicions about its nuclear activities.

British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw also said after the New York meetings with the Iranians that the previous offers "are still on the table."

"We're going to listen carefully" to Ahmadinejad's comments Saturday to the General Assembly, "and make an assessment from there" on what action to pursue at the IAEA board meeting, he said.

Ahmadinejad said Thursday his country was willing to offer nuclear technology to other Muslim states, Iran's state-run Islamic Republic News Agency reported. At the United Nations for a summit of leaders, Ahmadinejad also repeated promises that Iran would not develop nuclear weapons, the report said.

France has no objection to Iran's proposal to provide nuclear technology to other Muslim states, as long as it respects the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, Foreign Ministry spokesman Denis Simonneau said.

Respecting the international treaty is "paramount," Simonneau said.

The State Department expressed concern about Ahmadinejad's proposal.

----

U.S. Agenda on Iran Lacking Key Support
Push to Curb Nuclear Program Set Back

By Dafna Linzer and Colum Lynch
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, September 16, 2005; A26

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/15/AR2005091502465_pf.html

UNITED NATIONS, Sept. 15 -- Despite an intense lobbying effort at the most senior levels, the Bush administration failed to persuade three key countries Thursday to back the United States in pressuring Iran to give up sensitive aspects of its nuclear energy program, diplomats and officials said.

Russia, China and India either publicly or privately turned down U.S. requests to help report Iran's case next week to the U.N. Security Council, which has the authority to impose economic sanctions or an oil embargo.

The administration has the reluctant support of the European Union for the first time in more than two years, but that will not be enough. Without backing from one of the three others, U.S. officials indicated they were preparing to abandon, for now, a quest to move the matter into the council.

The decision left the administration scrambling for a Plan B, and U.S. and European diplomats said there were backroom negotiations, on the margins of a U.N. summit in New York, to forge a compromise among countries with influence on the board of the International Atomic Energy Agency. Some officials said they were considering the possibility of an IAEA resolution that would set a concrete deadline for Iran to comply with a series of measures. If Iran failed, the IAEA board would automatically take the matter to the Security Council.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who met with Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on Thursday and will meet with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov on Friday, acknowledged that Washington might lack a convincing majority if the IAEA votes on whether to refer Iran's case to the council when it meets Monday in Vienna.

"If we get a referralon September 19, that will be good, but I think the issue of a referral is something that we'll be working for a while," Rice told Fox News. "I'm not so concerned about exactly when it happens, because I don't think this matter is so urgent that it has to be on September 19," she said.

Her comments were the strongest public indication yet that the administration was reversing course after expressing confidence, as recently as last week, that it was closer than at any time in the past to taking the matter to the Security Council. U.S. and foreign diplomats said India, which recently forged a major new security and nuclear alliance with the United States, could not be persuaded to join the U.S. strategy. India, which has close economic, political and cultural ties to Iran, has said it supports Iran's right to a nuclear energy program.

India's position, which U.S. officials have said they had not anticipated, has been deeply embarrassing for the White House at a time when it is trying to win congressional support for the India deal. Some officials, who would discuss the diplomatic calculations underway only on condition of anonymity, said the administration preferred to give up the chance of winning a slim majority in the IAEA next week rather than seek a vote that India would publicly oppose.

Iran insists its nuclear efforts are aimed at producing nuclear energy, not bombs. The Bush administration has said that the energy program, built in secret over 18 years and exposed in 2002, is just a cover for a weapons program. Iran has built facilities to enrich uranium to fuel its energy program. But the facilities could produce bomb-grade uranium, and the Bush administration wants the Iranians to give them up.

While many countries appear to share U.S. suspicions about Iran's intentions, they have profound differences with the Bush administration over how to respond, and are apprehensive about the goals of a U.S. president who has said that "all options are on the table" in dealing with Tehran.

Undersecretary of State R. Nicholas Burns said the differences were tactical, rather than strategic, and that efforts were underway to "convince the Iranians to return to the talks" they started with the Europeans in the fall of 2003.

Iran bolted the talks in August after receiving European proposals that would have required Tehran to permanently give upmuch of the nuclear energy program it has already built. Burns said he would devote the next several days to working with the Russians on the Iran issue.

Even the Europeans, frustrated after two tumultuous years of negotiations with Iran over the future of its nuclear program, said they prefer to avoid going to the Security Council.

"Our aim all the way through in this when we started these negotiations was to keep the matter out of the Security Council," British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw told reporters after a half-hour meeting Thursday with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. "What we're going to do is to listen carefully to what [Ahmadinejad] is going to say on Saturday afternoon and we'll take it from there."

Ahmadinejad, who has been holding his own round of talks with world leaders attending the U.N. summit, met with Straw and the French and German foreign ministers. The European ministers held an earlier 90-minute meeting with Iran's foreign minister and Ahmadinejad's national security adviser.

The newly elected hard-line Iranian president has little foreign policy experience. But he told reporters Thursday he plans to present new proposals to resolve the impasse when he addresses the conference Saturday. He said Iran's aims are peaceful and that "any improper use of production for nuclear arms should be prevented."

----

Iranian signals a bid to clear talks logjam

By Steven R. Weisman The New York Times
FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 2005

http://iht.com/bin/print_ipub.php?file=/articles/2005/09/15/news/iran.php

NEW YORK President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran said Thursday that his country would present "new proposals" shortly to break the impasse with the United States and leading nations of Europe over Tehran's nuclear programs, but he provided no details and insisted that Iran must continue to possess a nuclear energy capability.
 
"We believe that atomic energy is a blessing given by God," Ahmadinejad said at a breakfast meeting with editors, reporters and television interviewers. "It's an opportunity. It is a clean energy. It is a healthy energy."
 
He added that Iran needed nuclear energy because it could not rely forever on its oil resources.
 
Wearing a tan windbreaker and an open shirt collar, Ahmadinejad appeared relaxed and joking at a large table at the Hotel Intercontinental at what amounted to his first meeting with the American media since arriving in New York City.
 
He was in town for the United Nations General Assembly, where diplomats said that the foreign ministers of Britain, France and Germany would meet their Iranian counterpart later Thursday to try to resolve the impasse over Iran's nuclear program.
 
Asked repeatedly whether Iran had not discredited itself by its failure to disclose past nuclear activities, raising suspicions from inspectors and other experts, Ahmadinejad said that Iran did not have nuclear weapons and that "there is absolutely no proof of a violation on the part of Iran" of its pledge to keep its nuclear program peaceful.
 
He was referring to a succession of reports by the International Atomic Energy Agency.
 
Those reports cite Iran's lack of cooperation in disclosing all its programs but also note that inspectors had no proof of a nuclear weapons program itself. Ahmadinejad displayed impatience over what he said was the difficulty in disproving an unfounded allegation.
 
"Usually you cannot prove that sort of thing," he said. "How can you prove that you are not a bad person?"
 
Europeans, India and several other countries are trying to get Iran to resume its suspension of uranium activities, which it abandoned last month. Asked whether he would consider such a step as a gesture, Ahmadinejad avoided answering, neither ruling it in nor out.
 
Ahmadinejad gave a brief speech at the United Nations on Wednesday, and another is planned for Saturday at which Ahmadinejad is expected to outline some sort of initiative in Iran's negotiations with Britain, France, Germany and the European Union over its suspected nuclear arms program.
 
As part of those talks, Iran had suspended certain uranium conversion activities, which the West believes are a precursor to making a weapon, but then resumed the uranium conversion last month, labeling as inadequate the European offer of economic benefits in return for a full cessation of uranium activities.
 
Western diplomats, saying they can only speculate, have been saying for several days that they expected a new set of proposals from Ahmadinejad but that they did not expect anything different or new. Iran, for example, has called on the Europeans to broaden the talks to include Muslim nations in the region also interested in nuclear energy issues.
 
European and American officials have rejected that idea outright and have also been cool to other proposals, such as one from South Africa, that Iran be allowed to produce nuclear fuel but send it to another country for enrichment to a higher level.
 
Elected to the presidency in an upset last June after serving as mayor of Tehran, Ahmadinejad has traveled little outside his country, if at all, but said he harbored great admiration for the American people, American diversity and its great natural resources.
 
"The capabilities of America can be beneficial for all other nations," he said.
 
In a clear dig at American pretensions, however, he expressed surprise that the American response to Hurricane Katrina stumbled in its initial days.
 
"We expected more," he said.
 
On his nuclear program, Ahmadinejad said Iran would continue to work with the International Atomic Energy Agency in allowing inspections, and he said Iran would observe a rule requiring it to give 180 days' notice if it processed uranium to the next step, which would be enrichment, requiring the use of centrifuges.
 
At present Iran is converting raw uranium in a form known as yellowcake into a gas, for later possible enrichment.
 
Ahmadinejad seemed comfortable with some of the technical details but on the ins and outs of the chapters in international agreements, he turned to Iran's new chief negotiator, Ali Larijani.
 
Overall, Ahmadinejad accused the West of double standards, wanting nuclear power for Western countries but not Iran.
 
"There is some kind of inequality and injustice being created," he said.
 
Anyone asking Iran to take conciliatory steps, like suspending its uranium conversion, should recognize that this work was legal under international agreements, he said.
 
On other subjects, Ahmadinejad said that Iranians would have close ties with their neighbors, the Iraqis, but that the roots of the current insurgency lay in the American military presence.
 
"Insecurity and the control of the occupation are linked to one another," he said. "After all, Iran is an occupied country."
 
As he has before, Ahmadinejad also denied that he anything to do with the Iranian seizure of the American Embassy and the holding of hostages for 444 days ending in early 1981.
 
"This is an allegation that has absolutely no basis," he said, adding that it was similar to allegations that Iran had a nuclear weapons program when there was no evidence to support it.

----

EU pins hope on Iranian President's UN speech

Sept 16, 2005 IRNA

http://www.payvand.com/news/05/sep/1140.html

London -The EU is pinning hope of reaching a compromise on Iran's nuclear programme on proposals which Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is expected to make in his speech to the UN General Assembly on Saturday.

After a meeting with Ahmadinejad chaired by UN Secretary Seneral Kofi Annan in New York Thursday, British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said the EEI would make an assessment of the proposals.

"What we're going to do is to listen carefully to what the president is going to say on Saturday afternoon and we'll take it from there," Straw said.

A British Foreign Office spokesman in London said that after the speech, the EU would be consulting with its international partners to see where to go from there." According to the Financial Times Friday, Iran is to propose international joint ventures in its nuclear programme as a means of providing an `objective guarantee' that it will not be diverted for military use.

"Iran will suggest international cooperation for uranium enrichment and invite Europe, Russia, China and South Africa to joint venture in which Iran keeps its nuclear fuel cycle," spokesman for Iran's Supreme National Security Council, Ali Agha-Mohammadi, was quoted as saying.

The apparent change in tact of not preferring to refer Iran's nuclear programme to the UN Security Council follows reports that the EU and US had failed to muster a majority among IAEA board members for such action.

It also comes after Straw cancelled a planned speech at the last minute on `Why Iran Matter' at the International Institute for Strategic Affairs on Tuesday in which he had been expected to repeat Britain's call for the case to go to the UN.

The Times newspaper Friday reported that the idea of the French, German and British foreign ministers holding talks with the Iranian president at the UN was suggested by Straw during a lunch with the UN Secretary General in London last weekend.

The meeting was said to have been later confirmed by Annan and led to the British Foreign Secretary flying one day earlier to the UN on Wednesday so the talks with Ahmadinejad could take place before the German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer returned home.

After the meeting French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy, also reiterated that "what happens at the IAEA is directly linked to what Mr Ahmadinejad says on Saturday." More directly, Fischer was quoted as saying that the EU must be realistic and focus on the new proposals and examine carefully what is the impact and in which direction we can move.

Ahmadinejad rules out comments by violators of safeguards

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Thursday that countries violating nuclear safeguards are not competent to comment on other states' peaceful nuclear program.

In an interview on the sidelines of the UN summit, Ahmadinejad said disarmament and non-proliferation of nuclear weapons are the most important chapters of the Non- Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

"A country, which possesses the biggest nuclear arsenal, embarks on proliferation of nuclear weapons in defiance of the safeguards and threatens to use them against others, is not competent to comment on peaceful use of nuclear know-how by other states." In a meeting with several American chief editors and directors of the highly circulated newspapers and news and TV channels, he stressed that instead of raising any claims, such a country should be brought under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and be accountable for its conducts and measures.

"The present era marks the era of awakening of public opinion and the implementation of the will and wishes of nations. The era of bullying and resorting to force is passing away because it is the resolve of nations that has the last say."

He ruled out opining by a few countries on behalf of the international community, saying, "The world has not allowed anybody to speak on behalf of the world nations.

"Therefore, the countries assigning other states should know that such an approach worldwide will not guarantee a lasting order." Ahmadinejad said those who have used shells contaminated with depleted uranium in Iraq should be accountable for their move, saying the shells were used against Iraqi people and even the occupying forces were not immune of their adverse impacts.

"Had former Iraqi ruler Saddam Hussein been the main target, they could have stopped supporting him and let Iraqi nation decide about him and their own future," added Ahmadinejad.

Asked about possibility of Iran's using fossil fuel reserves, he said all scientists and pundits know well that fossil fuel reserves are depleting and the US, despite having giant fossil fuel reserves, has made considerable amount of investment in the nuclear energy field.

"If countries are to be forced to use a special kind of product, in that case many restrictions should be imposed on the US," said the president.

He said that as a developing state, Iran should speedily increase its investment in different energy related sectors and undoubtedly, it will benefit from its legal and natural right and will not miss the chance to use nuclear energy, which is a clean source of energy.

He dismissed as "unreasonable and unacceptable" the dual approach which considers the use of nuclear energy "good" for some states and "bad" for certain other states.

Turning to the developments in Iraq, Ahmadinejad said that based on the international relations laws, Iraq's occupiers are responsible for the country's security.

"It seems that insecurity in Iraq has provided a pretext for continued occupation of the country but experience has proved that presence of occupiers is in contradiction with the interests of the country's people," said the Iranian president.

He stressed that the Islamic Republic of Iran is sensitive towards the developments in Iraq.

"Strong emotional and cultural affinities between the Iranian nation and the Iraqi people from different walks of life, including Kurds, Turkmens, Shiites and Sunnis, prompt Tehran to be sensitive towards Iraqi issues.

"Iran supports Iraqi people's right to decide their own fate and takes security in its neighboring country as its own."

He said the bullying of those possessing nuclear weapons worldwide have made the world insecure. "Where will the world lead to with this model of domination, intimidation and threat and use of a literature of supremacy," he asked.

Ahmadinejad said the UN Security Council is a haven to promote peace worldwide not a place to threaten and intimidate people.

"When the Security Council turns into a tool to threaten the rights of nations, it will surely lose its efficiency and the adverse impacts of such relations will affect the whole world," said the president.

"The military, economic and media supremacy of a country would not reserve any rights for it and such a country cannot demand any rights beyond what the international regulations have officially recognized for it. Therefore, the US should stop dealing with the world from a position of supremacy."

In another part of the interview, Ahmadinejad said love, affection and kindness towards human beings would guarantee lasting peace and security worldwide.

"We should love human beings to move towards goodness and virtues. If we do not like human beings, we will not be contented with anything less than genocide, tyranny and development of weapons of mass destruction," he said.

Ahmadinejad said if the US administration wants lasting and durable peace and security, it should change its approach towards nations, the approach which is based on supremacy and humiliation, and instead stand beside nations and love them. 

----

US decries Iran's offer to share nuclear know-how

Associated press, THE JERUSALEM POST Sep. 16, 2005

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/Printer&cid=1126750772026&p=1078113566627

Reported comments by Iran's president that his government was willing to give nuclear technology to Islamic countries make it more vital that other countries work in concert to stop the Iranian threat, the State Department said Thursday.

Based on Iran's record of "trying to develop weapons of mass destruction, supporting terror," spokesman Adam Ereli said, "we view with concern any suggestion that Iran would seek to contribute to very destabilizing and unhelpful international behavior."

Ereli said he had not seen President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's precise comments after a meeting at the United Nations on Thursday with Turkey's prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

Iran's state-run Islamic Republic News Agency reported that Ahmadinejad repeated promises that Iran will not try to obtain nuclear weapons, then added: "Iran is ready to transfer nuclear know-how to the Islamic countries due to their need."

Reports left unclear whether that had been a subject of Ahmadinejad's meeting with Erdogan, whose country is a Muslim democracy, a member of NATO and a prospective member of the European Union. Members of the Turkish mission at the United Nations said they did not know.

Ereli said the United States and its international partners are working "resolutely and with common cause to prevent Iran from developing the kind of capabilities that would prove so destabilizing for the region and for the world as a whole."

Considering that, he said, "remarks or reported remarks such as this I think just serve to underscore the importance and the urgency of acting together to confront this threat."

----

CHRONOLOGY-Iran's nuclear programme

Fri 16 Sep 2005 5:12 AM ET (Reuters)

http://today.reuters.com/News/CrisesArticle.aspx?storyId=L16226609

Sept 16 - The International Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA) board of governors begins meeting on Monday, and the United States and European Union may press for Iran to be referred to the U.N. Security Council for possible sanctions.

British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said the EU hoped to avoid referring Iran's nuclear programme to the Council, but the next step would depend on proposals to be made by the new Iranian president on Saturday.

Here are some major events since the nuclear programme first came to light:

Aug. 2002 - An exiled opposition group the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) says there is a massive uranium enrichment facility at Natanz and a heavy water plant at Arak.

Dec. 2002 - With the help of satellite photos of Natanz and Arak, the United States accuses Iran of "across-the-board pursuit of weapons of mass destruction".

Feb. 2003 - International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) chief Mohamed ElBaradei and his team inspect Natanz and Arak.

June 2003 - IAEA issues first report after the inspection, saying Tehran has failed to comply with its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

July 2003 - Diplomats tell Reuters the IAEA has found traces of weapons-grade highly-enriched uranium (HEU) at Natanz.

Sept. 2003 - IAEA finds weapons-grade HEU traces at a second site in Iran, the Kalaye Electric Company.

Oct. 2003 - Iran tells French, British and German foreign ministers negotiating for the European Union -- the so-called EU3 -- it will suspend all enrichment-related activities.

Dec. 2003 - Iran signs protocol allowing snap inspections of its nuclear facilities.

March 2004 - IAEA board "deplores" Iran's omissions of key atomic technology from its October declaration.

June 2004 - IAEA board says Iran's cooperation with the agency was not full, timely and proactive. In retaliation, Iran says it is resuming production and testing of centrifuges, which can be used to enrich uranium.

Sept. 2004 - IAEA asks Iran to suspend uranium enrichment programme immediately.

Nov. 2004 - Iran promises France, Britain and Germany it will suspend all nuclear fuel processing and reprocessing work.

Jan. 2005 - Iran agrees to allow U.N. inspections of military site where Washington believes work linked to bomb-making.

Feb. 2005 - President Mohammed Khatami says no Iranian government, present or future, will give up nuclear technology programmes, including uranium enrichment. Iran signs a nuclear fuel supply deal with Russia, opposed by the United States, to start its first atomic power plant by 2006.

May 2005 - Iran agrees at a meeting with the EU in Geneva to hold off on plans to restart the Isfahan uranium processing plant for two months after EU warnings it would be referred to the U.N. Security Council.

July 2005 - Khatami says Iran will resume some key work on its nuclear fuel cycle regardless of what the Europeans propose.

Aug. 5, 2005 - The EU presents Iran with proposals on economic and political cooperation and insists Tehran give up nuclear fuel work. Iran rejects the offer.

Aug. 9, 2005 - The IAEA meets in crisis to try to stop Iran pursuing a nuclear programme a day after Tehran resumed work at a less sensitive area of the Isfahan uranium plant.

Aug. 10, 2005 - Iran breaks U.N. seals at its Isfahan uranium conversion plant, breaching the suspension of sensitive nuclear work agreed with the EU3 in November.

Aug. 11, 2005 - IAEA board unanimously passes resolution calling on Iran to resume the suspension agreed with the EU3.

Sept. 2, 2005 - A report by IAEA chief ElBaradei confirms Iran restarted uranium conversion at Isfahan and says the IAEA is "still not in a position to conclude that there are no undeclared nuclear materials or activities in Iran".

Sept. 14 - France's prime minister says the EU3 are determined to refer Iran to the U.N. Security Council unless it resumes a full suspension of sensitive nuclear work, including Isfahan, despite IAEA's misgivings about a U.N. referral.

Sept. 15 - Iran's new President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says in New York that Tehran is ready to transfer nuclear know-how to other Islamic countries. (Compiled by Francois Murphy in Vienna)


-------- japan

Japanese set to direct 'sun-power' nuclear reactor in France

PARIS (AFP) Sep 16, 2005

http://www.spacewar.com/2005/050916180503.32b0ewaz.html

Japan has been asked to nominate the chief of an international project to build a multi-billion-dollar nuclear fusion reactor in southern France, the project's six partners said in a statement Friday.

Negotiators from the European Union, the United States, Russia, Japan, South Korea and China said after a meeting on Monday at Cadarache, the proposed site for the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER), that they also wanted construction to start as soon as possible, the communique said.

"In particular, the delegations expressed the wish to see Japan identify suitably qualified candidate(s) to be designated as nominee director-general," the statement said.

A Japanese physicist, Yasuo Shimomura, is the interim leader of the ITER project team.

After years of wrangling, Cadarache was chosen over Japan's Rokkasho-mura on June 28 as the site for the reactor, designed to emulate the power of the sun, after Tokyo withdrew its bid to host the 10-billion-euro (12-billion-dollar), 30-year project.

As a trade-off, the EU promised Japan 20 percent of staff posts and construction contracts, and the director-general's office.

Nuclear fusion produces no greenhouse gas emissions and much lower quantities of radioactive waste than conventional fission reactors.

Monday's meeting, the 10th involving official negotiators, also discussed the structure of the ITER organisation, staffing, resources and risk management, the statement said.

"Negotiators agreed that substantial progress was made on all topics and looked forward to an early completion of the negotiations," the statement said.

Delegates also had an informal meeting with an Indian group which expressed India's interest in joining ITER and agreed to send a fact-finding mission to the southeast Asian country.

"In a separate meeting, the ITER delegates had an informal exchange with a delegation from India on India's interest in the possibility of participating in ITER," the statement said.

"It was subsequently agreed that, without any further commitment, an exploratory fact-finding mission would visit India to follow up this exchange for future consideration by the ITER delegations," it added.

Three meetings between ITER negotiators have been pencilled in between September and December 2005 to finalise the choice of director-general and to draft the agreement establishing the ITER organisation.

Environmentalist groups were dismayed when Cadarache was chosen as the site for the experimental reactor, with Greenpeace International blasting the project as "a dangerous toy which will never deliver any useful energy."

The ITER centre is to be built beside the existing Cadarache nuclear research park, 70 kilometres (40 miles) inland from the Mediterranean port of Marseilles.

Established in 1959 by president Charles de Gaulle, the centre has helped develop three generations of nuclear reactors and includes six low-capacity experimental reactors and a 17-year-old nuclear fusion laboratory.

France has invested heavily in nuclear power generation, with 58 reactors supplying 80 percent of the country's energy needs.


-------- korea

N. Korea says will accept nuclear energy inspections

Fri 16 Sep 2005 7:28 AM ET (Reuters)

http://today.reuters.com/News/CrisesArticle.aspx?storyId=PEK40547

BEIJING, Sept 16 - North Korea stood firm on its demand for nuclear energy on Friday, but said it would accept joint management and inspections of a light-water reactor.

The statement offered a sign of leeway at six-country talks in Beijing on North Korea's nuclear programme, which have seen Pyongyang and Washington at odds over the North's insistence on its right to atomic energy.

"Light-water reactor is a measure of trust between the U.S. and North Korea," a North Korean official told reporters.

"But in order to dispel U.S. concerns in the provisions of a light-water reactor, we said we would leave its operation to joint management and will also accept inspections. So our demand is not unreasonable," he said.

But North Korea also tempered its offer with a threat, saying it would go its own way if no compromise could be found.

"If the U.S. continues to insist that is will not give us a light-water reactor, which is a measure of trust, then we have no choice but to continue our own way for our own peaceful nuclear activities," the official said.

----

DPRK says to continue peaceful nuclear program

(Xinhuanet) 2005-09-16 22:48:13

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2005-09/16/content_3501033.htm

    BEIJING, Sept. 16 -- The Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) will continue to pursue peaceful nuclear program in its own way whether the United States would provide it with a light-water reactor or not, said spokesman for the DPRK delegation Hyun Hak Bong Friday.

    He said at a press briefing Friday evening that the DPRK has offered to accept joint management of the light-water nuclear reactor once it is built for the sake of building mutual trust and taking into consideration the concerns of the United States.

    The DPRK's position in the six-party talks is that it will "completely give up" its nuclear weapons on the condition that DPRK-US ties are normalized, mutual trust is established and the DPRK is free from US nuclear threat, he said.

    He said according to the 1994 Agreed Framework between the two sides, the United States offers the DPRK light-water reactors, while the DPRK freezes its nuclear programs.

    "However, the Bush Administration abandoned the agreement and listed the DPRK as part of 'an axis of evil' and a target of its preemptive actions." he said. Under such circumstances, the DPRK opted to withdraw from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) for defending itself, he added.

    The spokesman said the DPRK has demonstrated its sincerity by taking part in the six-way nuclear talks and clarifying the target of Korean Peninsula denuclearization.

    "However, the United States demanded that the DPRK disarm and give up its nuclear deterrence for self-defensive purpose at first, which the DPRK can never accept," he said.

    The six parties, China, the DPRK, the United States, the Republic of Korea, Russia and Japan, reopened the fourth round of talks in the Chinese capital Tuesday after a five-week recess.

    Chief Russian negotiator Alexander Alexeyev said Friday afternoon a joint document may come out Saturday from the on-going six-party talks.


-------- russia

Nuclear Disputes to Top Bush-Putin Meeting

By ANNE GEARAN, AP Diplomatic Writer Fri Sep 16, 2005 12:29 PM ET

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050916/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_putin_4

WASHINGTON - President Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin agree on how the world should confront the development of nuclear weapons in North Korea, a member of Bush's "axis of evil."

They disagree over how to address Iran's nuclear ambitions and have long-running differences over the U.S. led invasion of Iraq. Bush's famous list of international outlaws included those nations, too.

Bush was expected to argue at his meeting with Putin on Friday that Iran deserves to be summoned to the U.N. Security Council to account for what the U.S. contends is a record of nuclear deceit.

Putin has grievances over what Russia views as U.S. slights and double standards in its support for democracy movements on former Soviet turf. In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, the Russian leader was getting a view of the U.S. in a vulnerable moment.

Putin was quoted soon after the flooding in New Orleans as saying he could not believe the images he saw came from the powerful United States.

At their first meeting in months, Bush and Putin also were expected to raise their differences over whether there is creep toward authoritarian rule in Russia and discuss Putin's current leadership of the Group of Eight industrial nations.

Bush and Putin call one another friend. Their bond was forged largely after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, when Russia delivered help in the fight against terrorism.

The political relationship has frayed with each passing year. Nuclear nonproliferation, however, has proved an area of considerable cooperation.

On North Korea, the U.S. and Russia are among five nations negotiating in unison to persuade the communist North to give up its declared nuclear weapons in return for energy and security guarantees.

The current round of talks has come to a standstill in Beijing. U.S. and Russian diplomats agree that North Korea cannot be trusted with the civilian nuclear power plant it seeks.

The story is different on Iran, which says its nuclear program is solely for peaceful energy production. Russia is helping Iran develop nuclear energy, and the Russian Foreign Ministry recently said it sees no basis for referring Tehran to the Security Council.

When the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency meets next week, it could vote to send Iran's case to the Security Council for possible penalties. The International Atomic Energy Agency could put off a vote, despite the Bush administration's preference for a quick referral.

Bush's hand may have been strengthened by statements from Iran's president on Thursday.

Iran's state-run news agency said President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, in New York to attend the U.N. world summit, said his country is willing to provide other Islamic nations with nuclear technology.

The European Union has taken the lead in trying to persuade Iran to halt development of nuclear activities that could be used to make weapons. In exchange, Iran would win economic concessions.

If the case does end up before the Security Council, Russian cooperation could be critical. As a permanent member of the Security Council, Russia could veto any resolution punishing Iran or could abstain.

China also could veto any possible punishment. The White House acknowledged Wednesday that Bush was unable to get a commitment on Iran during his meeting with Chinese President Hu Jintao.

Iran has said it does not fear the Security Council.

The United States does not have diplomatic relations with Iran and must apply pressure through international organizations or allies with political and economic ties to Tehran.

State Department spokesman Adam Ereli tried to play up a bright spot in U.S.-Russian dealings over Iran on Thursday. Russia has agreed to impose controls on its joint nuclear operations with Iran that will keep nuclear fuel out of direct control by the Iranians.

"I think that's very clear evidence of the concern that Russia has about Iranian activities and the measures that they are prepared to take in response to those concerns," Ereli said.

Ahmadinejad is expected to make new proposals by the weekend at the U.N. summit in hopes of defusing the nuclear standoff.


-------- security

3 illegals arrested at nuclear station

By Jerry Seper
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
September 16, 2005

http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20050915-112917-3277r.htm

Three illegal aliens were arrested by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents this week when they reported for work as outside contractors at a secure area of a Nebraska nuclear power station.

    ICE spokesman Dean Boyd yesterday said the men, all Mexican nationals, had been hired by an independent contractor to perform maintenance work at the Omaha Public Power District's Fort Calhoun Nuclear Station.

    As they attempted to enter a secure area of the plant, Mr. Boyd said, the men presented identification documents that raised the suspicions of Omaha Public Power District employees. They, in turn, contacted ICE agents for assistance. The men were arrested after agents determined they were in the United States illegally.

    Mr. Boyd said all three have been placed in immigration removal proceedings, adding that the arrests occurred Tuesday but were made public yesterday. He said ICE is investigating the circumstances under which the private contractor hired the aliens, but that the agency determined the men were not engaged in terrorist activity.

    "America's security depends on controlling access to sensitive facilities like nuclear power plants," said ICE Agent Michael Ward, who heads the agency's Omaha office. "ICE works closely with these industries across the nation to identify vulnerabilities that pose a potential security threat, then we aggressively act to remove that threat.

    "In this case, the system worked exactly the way it was supposed to because the nuclear plant detected the illegal aliens before they could enter."

    The arrests were the latest in a series of ICE apprehensions of illegal aliens performing contract work at nuclear plants and other nuclear-related facilities.

    In March, agents arrested an illegal alien who was performing contract pipe insulation work at the Duane Arnold Energy Center Nuclear Power Plant in Palo, Iowa. A federal grand jury later indicted him on charges of using and possessing fraudulent documents, as well as making false statements to federal agents.

    During a two-week period in March, ICE agents arrested six illegal aliens doing contract maintenance work at the Crystal River Nuclear Power Plant in Citrus, Fla. One of the illegal aliens was indicted on criminal charges of re-entering the country after deportation, while the others have been placed in immigration removal proceedings.

    In November, ICE agents arrested 44 illegal aliens at the Marley Cooling Technologies factory in Olathe, Kan., where cooling towers for nuclear plants are manufactured. The aliens used fraudulent documents and made false statements to gain employment.

    Mr. Boyd said the ongoing arrests are part of "Operation Glow Worm," a joint law-enforcement initiative begun by ICE and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission after the September 11 attacks to screen workers at the nation's 104 nuclear power plants.

    Numerous unauthorized workers have been arrested and warning notices issued to those employing unauthorized workers, he said. 


-------- terrorism

ARMENIA SIGNED INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION ON ELIMINATION OF NUCLEAR TERRORISM

16.09.2005 06:07 /PanARMENIAN.Net/ 

http://www.panarmenian.net/news/eng/?task=society&id=14644&date=2005-09-16

On September 15 during a special event titled �Focus 2005 � response to global challenges� dedicated to international treaties and held within the framework of the 60-th Session UN General Assembly Armenian Prime Minister Andranik Margaryan signed the International Convention on Elimination of Nuclear Terrorism. Proceeding from the principles of peace and security, friendly relations between the states and development of cooperation, acknowledging the right of states to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes and being concerned of the boom of terrorism the member-states solemnly condemned terrorism of any kind. 


-------- u.s. nuc facilities

Lab strengthens hardest metal

By Betsy Mason
CONTRA COSTA TIMES
Posted on Fri, Sep. 16, 2005

http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cctimes/12661125.htm

Harder is better, at least when it comes to metals, and Lawrence Livermore Laboratory scientists have discovered a way to make the hardest metals even harder.

The breakthrough could have applications for everything from armored vehicles to shielding for spacecraft and nuclear fusion experiments at the lab's National Ignition Facility.

"We've only just scratched the surface of how hard a material you can create," said Livermore laser physicist Bruce Remington.

Metals are made up of tiny "grains" that fit together like a geometric puzzle. Until recently, the pursuit of harder metals involved making those grains smaller and smaller. The strongest metals are nanocrystalline, which means their grains are smaller than a tenth of the thickness of a human hair.

At a certain point, however, smaller grains stop yielding stronger metals. Computer simulations suggest this is because extremely small grains can slide past each other as the metal is deformed, making it softer.

"It's like sand," Remington said. "When you step on sand, even though sand is solid, your feet penetrate and sink down through."

When metals with larger grains are deformed, defects are created within the grains that make the metal stronger. But for metals with exceedingly small grains, it becomes easier to deform by sliding grains past each other.

"To see even stronger materials, we have to somehow suppress this sliding mechanism," said Livermore materials scientist Yinmin Wang.

Using computer simulations, Lawrence Livermore team members, led by materials scientist Eduardo Bringa, found that by sending a high-pressure shock wave though nanocrystalline copper, they could stop the tiny grains from sliding and create the strengthening defects within the grains instead.

"It's a rather neat finding," Remington said. "We didn't expect to see that."

To test the simulations, Bringa's team took advantage of Livermore's world-class stable of powerful lasers. Using the lab's Janus laser, the team hit nanocrystalline nickel with a laser beam strong enough to vaporize the surface of the metal. As the surface heats up, expands and boils off in an instant, it creates a blast similar to rocket exhaust that sends a high-pressure shock wave through the metal.

The pressure from the shock wave kept the grains from sliding and defects formed instead, making the metal extremely hard.

The team is the first to do this kind of shock wave experiment in the real world instead of in a computer simulation. The study appears today in the journal Science.

"We are always looking for harder materials," said UC San Diego materials scientist Mark Meyers. "Their work is state of the art."

It is difficult to predict what these super hard metals will be used for, but Remington envisions shields for spacecraft that will withstand space debris impacts, armor for military vehicles that is even harder to penetrate and stronger frames for automobiles.

The super strong metals could also be used to make targets for the lab's National Ignition Facility that would need to contain a nuclear fusion reaction.

Betsy Mason covers science and the national laboratories. Reach her at 925-847-2158 or bmason@cctimes.com.

----

The U.S. Army built the first floating nuclear power plant in 1967.

From: "Muckerheide, James" <jimm@wpi.edu>
Date: Fri Sep 16, 2005 11:39pm

See under "1967" at: http://eia.doe.gov/cneaf/nuclear/page/nuc_reactors/superla.html

"The last nuclear power plant built by the U.S. Army was on a converted liberty ship, the USS Sturgis. The Department of Energy describes the Sturgis as follows: STURGIS Floating Nuclear Power Plant; Designation MH-1A, Location: Gatun Lake, Canal Zone; Principal nuclear contractor: Martin; Pressurized water reactor, Capacity: 10,000 net kW(e), Authorized 45,000 kW(t), Initial criticality, 1967; Shutdown (permanently), 1976. The vessel provided power to the Canal Zone. It was the first floating nuclear power plant and, for nearly three decades, appeared to be the last. In 2008 (described in the 2008 highlight), the Russians plan to bring on line the next floating nuclear power plant. More information on the Sturgis, is available from two sources: "MH-1A" First Nuclear Power Barge: Pioneer Barge Built in America" in the August 1996 issue of Atomic Insights and "Nuclear Power: An Option for the Army's Future," in the Army Almanac. In the latter source, there is a photo of the ship." (See: http://www.almc.army.mil/alog/issues/SepOct01/MS684.htm

See also: http://www.atomicinsights.com/aug96/MH-1A.html 


-------- california

NRC announces results of Humboldt Bay nuke rod investigation

James Faulk, 9/16/2005 04:27 AM  Eureka Times Standard

http://www.times-standard.com/portlet/article/html/fragments/print_article.jsp?article=3034950

EUREKA -- While maintaining Pacific Gas and Electric Co. did a thorough job in looking for its missing fuel rods and addressing the surrounding issues, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission announced at a public meeting Thursday that the company will face possible fines for the violations that led to their disappearance.

"As a result of our investigation, we identified three potential violations of our regulations and that will be the subject of escalated enforcement action," said Victor Dricks, public affairs officer with the NRC.

The company apologized for the missing fuel rods.

"We're here to tell you that we regret what happened," said Donna Jacobs, vice president of Nuclear Services with PG&E. "We apologize for the need to have this meeting tonight."

She said the company did not live up to its responsibilities in controlling and maintaining its special nuclear material.

In the fall of 2003, an inventory of a spent fuel pool at the Humboldt Bay Nuclear Power Plant led to the discovery of fuel fragments that were not accounted for in the company's records. That cast the company's records into doubt, said NRC Heath Physicist Emilio Garcia, and kicked off an internal investigation to find out where the fragments came from.

During that investigation, it was found that three 18-inch fuel rod segments that were supposed to be hanging from the wall of the pool were missing. A company investigation found that the rods were likely broken up but still in the pool, or that they had been shipped to a radioactive waste disposal site.

Commission staff said Thursday they essentially agreed with those findings, although Garcia said it's more likely that the material was shipped to a waste facility.

Theft is highly unlikely, he said, because detectors in the facility would have alerted employees that the rods were being moved; because moving the material without the proper protection would cause serious injury or death; and because moving the material with the proper protection would need cranes and other heavy equipment, as well as more than one person.

Such a "conspiracy" does not pass the "straight-face test," Garcia said.

PG&E was found by the commission to have violated three of its regulations.

"They failed to keep records that show the inventory, transfer or disposal of the three segments," said Dricks. "They failed to establish, maintain and follow adequate written material control and accounting procedures; and they failed to conduct an accurate physical inventory of all the spent nuclear material in their possession every 12 months."

The company has until Monday to respond to the NRC's findings.

"We're going to concur with the findings that we've talked about tonight," said Jacobs. "We agree with what's been found and we're taking corrective actions."

Roy Willis of the Humboldt Bay Nuclear Power Plant said insufficient training and procedures for the control and accountability of special nuclear material was one cause of the problem. Another was a lack of industry guidance and standards for control and accountability of fuel fragments.

There was guidance for larger fuel bundles, but little for segments of the size that are unaccounted for at the Humboldt Bay plant, he said.

The company has established a formal qualification system for plant personnel responsible for managing special nuclear material at the plant, he said. It's improved the programs and procedures for the control and accountability of the material, he said. And they've completed a detailed inventory of all the special nuclear material stored at the plant, he said.

Within 45 days of receiving the company's response, the NRC will announce the amount of any fine.

A nuclear power plant on the East Coast was fined more than $200,000 for a similar situation, Dricks said. 


-------- connecticut

Uranium rush hits West End
  
James Shea
Montrose, CO, Daily Press Writer, September 16, 2005

http://www.montrosepress.com/articles/2005/09/16/local_news/1.txt

Last month, President Bush signed the Energy Policy Act, revamping the nation's energy policy for the first time in more than a decade. Given the nation's dependence on foreign oil, many politicians and experts are looking for alternate energy sources.

"Nuclear power is another of America's most important sources of electricity," Bush said when he signed the bill. "Of all our nation's energy sources, only nuclear power plants can generate massive amounts of electricity without emitting an ounce of air pollution or greenhouse gases. And thanks to the advances in science and technology, nuclear plants are far safer than ever before. Yet America has not ordered a nuclear plant since the 1970s."

In the middle of the 20th century, Montrose County and the Uncompahgre Plateau were major sources of uranium, the fuel used to generate nuclear power. Overnight, towns such as Uravan and Nucla, capitalizing on the nuclear theme, sprang into existence.

The era was part of long line of boom and bust cycles in Colorado mining. By the 1980s, the uranium boom had become a bust. The price of uranium sank, and with it the hopes and dreams of hundreds of miners disappeared.

Over the last year, due to the increased price of uranium, a new chapter has begun on the plateau. Once-idle mines are now busy with activity, returning hope to the industry.

Drive for nuclear energy

In the United States, 20 percent of the electricity is created from nuclear power while in France, nearly 80 percent of electricity is generated from nuclear power.

"Nuclear energy is an extremely important source of electricity," said Stuart Sanderson, president of the Colorado Mining Association.

Sanderson said the United States must diversify its power generation, and like the president, he advocates nuclear energy as an energy source.

Until recently, nuclear power was not considered a reliable source of energy, partly because of perceived safety concerns. In 1979, an accident at the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant nearly released radiation, but a catastrophe was averted. Residents of the Ukraine were not so lucky. In 1986, a faulty design at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant and untrained personnel caused the release of radiation, resulting in the death of more than 40 people.

The perception about nuclear power has changed. Many countries in Asia and around the world have begun massive nuclear plant construction projects. China has nine nuclear reactors and plans to construct 18 additional plants. India has 14 nuclear power plants and wants to build 24 more.

"We have a slow rate of growth for nuclear power in our forecast," said Ron Hagen, an energy specialist in nuclear energy with the U. S. Department of Energy.

This drive toward nuclear power in the United States and around the world has caused uranium prices to increase dramatically. In 2001, the metal was trading at $9 per pound and now hovers near $30.

Hagen said nuclear power plants until recently have depended on a large stockpile of uranium, including converting nuclear weapons from the former Soviet Union and pillaging tailings from old uranium mines.

"It's an industry that depends on 50 percent inventory," Hagen said.

Sanderson said the worldwide demand for uranium is about 170 million pounds annually but only 100 to 103 million pounds are produced, heavily depleting the stockpiles.

"I don't think there is a question that there is a shortage," he said.

Looking at old sources

Hagen said Canada and Australia have been the major suppliers of uranium for years, because the mined ore is more pure than that on the Western Slope of Colorado, making it less expensive to produce.

Recently, because of the increased price of uranium, the Cotter Corporation has opened several mines on the Uncompahgre Plateau, and thousands of mining claims have been filed over the last year in the region.

Michael Tucker, the lease management program manager at the Department of Energy, said one mine opened in 2003, two mines opened in 2004, and the company began mining one more this year with plans to open two more by the end of the year.

"The price has been depressed for ten years and the industry has been living on stockpiles," Tucker said.

He said the federal government is considering opening up several old uranium mines next summer.

"There is significant demand for uranium properties," said Ed Cotter, project manager of the uranium-leasing program with the Steller Corporation. (Cotter is not affiliated with the Cotter Corporation.)

Historically, uranium mining on federal lands was done through the Uranium Leasing Program. After World War II, the government withdrew federal lands from public holdings, ensuring the country an adequate supply of uranium.

Until 1968, the government regulated the price of uranium. After that year, the metal was sold on the open market. The push for nuclear power and the nuclear weapons program in the United States pushed the price as high as $40 a pound.

In 1974, companies were given 20-year leases for the Uranium Leasing Program. During that period, 1.7 million tons of ore were mined, yielding 6.5 million pounds of uranium. But when the leases came up, most companies opted not to renew, given the lack of economic incentives.

With the increased demand for uranium, the government restarted the leasing program in 2004. Today, the DOE administers 13 active leases in San Miguel and Montrose counties and has considered adding 25 inactive lease tracts.

Cotter said the DOE is doing an environmental assessment on the proposed lease sights.

"We are going to look at the environmental impact of expanding the program," said Tucker.

In August, the agency conducted public meetings in Naturita and other towns on the Western Slope as part of the environmental assessment.

"We would like input from the public on the issues that citizens think the Department of Energy should consider in preparing the environmental assessment for the Uranium Leasing Program," Tucker said.

He said the agency could let the current lease run out, maintain the current lease in the future or increase the number of leases. If the leases are made available, the agency will conduct a bidding process where the highest bidder is awarded the lease.

Tucker said the environmental assessment would be finalized in February. This would make the lease tracks available by next spring.

Sanderson said expanded uranium mining is good for the mining industry in Colorado and was pleased to see the renewed activity.

"We are engaged in uranium production for the first time in years," he said.

Hagen, however, is not convinced that the Western Slope will return to its dominant position in the industry. He said there would be some growth in the area, but the cost of production is too high. The ore from mines on the Western Slope are less than 1 percent uranium. This is compared with high-production mines that can be as high as 20 percent.

"(Is the Western Slope) going to be major player - probably not," he said.

Nuclear safety issue

Many media outlets have proclaimed nuclear power as the winner of the Energy Policy Act, because it offers tax incentives to build new power plants. However, some energy analysts are not convinced that nuclear energy is market competitive.

"There are plenty of problems with nuclear power," Hagen said.

He said nuclear power plants have huge capital costs. This can make private financing of new power facilities difficult, according to a report by the Rocky Mountain Institute, a non-partisan group that studies energy policy.

Hagen said federal government studies estimates the cost of nuclear power at $1,900 a kilowatt hour (kwh) but the industry has the cost at $1,200 kwh. He said industry studies often exclude the capital costs in the calculations.

Hagen said because a nuclear power plant has not been built in the United States in 20 years, the construction costs have not been determined.

"Nobody knows what it will cost," he said.

The Rocky Mountain Institute report said wind and other renewable energy could more quickly address the nation's energy problems. It stated that Spain and Germany added 10 times as much energy output in 2004 with wind power as the entire world with nuclear power.

"We think a sound energy policy should let all energy technologies compete," said Nathan Glasgow, special aid to the CEO at the Rocky Mountain Institute.

The other problem with nuclear power is waste. Large volumes of radioactive waste are created during the enrichment of uranium. Also, after uranium fuel cells have been drained of energy they remain highly radioactive.

"The problem of waste is the one that has not been solved," Glasgow said.

The government has proposed storing the fuel cells at Yucca Mountain in Nevada, but the facility is mired in lawsuits and controversy. A temporary site has been suggested in Utah on an Indian Reservation but the earliest the site can be ready is 2007.

For now, spent fuel from nuclear power plants is being stored at the nation's 100 nuclear power plants.

Hagen added that safety with nuclear power is always a concern. He sited the problems at the Davis-Besse plant in Ohio as an example. Because of faulty construction, pipes within the plant where found to be corrosive. The problem was eventually discovered but not before it created a stir with the public and within the industry.

"It is a sign that you have to be careful," Hagen said.

Sanderson said nuclear power is a viable and safe form of power in the United States and around the world. He said nuclear power creates zero emissions and plants are becoming increasingly efficient.

"They (nuclear power plants) are, contrary to popular belief, extremely safe," he said.

Contact James Shea via e-mail at jamess@montrosepress.com 


-------- nevada

Navajos fight against uranium mining
Apparent losing battle resembles Utah's N-storage oppositionBattle resembles Utah's opposition to N-storage

By Jerry Spangler <spang@desnews.com>
Deseret Morning News
Friday, September 16, 2005
 
http://www.desnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,605155073,00.html

      WASHINGTON � It is a story familiar to Utahns: A government leader lobbies Congress to block nuclear activities but watches helplessly as the Nuclear Regulatory Commission issues a license anyway.

      But this time it isn't Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. fighting the losing battle with the NRC, which last week issued a license to a consortium of nuclear power utilities to store spent nuclear fuel on Goshute tribal lands in Skull Valley.

      It is Navajo Nation President Joe Shirley, who is fighting his own losing battle to block uranium mining on tribal lands.

      "We have control of our lands, but we do not have control of the NRC, and that is the reason I am here today," Shirley said in an interview.

      The Navajo Nation, which straddles the borders of Utah, Arizona and New Mexico, is locked in a fierce battle with the NRC, which has issued a license to Hydro Resources Crownpoint Uranium Project to mine at four sites in New Mexico � despite a Navajo law that prohibits it.

      Shirley was in the nation's capital this week, lobbying members of Congress to support the tribal government's Dine Natural Resource Protection Act, passed last April, which prohibits new uranium mining on tribal lands.

      The law is rooted in a long history of Navajos who worked in uranium mines and mills in the Four Corners area during the Cold War, and who were sickened and later died of radiation-caused cancers the U.S. government hid from the uranium workers.

      "Uranium has killed too many of our people, and our elderly, who knew the sacred songs and sacred stories of life, are stricken with cancer on their death beds," Shirley told the Deseret Morning News. "Our culture is dying with them. Why should we have more uranium mining and afflict ourselves with more incurable cancers?"

      The Navajo opposition to uranium mining and all things nuclear stands in stark contrast to the Skull Valley Band of Goshutes, who see nuclear waste as an economic ticket out of poverty. They stand to become fabulously wealthy, even though terms of the lease with the consortium, Private Fuel Storage, have not been released.

      Shirley, who won election on a campaign to stop the uranium mines, said the opposition is not negotiable, even with the lure of jobs. All things nuclear, from raw uranium to spent fuel rods, are foreign concepts to the Navajo � and they reject them in totality, he said.

      "Even making money galore is a concept that is foreign to us," Shirley said. "We are not interested in the money. Life is sacred."

      The Navajos are still living with the deadly legacy of uranium mining from 1948 to 1971 when thousands worked in the mines and mills. They are eligible for compensation under the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act, originally sponsored by Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah.

      Hatch spokesman Adam Elggren said the senator has worked to get RECA coverage for "as many deserving claimants as possible," but a problem with documentation seems to be more an administrative issue than a legislative one.

      "We will certainly keep an eye on it," Elggren said.

      The problem is many of the afflicted Navajos are traditionalists who do not have documents � things like birth and marriage certificates � required by the current legislation.

      Shirley was hosted at a Thursday afternoon congressional briefing by Reps. Jim Matheson, D-Utah; Tom Udall, D-N.M., and Rick Renzi, R-Ariz. Shirley said he has found sympathetic ears everywhere he has turned in Washington.

      "I went to sleep last night with a glad heart," he said.

      But sympathy won't stop the mines. And like the state of Utah, the Navajo Nation will probably have to make its arguments in federal court, Shirley said.

      Getting Congress to change RECA may be a lot easier than getting the NRC to change its mind. Shirley said the NRC has ignored the tribal government's laws and its scientific evidence.

      "The NRC is not even looking at the scientific data we submitted as a nation," he said, "but the data submitted by mineral companies, well, (the NRC) listens to them. I would not be surprised if there is something in the works behind the scenes."

      The NRC disputed Shirley's allegations, saying it "looks at all information provided to us during licensing reviews, including information from opponents of a proposed facility," according to NRC spokesman David McIntyre.

      The Navajo Nation has made the argument � unsuccessfully, so far � that the mining proposal strikes at the heart of tribal sovereignty, threatens public health and could contaminate the regional aquifer that provides drinking water for 20,000 people.

      The mining proposal is not the first time the Navajos have turned down economic development for environmental reasons.

      Shirley said the same nuclear power utilities who now plan to send their waste to Goshute lands once approached the Navajo Nation about storing nuclear waste in a remote county there. The Navajos said no, and that position has never wavered.

      "The Earth is sacred, and we will not introduce anything into it that is foreign," he said. "We will continue to say no."


-------- ohio

Centrifuge poses no big risk to environment

By GREG WRIGHT
Gannett News Service
Friday, September 16, 2005

http://www.chillicothegazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050916/NEWS01/509160309/1002

WASHINGTON - A proposed uranium processing plant in southern Ohio should bring hundreds of new jobs and some traffic jams, but not pose a major environmental risk, according to a preliminary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission report.

Officials at U.S. Enrichment Corp., the firm that wants to build the American Centrifuge Plant in Piketon, said the report is good news. The NRC must give U.S. Enrichment Corp. an operating license before the company can build the facility on the site of a closed government plant that once processed uranium for nuclear bombs.

The American Centrifuge would use newer, more electricity-efficient technology to enrich uranium for a peaceful purpose - fuel for nuclear power plants in the U.S. and abroad. The project is expected to cost up to $1.7 billion, U.S. Enrichment Corp. spokeswoman Elizabeth Stuckle, in Bethesda, Md., said.

"The impact of the American Centrifuge will be minimal on the environment," she said. "It is a very green and safe plant to the environment."

Despite assurances, some residents oppose the plant. Vina Colley says workers and the public are at risk because there is still radioactive and chemical contamination at the centrifuge site. And she worries toxic waste could be stored there.

"I think we are becoming the national sacrifice zone for nuclear waste," said Colley, who used to work at the old government plant and is now co-chair of National Nuclear Workers for Justice.

The NRC will hold a third meeting in Piketon Sept. 29 to get public input on the plant before releasing a final environmental impact statement around February. The NRC may not decide if it will issue an operating license until August 2006 or later, spokesman David McIntyre said.

There are 103 nuclear power plants in the U.S. that supply 20 percent of the nation's electricity needs. The U.S. is forecast to build the equivalent of five new large nuclear plants by 2020 to keep up with increased electricity demand, the NRC report says.

The Ohio plant would help increase national security by making the U.S. less reliant on foreign uranium, the report said. The plant would also be a boon to economically distressed parts of southern Ohio.

The plant will generate 3,362 full-time jobs during construction between 2006 and 2010 and 1,500 plant jobs between 2010 and 2040, the report said.

"That is a significant number of jobs for a rural, highly depressed economy that has an often double-digit unemployment," said Robert Walton, director of the Scioto County Community Action civic group.

The NRC report highlighted other ways the American Centrifuge will affect the region:

- Traffic will be heavier on U.S. Route 23 and to a lesser extent on Ohio 32 during five years of construction. The report forecast 18 traffic injuries a year involving employees and one fatality during this period.

- There is a small risk workers and the public will get cancer from exposure to radiological material along transportation routes, even if an accident releases contaminants. The projected worst-case scenario calls for fewer than one radiation-related cancer death over 30 years of operation.

- There is a moderate risk potentially deadly uranium hexaflouride will be released during transport. This gas forms when uranium, a metal, is converted to a gas to be enriched. When the gas hits air it becomes corrosive and leaks have caused deaths at some enrichment plants, said Ed Lyman, senior scientist at the Union of Concerned Scientists.

- The chance of employee or public radiation exposure is small.

- U.S. Enrichment Corp. does not anticipate radioactive liquid discharges from the plant. An approved spill control plan should also limit the potential for spills or leaks to contaminate local water or soil.

The plant expected to generate 630,000 tons of slightly radioactive, depleted uranium over 30 years. It will be shipped by rail to a Western disposal site, the report said.

On the Web:

http://www.usec.com, U.S. Enrichment Corp.

http://www.nrc.gov, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

The NRC report highlighted other ways the American Centrifuge will affect the region:

# Traffic will be heavier on U.S. 23 and, to a lesser extent, on Ohio 32 during five years of construction. The report forecasts 18 traffic injuries a year involving employees and one fatality during this period.

# There is a small risk workers and the public will get cancer from exposure to radiological material along transportation routes, even if an accident releases contaminants. The projected worst-case scenario calls for fewer than one radiation-related cancer death over 30 years of operation.

# There is a moderate risk potentially deadly uranium hexaflouride will be released during transport. This gas forms when uranium, a metal, is converted to a gas to be enriched. When the gas hits air it becomes corrosive, and leaks have caused deaths at some enrichment plants, said Ed Lyman, senior scientist at the Union of Concerned Scientists.

# The chance of employee or public radiation exposure is small.

----

Skip FirstEnergy case, 5 Ohio justices urged
Watchdog cites $125,000 in campaign gifts

By JIM PROVANCE
TOLEDO BLADE COLUMBUS BUREAU
Friday, September 16, 2005

http://toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050916/NEWS02/509160374

COLUMBUS - Five of seven sitting Ohio Supreme Court justices have received nearly $125,000 in campaign cash connected to FirstEnergy Corp. over the last decade, prompting a call for them to remove themselves from an upcoming case worth billions to the company.

Recent recusals in two high-profile, politically charged cases have raised questions as to where the bar has been set for when the government's umpire should take itself out of the game to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest.

In May, five Republican justices who received $23,510 in campaign contributions from Tom and Bernadette Noe, former Lucas County Republican chairmen, recused themselves from a case related to the Bureau of Workers' Compensation's failed $50 million investment in rare-coin funds run by Mr. Noe.

Six months earlier, four justices - three Republicans and one Democrat - removed themselves from consideration of an election matter involving a group that spent millions promoting or attacking Supreme Court candidates.

"Giving money to the referee in the middle of the game is not workable," said Catherine Turcer of the government watchdog Ohio Citizen Action.

Yesterday, the organization mailed letters to Chief Justice Thomas Moyer and Justices Evelyn Lundberg Stratton, Maureen O'Connor, Terrence O'Donnell, and Judith Lanzinger urging them to sit out oral arguments in the FirstEnergy case on Sept. 28.

The Ohio Consumers' Counsel has challenged the legality of an Aug. 4, 2004, decision of the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio. That decision essentially locked in for another three years the amount that FirstEnergy, Akron-based parent of Toledo Edison, has been allowed to recoup from customers for nuclear power plants and other investments, even when the consumer purchases power from another supplier.

The estimated total cost across all consumer classes, including residential, commercial, and industrial, is $2.9 billion, according to the consumers' counsel.

Chief Justice Moyer said he has yet to make a decision whether to participate in the FirstEnergy case, but he believes Citizen Action has no standing to make such a request.

"The reason we got off [the Noe] case was it appeared to us he was personally liable," said Chief Justice Moyer. "But, obviously, if we got off every case for campaign contributions, you'd have very few judges sitting on cases. Our system requires us to raise funds, unfortunately."

Consumers' Counsel Janine Migden-Ostrander has no plans to request recusal, saying she believes the justices can decide the case fairly.

Justice Lanzinger, of Toledo, said Mr. Noe's role as her campaign chairman prompted her earlier recusal.

"Certainly, because we have an elected system, candidates are going to be receiving contributions from a variety of sources," she said. "I would certainly hope that the mere fact that somebody has given a contribution within the limits does not mean I am going to be biased in favor of that individual."

On Aug. 6, 2004, two days after the PUCO finalized its order allowing FirstEnergy to charge its customers billions more over the next three years, 44 contributions from FirstEnergy's political action committee, employees, and their families totaling about $61,000 were funneled to the campaigns of Justices Moyer, Lanzinger, and O'Donnell.

All were from a fund-raiser hosted by FirstEnergy CEO Anthony Alexander in his Akron-area home. Tens of thousands of extra dollars were raised from attendees without direct connections to FirstEnergy.

Company spokesman Ellen Raines said the fund-raiser was scheduled well in advance of Aug. 6 and that the arrival of checks two days after the PUCO ruling was coincidental.

"The bottom line is these contributions were made legally by people who have the right to participate in the political process," she said. "This is all about the consumers' counsel pulling out all the stops to derail a rate plan that has been proven to be good for consumers."

According to an analysis by Citizen Action of campaign finance records at the Ohio Secretary of State's office, none of the three Democratic challengers in 2004 received contributions. Neither did Justice Paul Pfeifer, a Bucyrus Republican who had no opposition.

Recusals result in the temporary appointment of replacements from the pool of Ohio Court of Appeals judges to preside over those cases.

That process was triggered when Chief Justice Moyer and Justices O'Donnell, Lanzinger, Stratton, and O'Connor recused themselves from a case in which The Blade sued the Workers' Compensation Bureau to force release of records associated with its investment in Mr. Noe's coin funds.

"They felt it was necessary in the Tom Noe case to recuse themselves and that was only a few thousand dollars," said Ms. Turcer.

Chief Justice Moyer and Justices Stratton, O'Donnell, and Alice Robie Resnick recused themselves from an elections challenge against the Ohio Chamber of Commerce's nonprofit political arm, Citizens for a Strong Ohio, which spent millions in corporate cash on ads attacking Justice Resnick and promoting the others.

"The argument could be made that justices would be handcuffing themselves if the standard policy was they would not participate in cases where one of the law firms had given a contribution," said Larry Baum, Ohio State University political science professor.

"There might even be concern that law firms would strategically contribute in order to disqualify a judge they don't like," he said.

Contact Jim Provance at:
jprovance@theblade.com
or 614-221-0496.


-------- utah

"The Nuclear Waste Site in Utah"

New York Times editorial originally published Sept. 16, 2005

http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,605155265,00.html

      While few people outside Utah were paying close attention last week, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission authorized the licensing of a private storage plant for spent nuclear fuel rods on an Indian reservation some 50 miles southwest of Salt Lake City. Utah's outraged political leaders pledged to use every legal and political trick available to block the project even though, as representatives of a very conservative state, they supposedly abhor bureaucratic or judicial interference with private corporate decisions. Their contention � that the storage site, backed by a consortium of eight utilities, would pose a safety hazard � seems overblown. If the project should clear all of the remaining regulatory, legal and commercial hurdles, it could provide a useful interim storage site while the nation seeks a more permanent burial site deep underground.

      The government's long-term goal is to bury the waste in stable geologic formations that will be resistant to leaks for eons to come. Unfortunately, progress has been slow. The only site approved for evaluation � at Yucca Mountain in Nevada � has been hobbled by technical problems and legal challenges. Meanwhile, spent fuel rods have been piling up in cooling pools and in dry-storage casks at nuclear reactor sites around the country.

      So far as is known, the used fuel rods can be left there safely for decades. But it becomes awkward and costly to guard and maintain the storage casks after the reactors themselves have been retired from service. Several reactors have already been shut down, and more are apt to follow. In some cases, the spent fuel rods sit on land that might have more valuable uses. Unless these used fuel rods can be sent to Yucca, a destination that has not yet been approved to receive them, it seems desirable to have a backup site.

      The question of whether Utah is the best place for such a site has never been addressed. Private Fuel Storage, a company set up by the utilities, simply negotiated a deal with a small, poor Indian tribe, the Skull Valley Goshutes, for an undisclosed but presumably substantial amount of money. The site seems safe enough. The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission � both charged with protecting the public from nuclear hazards � approved the project after an exhaustive eight-year process.

      There are still hurdles to clear before the site can be developed. The state plans to appeal the decision in federal courts. It will also try to persuade the Bureau of Indian Affairs to withhold approval of the lease and will ask the Bureau of Land Management to deny a right of way needed for a rail spur to haul spent fuel to the site. So there is plenty of room for political interference should the Bush administration wish to do Utah a favor.

      Meanwhile, Private Fuel Storage will need to sign up enough customers to make the project financially viable. Some utilities in the consortium are reported to be in no great rush to ship fuel rods to the site only to then ship them a second time, to Yucca.

      We remain hopeful that Yucca can qualify as a permanent disposal site. But if Yucca fails to pass muster with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the nation will need a centralized surface site to fill the gap until a safe burial location can be found. The Indian reservation in Utah can fill that purpose.

----

U.S. checking on PFS

Repository security under Homeland Security review
By Joe Bauman
Deseret Morning News
Friday, September 16, 2005

http://www.deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,605155020,00.html
	
      The U.S. Department of Homeland Security is reviewing security aspects of the Private Fuel Storage high-level nuclear waste repository in Tooele County at the request of Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr.

      A week ago, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission � knowing the review was ongoing � issued a license to build the plant with the finding that it can be constructed and operated safely.

      Earlier, Homeland Security officials took a look at the PFS site, located in Skull Valley, 50 miles southwest of Salt Lake City. But the fact that the department was doing an actual review of the issues apparently was not released until Thursday.

      Confirmation of the Homeland Security review came from NRC spokesman David McIntyre, speaking on "RadioWest," a public affairs program broadcast by KUER, the University of Utah station. Program host Doug Fabrizio asked McIntyre whether the license decision indicated the federal government was interested in increasing use of nuclear energy.

      "I don't think that that's particularly the conclusion that should be drawn," McIntyre replied, speaking by telephone from NRC offices in Rockville, Md. He said the PFS proposal was made by industry years ago, not by the government.

      However, he added, "The government now is moving towards rejuvenating the nuclear industry." By that, he said, he meant the U.S. Department of Energy, not the NRC, which he said is not an advocate in the matter.

      McIntyre was asked to detail the steps the NRC took to review concerns about a possible attack by terrorists.

      "Part of the application from PFS included a physical protection plan, a security plan, for the proposed facility," McIntyre said. Commission officials evaluated the plan a couple of years ago, he added. Part of the findings might be proprietary, meaning they could not be released publicly because they involved sensitive security issues.

      "The Department of Homeland Security is currently doing a review of the security aspects of the PFS facility at Gov. Huntsman's request, and NRC is participating in that to some degree," McIntyre said.

      Asked what would happen if Homeland Security were to conclude that the risk of a terrorist attack made the project unacceptable, he replied, "I can't really predict what DHS (Department of Homeland Security) would come up with."

      Pressed to say what would happen if Homeland Security did make such a finding, McIntyre said, "I don't know whether they would come down and try to block it or say, 'OK, you need to do this, that or the other to alleviate those concerns.' "

      McIntyre said the NRC is "always looking at security for these facilities." Whenever it finds a possibly vulnerable aspect, he said, it takes action "to shore that up."

      In February, the NRC's Atomic Safety and Licensing Board issued a finding in favor of PFS, ruling against concerns raised by the state of Utah. The board's finding included the statement that "long-standing commission precedent circumscribes board hearings by explaining they are not the place to consider deliberate terrorist-type attacks. That precedent was followed here."

      A footnote added that the agency refusal to consider deliberate attacks was a "long-term practice, dating from the days of the Atomic Agency Commission." Instead, protecting nuclear facilities against terrorism has been undertaken by the commission itself, working with other federal agencies. That takes place "outside the hearing process," says the report.

      Sen. Orrin Hatch R-Utah, commenting on the issuance of the license before the Homeland Security review was completed, called this a fairly good example of the apparent bias within the NRC. He termed the project a reckless proposal.

      "The fact that they would make this premature decision without the Homeland Security report is outrageous," Hatch said in a statement sent by e-mail.

      "But it's no secret that the NRC had its own motivations for granting this license, and we have already set our sights on other ways to make sure this waste never makes a home in Utah."

Contributing: Jerry Spangler
E-mail: bau@desnews.com 


-------- wyoming

EMC Completes Acquisitions of the Moore Ranch Uranium Deposit in Wyoming's Powder River Basin
 
VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA--(CCNMatthews - Sept. 16, 2005)

http://www.ccnmatthews.com/news/releases/show.jsp?action=showRelease&actionFor=555464

Energy Metals Corporation (TSX VENTURE:EMC) (the "Company") is pleased to report, that further to its February 18, 2005 news release, the Company has recently completed the acquisition of an additional 600 acres internal to the SD claims and as a result, controls the surface and mineral rights covering the Moore Ranch Uranium deposit in Campbell County, Wyoming. The Moore Ranch property consists of surface leases, fee mineral leases, unpatented federal mining claims, and a Wyoming State Mining Lease and are subject to industry standard surface land-use agreements and royalties.

The Moore Ranch Uranium deposit was discovered by Conoco in the 1970s. Between 1970 and 1979, considerable work was done on the property. A Mine Permit Application for the Moore Ranch Mine and Sand Rock Mill Project was made to the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission in 1980. This 4 volume application reported a historic "mineable ore reserve" of 3.6 million tons at an average grade of 0.072% U308 (5.18 million pounds U308) in 3 open pits. The deposit was to have been mined by a joint venture between Conoco and Kerr McGee with the associated Sand Rock Mill to have been built and operated by a joint venture between Conoco and Pathfinder Mines Corporation (a Cogemea subsidiary). The joint venture was seeking an approval for a conventional sulfuric acid leach mill to process up to 3000 MT of uranium ore per day. The plans to develop the property were dropped due to declining uranium prices. The property was once again held by Power Resources (a subsidiary of Cameco) until 2003 when it was dropped at a time of low spot uranium prices (US$11.86/lb U308).

Uranium occurs on the Moore Ranch property in typical roll-front deposits within coarse to very coarse grained sandstone locally named the "70 sands" by Conoco geologists. The 70 sands average 80 feet in thickness. Mudstones, clay seams and coal seams lay immediately above and below the 70 sands. The 70 sands are believed to be almost flat lying with a dip of less than 1 degree. Average depth to the 70 sand is 180 feet. The bulk of the mineralization lies below the water table. The uranium mineralization is generally less than 25 feet in thickness. The transmissivity and hydraulic conductivity from wells in the mine area show favorable values for ISL (in situ leaching) development with values ranging up to 3800 gal/day/ft transmissivity and hydraulic conductivities up to 4600 ft/yr; averaging 120 ft/yr. Although ISL technology was known at the time of the Conoco report, the Conoco staff decided that it was not a sufficiently developed technology to be employed at Moore Ranch and opted for an open pit mining method. EMC plans to conduct further tests to establish the viability of more advanced and current methods of ISL as applied to the Moore Ranch deposit. Of potential interest are the documented mineralized zones shown by drilling and cross section to exist outside of the proposed pit boundaries that may be amenable to ISL extraction. Paul Matysek, P.Geo is the QP responsible for preparing the technical information contained in this news release.

The Company is also pleased to announce that further to its news release dated June 27, 2005, it has received Exchange acceptance to the purchase of Garfield Resources I LLC's 100% interest in the Congress Property and has issued 10,500 common shares with a hold period that expires on December 31, 2005.

Readers are cautioned that while the historical resource estimate is considered to be relevant, Energy Metals has not done necessary work to verify the classification of the resource, and the reader should not rely upon these historical resource estimates. The Company's management and consultants intend to carry out a mineral resource estimate to NI 43-101 requirements in due course.

Energy Metals Corporation is a Canadian listed company involved in developing resources to power the 21st century. The Company has adopted a corporate strategy to focus on the acquisition and development of uranium assets in politically favorable and mining-friendly jurisdictions within the United States to take advantage of the continuing growth in the U.S. and worldwide of demand for electrical energy. This increasing consumption is occurring at a time when uranium mine supplies are dwindling and inventories are being depleted.

The Company is targeting advanced projects in Wyoming that are amenable to ISL. This form of uranium mining was pioneered in Wyoming utilizing water wells and oxygen-fortified groundwater to mine the uranium in place. Energy Metals Corporation is also actively advancing other conventional mining and ISL opportunities for uranium properties in the States of Utah, Nevada, Oregon and Arizona.

ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF ENERGY METALS CORPORATION

Paul Matysek, M.Sc., P.Geo., President, CEO and Director

The TSX Venture Exchange has not reviewed and does not accept responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this news release.
 

-------- MILITARY 


-------- iraq

US tempers its view of victory in Iraq
The Pentagon hoped to quell unrest before a pullout, but violence is changing US goals.

By Mark Sappenfield | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor
September 16, 2005 

http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0916/p01s02-usfp.html

WASHINGTON � Since the day in May 2003 when President Bush stood beneath a banner proclaiming "Mission Accomplished," the course of the conflict in Iraq has been one of optimism followed by revision.

From the earliest battle plans, which called for the quick return home of tens of thousands of troops, to the campaign in Fallujah and national elections that followed, the Pentagon had hoped it could largely eliminate lingering unrest before turning security over to Iraqis.
		
The increasingly bracing tone from the White House and Pentagon, however, points to a new calculus. The persistence of the attacks, as well as their undiminished capacity - witnessed by Wednesday's bombings in Baghdad, which killed more than 150 Iraqis - seems to have confirmed that the insurgency will probably outlast the American occupation.

Indeed, the inability of American forces to defeat the insurgency through strikes such as the current offensive in Tal Afar raises doubts about the possibility of any clear victory for the administration. And it could leave the Iraqis with a years-long task that many planners had not anticipated.

"There has been a clear realization that this war is not winnable in the short term," says Seth Jones, a terrorism expert at RAND Corp. in Arlington, Va.

The change in thinking has come gradually, as pivotal moments in the maturation of the Iraqi state have come and gone - and the insurgency has remained. In the first months after Mr. Bush declared victory, Pentagon officials were loath even to use the word "insurgency" to describe the attacks that killed some two dozen troops in May and June of 2003.

In testimony before Congress that July, Gen. Tommy Franks argued that the attacks did not fit his definition of an insurgency.

A year later, however, the continuing toll of the insurgency was reshaping the Pentagon's expectations. By the spring of 2005, a spike in violence, despite the previous November's successful campaign against the insurgent stronghold of Fallujah and January's relatively peaceful elections, made it clear that political momentum was not enough.

Part of the reason for the failure to plan for uncertainties came from the ideological insistence that almost all Iraqis would see Americans as liberators. Yet it also came from a political calculation that dismissed the lessons of the Clinton years. "There was a sense that there was nothing to learn from Somalia or Haiti or Bosnia," says Dr. Jones.

Some parts of the administration have been slower to reach this point than others. In the midst of the May attacks, Vice President Dick Cheney famously said that the insurgency was in its "last throes." But less than a month later, on June 26, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said: "Insurgencies tend to go on five, six, eight, 10, 12 years. Coalition forces, foreign forces are not going to repress that insurgency. We're going to create an environment that the Iraqi people and the Iraqi security forces can win against that insurgency."

It is this attitude that has moved from post-invasion rhetoric to Pentagon doctrine. In some ways, it is the same measure of victory that the Pentagon laid out two years ago. "At an absolute minimum, we'll be here for [two years], and probably longer, to make sure that [Iraqi forces] are capable of protecting the sovereignty of Iraq," said Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez in an Aug. 7, 2003, Pentagon briefing.

Administration officials have always insisted that events on the ground - and not artificial timelines - would dictate American actions in Iraq. Yet today, the finish line is no more certain than it was two years ago - and the threat that Iraqi forces will be facing when US troops leave is more dire than many military officials imagined.

The result is that Bush's characteristic steel about Iraq still lacks any specifics or certainty. "As a practical matter, no one in the administration is going to admit this," says Anthony Cordesman, an analyst for the Center for Strategic and International Studies here. "Nobody's making military promises that are unrealistic."

There are some positive signs. The offensive to roust insurgents from Tal Afar, which began in May and intensified the past two weeks, has put more responsibility in the hands of the Iraqi military. "It's a very important step in turning over security to the Iraqis," says Rachel Bronson, an analyst for the Council on Foreign Relations in New York.

But there is a long way to go, she and others say. Significantly, when Iraqi President Jalal Talabani suggested this week that Iraqi forces would be ready to replace 50,000 US troops by the end of the year, he quickly reversed his statement and later added that US soldiers might be needed for another two years, though he set no deadline.

Amid this military uncertainty, administration officials have turned to political events as the primary marks of progress. "The referendum on the constitution and the elections at the end of December are the most important aspects of what we're doing now," Gen. George Casey told Congress in June.

Yet Wednesday's attacks in Baghdad suggest that the practical matter of adequately preparing the Iraqi military - not the grand clash of political ideas - will ultimately determine the success or failure of American hopes, analysts say. In a recent paper, Dr. Cordesman writes: "If political developments do have a positive effect, it will be ... because a substantially larger number of Iraqi Sunnis ... see the military balance shifting decisively in favor of Iraqi government forces."


-------- latin america

Venezuela Denies Drug Smuggling Charge

By IAN JAMES, Associated Press Writer Fri Sep 16, 9:53 PM ET

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050917/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/venezuela_us_drugs_1

CARACAS, Venezuela - A U.S. decision to brand Venezuela as a country failing to do enough against drug smuggling drew a sharp denial from the Venezuelan government Friday, aggravating tensions between Washington and one of its top oil suppliers.

President Bush criticized President Hugo Chavez's government Thursday, saying the South American nation had "failed demonstrably" to make a concerted effort to block shipments of illicit narcotics to the U.S. and Europe last year.

"Mr. Bush's government knows perfectly well the strong action by our country, the cooperation it offers and the impressive volume of drugs seized," Venezuelan Vice President Jose Vicente Rangel said in a statement. "But none of that counts because what matters to the U.S. government is the political disqualification of Venezuela for the purpose of future aggressions."

The U.S. is the top buyer of Venezuelan oil, but tensions have run high between Washington and Chavez � a close ally of Cuban leader Fidel Castro.

The White House determined that despite an increase in seizures, Venezuela hasn't done enough to halt a growing flow of drugs � mainly from Colombia to the United States and Europe. By U.S. estimates, 165 tons of cocaine passed through Venezuela last year.

Rangel said the United States, as a leading consumer of illegal drugs, had no "moral authority" to pass judgment.

Rangel said the U.S. government congratulated Venezuelan authorities last year when they seized 43 tons of drugs, and so far this year seizures have netted 59 tons.

----

Venezuela says US drug criticism is political ploy

Fri Sep 16, 2005 10:51 PM ET (Reuters)

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050917/ts_nm/venezuela_drugs_dc_1

CARACAS, Venezuela - Venezuela said on Friday that Washington's criticism of its anti-narcotics effort was "false" and politically motivated and did not reflect the country's successes fighting illegal drugs.

The U.S. government said on Thursday Venezuela had failed to stop illegal drug shipments to the United States last year in a judgment likely to worsen deteriorating political ties between Washington and the world's fifth-biggest oil exporter.

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, a vocal critic of U.S. foreign policy, dismissed the classification as part of a campaign by Washington to discredit his government.

"Absolutely false. We have broken records this year in confiscation of cocaine in the fight against drug trafficking," he told ABC's "Nightline." "Those are the false aggressions, the false signals we've been receiving," he said in New York.

The White House said Venezuela would not face sanctions usually associated with the designation and that Washington would maintain programs to help Venezuela's institutions and strengthen its political parties.

Venezuela said the waiver allowed Washington to keep funding opponents of Chavez, a self-styled revolutionary whom U.S. officials accuse of eroding democracy at home and menacing regional stability in alliance with Cuban President Fidel Castro.

"This is a capricious and absolutely political judgment, that is completely at odds with the position of other governments involved in the fight against drugs," Venezuelan Vice President Jose Vicente Rangel said.

Venezuelan government officials cite their anti-narcotics cooperation with European countries and recent successes in halting cocaine shipments to the Caribbean.

Venezuela joined Burma as the only countries on a list of major drug-producing or drug-transit countries the White House says "failed demonstrably" to adhere to international narcotics cooperation accords.

The failing grade from the White House followed Chavez's suspension of cooperation with the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration earlier this year after accusing its agents of spying on his left-wing government.

Soon after that suspension, U.S. officials revoked the U.S. visas of three top Venezuelan military officers on suspicion they were involved in drug trafficking, including the head of the National Guard anti-narcotics unit. 


-------- prisoners of war

Guantanamo hunger strike spreads
The inmates are protesting their indefinite detentions

Friday 16 September 2005, 1:44 Makka Time, 22:44 GMT  

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/D57AF325-3C76-4B79-9B4C-905EE8142A23.htm

A hunger strike at the US prison for terror suspects in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, has grown to its largest point since detainees began their latest protest more than a month ago.

After 11 detainees joined the protest overnight, there are now 131 taking part in the hunger strike, said Major Jeff Weir, a spokesman for the detention centre on Thursday.

Twenty-one of the striking prisoners were hospitalised in stable condition at the prison medical clinic, including 20 who were being tube-fed, Weir said.

This is the latest in a series of hunger strikes since 2002 by the detainees. Many of the inmates have been held without charge for more than three years and some prisoners have threatened to starve to death unless they are put on trial or released.

The military considers a hunger strike to be a form of suicide and Weir said that one prisoner was restrained after he resisted having a feeding tube inserted.

"No facility in the US, and hopefully the world, is going to let someone starve to death," Weir said. "We're charged with keeping them in good health, and that's what we're doing."

Growing numbers

Guantanamo officials said this latest hunger strike began on 8 August with 76 detainees protesting their confinement.

It has since grown to more than a quarter of the approximately 500 detainees.

The military defines someone as being on a hunger strike after they have refused nine consecutive meals. There have been at least two previous hunger strikes, but military officials said they were not able to confirm whether this was the largest.

A US human rights group, the New York-based Centre for Constitutional Rights, has claimed that some 210 detainees are participating in the hunger strike.

The detainees are accused of ties to the al-Qaida terror network or Afghanistan's ousted Taliban regime. Most have been held for more than three years without charge.


-------- POLICE / PRISONERS / COURTS / JUSTICE

New Orleans Police Harass Independent Journalist

Friday, September 16th, 2005 Democracy Now!

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/09/16/1222253

As President Bush says he'll rebuild New Orleans, we speak with Hip Hop activist and independent journalist Rosa Clemente about the crackdown in the shelters. She describes being harassed by a New Orleans police officer while doing interviews at a Red Cross shelter. [includes rush transcript] Yesterday evening President Bush addressed the nation from the devastated city of New Orleans. He spoke in Jackson Square, in the heart of the French Quarter and said that the rebuilding of the Gulf Coast after Hurricane Katrina will be one of the largest reconstruction projects the world has ever seen. He also acknowledged that the government failed to respond adequately to the disaster. African Americans have been particularly angered by the government response to the disaster, with an overwhelming majority telling pollsters they believe help would have come quicker if so many of the people stranded had not been poor and black. Bush seemed to be responding to those charges by mentioning the role of persistent poverty in the region.

    * President Bush, primetime address from New Orleans, September 15, 2005.

President Bush faced the nation at a vulnerable point in his presidency. Most Americans disapprove of his handling of Katrina, and his job-approval rating is at the lowest point of his presidency. In his speech, Bush promised to review the government response and cooperate in a Congressional investigation into what went wrong. He also said that a disaster on the scale of Katrina requires greater federal authority and a broader role for the armed forces.

    * President Bush, primetime address from New Orleans, September 15, 2005.

We speak with activist Rosa Clemente who recently returned from New Orleans.

    * Rosa Clemente, a Malcolm X Fellow for the Institute of the Black World and an organizer with the Malcolm X Grassroots Movement. She just returned from New Orleans.
      - For more go to: RosaClemente.com

RUSH TRANSCRIPT

AMY GOODMAN: Yesterday evening President Bush addressed the nation from the devastated city of New Orleans. He spoke in Jackson Square, in the heart of the French Quarter and said that the rebuilding of the Gulf Coast after Hurricane Katrina will be one of the largest reconstruction projects the world has ever seen. He also acknowledged that the government failed to respond adequately to the disaster. African Americans have been particularly angered by the government response to the disaster, with an overwhelming majority telling pollsters they believe help would have come quicker if so many of the people stranded had not been poor and black. Bush seemed to be responding to those charges by mentioning the role of persistent poverty in the region.

    GEORGE W. BUSH: When communities are rebuilt, they must be even better and stronger than before the storm. Within the Gulf region are some of the most beautiful and historic places in America. As all of us saw on television, there's also some deep, persistent poverty in this region, as well. That poverty has roots in a history of racial discrimination, which cut off generations from the opportunity of America. We have a duty to confront this poverty with bold action. So let us restore all that we have cherished from yesterday, and let us rise above the legacy of inequality. When the streets are rebuilt, there should be many new businesses, including minority-owned businesses, along those streets. When the houses are rebuilt, more families should own, not rent, those houses. When the regional economy revives, local people should be prepared for the jobs being created. Americans want the Gulf Coast not just to survive, but to thrive; not just to cope, but to overcome. We want evacuees to come home, for the best of reasons -- because they have a real chance at a better life in a place they love. 

AMY GOODMAN: President Bush speaking in New Orleans. He faced the nation at a vulnerable point in his presidency. Most Americans disapprove of his handling of the hurricane, and his job approval rating is at the lowest point of his presidency. In his speech, Bush promised to review the government response and cooperate in a congressional investigation into what went wrong. He also said a disaster on the scale of Katrina requires greater federal authority and a broader role for the armed forces.

    GEORGE W. BUSH: I also want to know all the facts about the government response to Hurricane Katrina. The storm involved a massive flood, a major supply and security operation, and an evacuation order affecting more than a million people. It was not a normal hurricane -- and the normal disaster relief system was not equal to it. Many of the men and women of the Coast Guard, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the United States military, the National Guard, Homeland Security, and state and local governments performed skillfully under the worst conditions. Yet the system, at every level of government, was not well-coordinated, and was overwhelmed in the first few days. It is now clear that a challenge on this scale requires greater federal authority and a broader role for the armed forces -- the institution of our government most capable of massive logistical operations on a moment's notice. Four years after the frightening experience of September the 11th, Americans have every right to expect a more effective response in a time of emergency. When the federal government fails to meet such an obligation, I as President, am responsible for the problem, and for the solution. 

AMY GOODMAN: President Bush speaking on Thursday from New Orleans. We're now joined by Rosa Clemente. She�s a Malcolm X fellow for the Institute of the Black World and an organizer with the Malcolm X Grass Roots Movement. She just drove in from New Orleans. Welcome to Democracy Now!.

ROSA CLEMENTE: Thanks for having me, Amy.

AMY GOODMAN: Well, you had quite an experience for the brief time you were there. Talk about why you were there and what happened?

ROSA CLEMENTE: I felt I needed to go, particularly as a younger person of color. I think this is a watershed moment for particularly black and people of African descent in America, and I wanted to be there. I didn't want it to be filtered through anyone's eyes but my own and my partner who went down with me, Brad Young. And it's just � It was my duty to be there, to be able to report back particularly to the hip hop generation, and I was also very upset at the low, low numbers of people of color, journalists, that I saw on the ground. The only ones I really saw were folks from CNN and mainstream media, and as I'm a proud member of alternative and progressive media here in New York, it was my duty to be there.

AMY GOODMAN: So, what happened when you went, particularly to look at the shelters? You went where, to the �

ROSA CLEMENTE: Well, first we went to New Orleans, and actually, we went to the Convention Center and, you know, just saw real estate speculators there and Blackwater mercenaries protecting property and didn't realize that the Marriott and the Wyndham hotel were across the Convention Center and began to ask the question: Why weren't those hotels taken over as eminent domain? That's the question I have. If someone can take my private property for � to build a highway or a medical facility, why were these hotels not opened to let these people not languish in what can only be described as a living hell. And to see the militarization. We then went to Algiers and spent the day with Malik Rahim. We could not leave because of the curfew, and that was a first experience for me. It was an experience to have an M-16 pointed at my car and from �

AMY GOODMAN: What do you mean?

ROSA CLEMENTE: When we got on I-10 West, we went to a military checkpoint, and when we pulled up, three of the National Guards just had M-16's pointed at the front of the car, and the side door and the side door, the two front doors. Then we went to the next military checkpoint, and they told us we could not go in at all. We snuck in and we got on Canal Street and we worked our way through that whole area. We then went to Algiers again to spend the day with Malik Rahim and also see the levee, and see what�s going on with that and to see the amazing work that Malik Rahim and Indymedia folks are doing by setting up a command center. It was amazing to be there to see that being built.

AMY GOODMAN: And I encourage people to go to our website, Democracynow.org. We also went with Malik, a community organizer in the Algiers neighborhood, right to the health center which was around the corner. It's closed, the Arthur Monday Health Center. But in the driveway has been a dead body for two weeks. And as he was telling us that he has told every level of authority, concerned about disease, the disrespect to the bodies, been there since the day of the hurricane, every level of that authority drove by, and we went up to them and asked them, �There's a dead body here, will you be picking it up?� Louisiana State Police, the New Orleans Police, the National Guard, the Army, the First Cav, the Department of Homeland Security, an ambulance drove by, and yet this has been going on for two weeks.

ROSA CLEMENTE: Yeah. I mean, I think the one thing that struck me was the smell, when I realized that it's the smell of death in the air of New Orleans, and that was just shocking because I have only kind of seen that on TV, right, and when people make that face, but � and we saw things that looked like body parts, but of course, I just couldn't look � but it didn't look � it looked like human body parts that had been mutilated in the garbage cans behind the Convention Center. As of Monday, when we looked in the Convention Center, you could see the remnants of everything, and just � it's just horrific just to see that. So, Malik had told us about that that dead body that I think was finally picked up.

AMY GOODMAN: Oh, really? Well that would have been in the last few days. Talk about the shelter where people who have been evacuated are staying, where you tried to document?

ROSA CLEMENTE: Yeah. We then went to the Baton Rouge River Center, which is the largest shelter in Louisiana, seven miles away from Governor Blanco's mansion. She has not visited there. We were asking residents, �How many times has the Governor come here to visit?� They said, �Not one time.� There's about four thousand people in that shelter. It's supposed to be, �one of the best-run American Red Cross shelters.� It can only be described as a prison. Everyone we talked to in there said it was a prison-like facility. Well, you have to go through metal detectors to get in. There's a curfew. When we did get in there and had registered earlier with the Red Cross as media, we were then stopped � the National Guard let us in, and us being someone that was traveling with us, a lawyer, and the videographer, Brad Young.

When we got in there, the National Guard let us in, but then the Baton Rouge Police Department said something to the National Guard and the National Guard said, �You can't come in. You're not media.� �What do you mean, I'm not media. Here's my press pass.� �Well, you're not the media I know.� And I said, �Who I do talk to?� And they said, �An American Red Cross volunteer.� They sent someone over and the American Red Cross volunteer said, �You're over time. Interviews can only happen up until 6:00 p.m.� I said, �I called the Red Cross and in fact, I see CNN in here with a camera. So, what's going on?� So, we were audio � you know, I was � I had my mini disc on and Brad had his camera on and then the � it was the Baton Rouge Police officer who said, �Turn your equipment off.� We said, �We're not turning our equipment off until we're told by someone from the American Red Cross. You don't run this shelter. You are here to enforce the law.� He said, �I'm here to do whatever I want. Turn it off.� We refused to. He then grabbed Brad, threw him over the table, and pulled out the handcuffs and went to arrest him.

Something ensued in that point. I was not watching. I was more mini-discing the kind of chaos because then the people coming in started to kind of stop and say, �What's going on? Why can't they videotape?� People were noticing, �Well, they're the only black people here. Why are you not stopping those other people on the corner, right here, the CNN crew?� And Brad got escorted out along with the lawyer that was with me. I was left there. The officers said, �I want your tape.� �Why do you want my tape?� He said, �Because you said my name into the tape.� I said, �Your name is public information.� He said, �You're slandering me, give me your tape.� He went to grab my mini disc and I backed up, and he said, �You're under arrest.� I said, �Am I being detained?� He said, �No, you're under arrest.� He then begins to call for his backup, backup, and I said, �Well what are you going to do?� He goes, �Come over here.� I said, �You are going to have to grab me and you are going to have to physically � you are going to have to put handcuffs on me.� He said, �Give me your mini disc; I'm not going to ask you again.� So, I popped the tape out. I put it in my pants and I handed him the mini disc. I said �Here's the mini disc. You didn't ask for the tape. If you want the tape, you have to strip search me in public.� He called for backup again. I said, �Am I under arrest?� �You're under arrest.� �Can I leave?� �You're under arrest.� The Lieutenant came with three other people, I guess more superior to him, and they whispered, had a little conversation. The Lieutenant goes, who are you with? I said �I'm here with Pacifica � I'm a reporter with Pacifica radio. I'm also corresponding for many � the Bev Smith Show�, and I gave him the rundown. He said, �Let me see your press credentials.� I showed it to him. He said, �On behalf of the Baton Rouge Police Department, Miss Clemente, we apologize. You're free to go.�

We then went outside and stayed until curfew, which is 10 p.m. and got amazing interviews with some young men who actually said �I'd rather be in prison because at least in prison, I have information.� When we asked them what that meant, what it meant is that they're not � they don't get papers. For four thousand people, there's only three TVs. For four thousand people there's only three computers. They can only go on the computer not to access websites but to download FEMA forms. Then they download these FEMA forms, but many people are illiterate. There's no one there to help them. There were no Spanish language translators although there's a sizable Latino population in there. There's a Filipino and Vietnamese population, and no translators for them. So they have other people kind of looking out for them. You know, they are giving kids � the Church of Scientology is the biggest organization in there. There was about forty of them. What they do is every hour they go and give kids lollipops and little juices, and potato chips. We asked the young men �What kind of food are you getting?� They get a bagel and orange juice in the morning. They get a peanut butter and jelly sandwich during the day, and they get ravioli with some type of white sauce, a scoop of corn and a piece of bread. Some of the young men are not allowed to wear sneakers because if they're already labeled as a, quote, �gang member�, they're not allowing them to wear sneakers. They have to wear what we call �prison slippers�. I mean, just � Amy, it just goes on and on and on.

AMY GOODMAN: Well, if people want to see your reports, you can go to Rosa's website at rosaclemente.com. Rosa, thanks for being with us.

ROSA CLEMENTE: Amy, thank you so much for having me. 

----

Trapped in New Orleans: Emergency Medical Worker Describes How Police Prevented Evacuation

Friday, September 16th, 2005 Democracy Now!

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/09/16/1223207

We speak with emergency medical worker Lorrie Beth Slonsky who was in New Orleans attending a conference when hurricane Katrina hit. She describes how she spent most of the next week in New Orleans trapped by the flooding - and the police. [includes rush transcript] We speak with Lorrie Beth Slonsky of San Francisco, a retired paramedic from the San Francisco Fire Department and was in New Orleans attending a conference when Hurricane Katrina hit. She was fortunate enough to be staying in hotel in the French Quarter for the first few days but she and her partner Larry Bradshaw were forced to leave when conditions worsened.

    * Lorrie Beth Slonsky, a retired paramedic from the San Francisco Fire Department.
      - Read her story: "The Real Heroes and Sheroes of New Orleans"

RUSH TRANSCRIPT

AMY GOODMAN: She was fortunate enough to be staying in a he hotel in the French Quarter for the first few days. But then she and Larry Bradshaw, her partner, were forced to leave when conditions worsened. She tells the story from there.

LORRIE BETH SLONSKY: Now it's day four and the hotels had completely run out of fuel for the generator and food and water. And sanitation, even in this very fancy hotel had become dangerously abysmal. And it seemed like our only choice was to go to the Convention Center. As we left the hotel, we came across the National Guard, and this is where they told us that we couldn't go to the Superdome nor the Convention Center, and they didn't have any suggestions where we should go, and they also said we should have gotten out there sooner. And no, they didn't have any food, and no, they didn't have any water to spare. And then the next thing we came across was the Police Command Center and this is at Harrods on Canal Street and we were told the same thing: that we are on our own, and they had no place to suggest where we should go, and they didn't have any food, but they did give us four small bottles of water to share among the probably 200 folks that had left the hotel and the downtown tourist type folks. That's what they had to give us was four small bottles of water to spare.

So, right across the street from this Police Command Center was this amphitheater type place and we thought the best thing to do is to go ahead and camp across the street from the Police Command Center. Because we thought, well, we would be visual to the media and we have some sort of a protection, and before we got too comfy, the Police Commander came up to us and said we needed to go to the bridge because they were going to be buses waiting there to take us out of the city. You know, this crowd of 200 that had left the hotel in the downtown area, we just let out a big old cheer, but Larry called everyone back and said to the police officer and to the folks that, you know, we have been given so much misinformation and was he sure there were buses? And I have to tell you, Amy, that he looked at us directly and he said, I swear to you that the buses are there.

So, we group of about 200 people, set off to the bridge, and I have to say, we must have looked like quite determined tourists with our little roll-top suitcases following behind us, and we passed near the Convention Center, and locals asked us where we were going. And we told them the great news, how the police commander said that there was going to be buses at the bridge, so you know, families grabbed their few belongs and we all started marching up towards the bridge. And our numbers doubled and probably doubled again. We were probably about 600, 700, 800 people. Just it seemed like a lot of people. So, it started to rain, and even though it started to pour down rain, we -- our -- it didn't dampen our spirits at all. We felt like, God, we have a way out of here on day four. And as we approached, there were armed Gretna deputies. And they had formed a line at foot of the bridge. And before we were even close enough to cross, they shot guns, they shot guns over our heads. They fired guns over our heads. And this group of families and, may I say, disabled people, children, tourists, I mean, just everyone, we just all scattered in all sorts of directions. And then everyone was in their own small little groups and milling around and what to do next.

And this is when Larry approached the Gretna deputies, and you know, he had his badge, his San Francisco Fire Department badge and had his hands up and asked if he could approach. And he was able to engage the deputies in some conversation. And Larry told them that we were told by the Police Command Post that we needed to come here to the bridge, because we we�re going to get on buses. And the deputy said that the Police Commander had apparently lied to us, and there were in fact no buses that were going to take us out of New Orleans. So, we asked the deputies, well, why couldn't we just cross the bridge anyway? And this is -- this is what we heard for the first time that the deputies had said to us, they said, this is not New Orleans, and there wasn't -- they were not going to have a Superdome over here, meaning, I guess in Gretna or Algiers or across the bridge. And I -- if you looked at the group that was remaining in our little group, I mean, you could only look at us and see that -- predominantly everyone was African-American or a person of color except for Larry, me, and the other gal we were with that it could only mean that if you are poor, or if you are black, you are not going to get out of New Orleans.

AMY GOODMAN: They set up an encampment with a group of people, thought they were protected near a bridge, but the police came again and forced them to disperse. Then Lorrie Beth Slonsky talked about this whole discussion of looting during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. I asked Lorrie Beth what she saw take place at the Walgreens near her hotel.

LORRIE BETH SLONSKY: Our Hotel Monteleone had a little -- you could look over and you could see the Walgreens because it was across the street from each other. And what you would see were people going in and they would take food, and they would take water, and you could see people coming out with pampers. And then the police would arrive with their sirens blaring and they would chase everybody away. And we just watched this go on for hours, this sort of cat and mouse game of people going in and getting necessities and getting out. And the other thing that kind of amazed me is I did have -- I met someone who did go into the Walgreen's and I said, you know, what was it like -- what did it look like inside? She said it was so surreal and bizarre because on one hand you could see all the make-up still on the shelf. But all the � were the milk and the dairy products that Walgreens does carry in their little cold containers was all gone and it just looked like people were going after what they needed for basic necessities and they were sharing it with people that walked by. The police would show up. They would drive up really fast with their sirens blaring, and then everybody would scatter and run away, and then the police would leave and go on to wherever else they were going, and then apparently must have gotten reports again and they would screech back up and do the same thing, and we saw that a couple of times.

AMY GOODMAN: Lorrie Beth Slonsky, an emergency worker from San Francisco, caught in the storm of Hurricane, Military, and Police of New Orleans. 


-------- ENERGY 


-------- alternative energy

Western States Could Generate Eight Gigawatts Solar Power by 2015

WASHINGTON, DC, September 16, 2005 (ENS)

http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/sep2005/2005-09-16-09.asp#anchor5

With a longer-term federal investment tax credit and state-based incentives, the western United States could install as much as eight gigawatts of solar electric generating capacity by 2015, according to a new report produced for the Western Governors� Association (WGA).

"The Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) congratulates the WGA Solar Task Force on achieving a consensus set of recommendations to achieve 8 GW of solar power by 2015," said SEIA president Rhone Resch. "We applaud the consensus finding of the companies, utility executives, policymakers and advocates represented on the task force.

"A longer-term extension of the 30 percent federal investment tax credit would stimulate new US manufacturing jobs and investment, and enable the Western states to harness their abundant solar energy resources."

According to the report, the development of 8 GW of solar electricity � enough to power 4 million homes � would generate 32,500 new high paying jobs in manufacturing, construction and installation.

Deployment on this scale would also bring down solar costs to a point competitive with power produced from fossil fuels, according to the report. The task force envisioned half of deployment coming from central concentrating solar power (CSP) plants and half coming from distributed photovoltaic (PV) generation.

"At a time when natural gas prices are skyrocketing and consumers are feeling the pinch from high energy bills, the WGA task force has provided a clean and cost-effective path forward: solar energy," said Resch.

The report can be read online at: http://www.westgov.org/wga/initiatives/cdeac/solar.htm. It will have a 30-day public comment period. The Western Governors� Association is scheduled to adopt the document in June 2006. 


-------- OTHER


-------- environment

Army Corps Allows Development of Isolated Wetlands

WASHINGTON, DC, September 16, 2005 (ENS)

http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/sep2005/2005-09-16-09.asp#anchor7

The loss of U.S. wetlands that shelter migratory birds and endangered species may start climbing again, following decisions by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to open up from 11,000 to 15,000 acres of wetlands in 15 states since 2004.

The Environmental Integrity Project (EIP) produced an analysis Thursday that shows a 2001 Supreme Court decision narrowing Clean Water Act protections by excluding "isolated" wetlands that are not attached to navigable waters is the basis for opening wetlands to development.

Nearly five years ago, the Rehnquist-led Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that the Clean Water Act did not protect so-called "isolated" wetlands inhabited by migratory birds.

EIP Director Eric Schaeffer said, "By a narrow majority, the Supreme Court voted to shrink the Clean Water Act and opened thousands of acres of wetlands to commercial development. Disappearing wetlands increase the risk of flooding, threaten the survival of migrating birds and endangered species, and diminish the environment for outdoor lovers and sportsmen."

"Developers are going to keep attacking the Clean Water Act," said Schaeffer, "and the public should understand that the new Supreme Court has the power to determine whether our wetlands live or die."

EIP found that a wide range of commercial interests will benefit from recent determinations by the Corps wetlands-related decisions, including a Wal-Mart shopping center in Texas, a titanium sand mine in Georgia, a peat bog mine in Florida, and, in several states, residential development and golf courses.

The fact that the Corps has determined a wetland is exempt from the Clean Water Act does not necessarily mean that all of the acreage in question will be destroyed. Developers may choose to preserve some for aesthetic reasons, and in a few instances, state or local regulation could help to fill the void left by the Corps, Schaeffer explained. "But in the vast majority of cases, once the Corps decides that the Clean Water Act no longer applies, the wetland at issue are completely vulnerable to being carved up by commercial interests."

The 15 states with the most wetlands exempted by the Corps� aggressive implementation of that decision since 2004 are: Nebraska (2,970-3,139 acres); North Dakota (2,134-2,474 acres); Florida (1,699-1,884 acres); Illinois (643-1,332 acres); Texas (642-887 acres); Georgia (539-1,104 acres); South Dakota (479-704 acres); Colorado (469-872 acres); Wisconsin (434-641 acres); Indiana (407-645 acres); Ohio (259-325 acres); California (215-344 acres); Minnesota (169-356 acres); Iowa (150-274 acres); and New York (140-205 acres).

The EIP report found an apparent bias against wetlands preservation on the part of the Corps, which was also found to underestimate wetlands destruction, and to discount the input of sport fishermen.

The Corps was found to write off of wetlands that provide habitat for endangered species. "Endangered species were present, or thought to be present, in about 15 percent of the cases in which the Corps determined that wetlands were no longer covered by the Clean Water Act. In many other cases, the Corps simply did not know. The US Environmental Protection Agency estimates that about a third of endangered species live their entire lives within wetlands.

The United States has lost more than half its native wetlands since European settlement began.

Wetland losses averaged 300,000 a year in the late 1970s and early 1980s, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, but slowed to about 60,000 acres a year in the late 1990s, thanks to a combination of Clean Water Act regulation and voluntary incentives for conservation.

While the Supreme Court�s opinion was limited to "isolated" wetlands, the Corps has gone further in many cases by dismissing wetlands without considering other benefits. Schaeffer said, "As bad as the Supreme Court decision was, the Army Corps has made it worse by going further than the opinion required. President [George W.] Bush has pledged to support 'no net loss of wetlands.' But the Corps� decisions to remove wetlands from the Clean Water Act in so many cases speak louder than words." 


-------- imf / world bank / wto (economics)

The Coming Depression

By Patrick Meloy Sept 11, 2005
Friday, September 16 2005 @ 11:41 AM MDT

http://www.vivelecanada.ca/article.php/20050916054129788

The United States is pushing towards a war with Iran with the stated reason that Iran is attempting to build nuclear weapons. We now know that Iraq�s alleged �weapons of mass destruction� that were said to be poised to annihilate the free world at a moment�s notice, did not exist. The United States and Britain used weak and false intelligence to spread this fallacy in an effort to legitimize a war of aggression and they are trying to do the same thing again. Iraq did indeed pose a real and serious threat to the United States, but not by way any military weapons. Iraq had the power to destroy the value of the American Dollar and along with it, the American Economy.

To understand this true weapon of mass destruction, you must understand the position the American Dollar holds in the world economy.

After WWII, Europe lay in ruins. The United States instituted the Marshall Plan where the US loaned massive amounts of money to European nations with the condition that goods and services be purchased from the United States. It was a great success; Europe was quickly able to rebuild its infrastructure and industry while US companies made fortunes supplying Europe�s needs. Because so many countries had so many US dollars, they ended up using them to purchase goods and services from other countries as well - including oil from the Middle East. In fact, two energy exchanges, the International Petroleum Exchange (IPE) in London, and the New York Mercantile Exchange (NYMEX) emerged as the only places to trade energy products and everything was priced in US dollars. In the 1970s, after the US made deal with Saudi Arabia, virtually the only currency you could use to purchase oil was the US dollar. This made the Greenback the dominant currency in the world, used for most (Western) trade and all energy purchases. This was a great deal for the United States - the value of the US dollar gained strength rapidly and they could afford to print huge sums of money without risk of devaluing their currency. Most of the newly printed money ended up offshore, in the vaults of central banks around the world that needed it for trade and energy.

Due to Free Trade, Globalization, and Reaganomics, American manufacturing fled to low-wage countries in search of higher profits. American output fell; unemployment rose, and the Federal government started borrowing madly to maintain spending levels; at the same time, their ability to pay shrank. America is now in a worse economic position than that of either Brazil or Korea when those countries� economies melted down. The United States has an advantage that neither of those countries had though, massive amounts of their own currency sitting in other countries� central banks collecting dust. America was able to borrow back its own currency from a multitude of countries that were happy to have their reserves earning interest instead of just laying around. This process of printing money for use outside the country and then having it come back as investments is known as �Recycling the Petro Dollar�.

Most of the world now realizes that the main reason for the USA to invade Iraq was to take its oil. What most governments, but few citizens, know, is that the rush to war was due to Saddam Hussain�s committing the high crime of accepting Euro dollars for oil under the �Oil for Food� program. While oil sales from Iraq were minimal due to UN sanctions, the act of defiance did not go unnoticed. Iran, Venezuela, and North Korea all started to dump portions of their US dollar reserves, and OPEC itself received European Union representatives who gave a presentation on the advantages of using the Euro currency for oil sales. The EU today is actually a larger market than the USA. It has more people and more money, and uses more oil than the United States. As OPECs largest single customer, it makes sense to use their currency. With Europe posing a major threat to the hegemony of the US Greenback, the USA decided it had to do something drastic to show OPEC that it would not allow a switch to the Euro. This is why; shortly after Iraq�s conversion to the Euro in late 2000, the USA used the excuse of 9/11 to invade Iraq - not to fight terrorism, but to perpetrate terror itself in order to keep OPEC in line. One can understand the reticence of Germany, France, and Russia when it came to invading Iraq, as switching to the Euro would have been a strategic economic victory.

In 2003, Iran began selling oil for Euros to a large number of Euro-dominated countries. The Euro was already making inroads as a replacement trade currency and this switch to the Euro for oil has played a large part in the US dollar�s declining value. As if this crime against the USA wasn�t enough, Iran also announced its intention to open its own Oil Bourse (exchange) in late 2005 (now delayed until spring 2006), competing with the two American owned exchanges, NYMEX and IPE. The last technical hurdle to the Euro taking over as both world trade and energy currency would be eliminated; the US dollar would likely go into freefall as central banks dumped their Greenbacks and bought Euros. The US has been working hard overtly, with its weapons of mass destruction smear campaign, as well as covertly, using its own cadre of terrorists, the M.E.K, to destabilize the Iranian government. The USA lacks the troops to invade and Dick Cheney has asked the Pentagon to draft a plan to use nuclear weapons against Iran. Assuming that Russia and China do not retaliate with a missile attack against the USA and its assets, using nuclear weapons against Iran could push the rest of the world to use its only real defense against the USA, dumping the Greenback and destroying the US economy. If the US does not attack, the oil bourse will open and the ultimate result will likely be the same: the end of the USA as a world power and the start of a new �Great Depression�.


-------- ACTIVISTS

Deported activist landed with bill

From Peter Mitchell in Los Angeles
16 sep 05 Australia Herald Sun

http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,16621434%255E1702,00.html

AMERICAN peace activist Scott Parkin arrived back in the US today under guard after Australian authorities detained him in a Melbourne jail for five days for being a "national security risk".

The 36-year-old Texan history teacher was also given a bill for almost $11,700 after his brush with Australian authorities. Mr Parkin said he was made to feel like a terrorist and a criminal and remains baffled as to why six police officers "snatched him off the street" as he left a Melbourne cafe last Saturday.

He said he was interrogated and spent the next five days in solitary confinement in a Melbourne jail.

He was escorted by two Victorian correctional officers on a Qantas passenger plane which left Melbourne yesterday, arriving in Los Angeles this morning.

"I'm just completely baffled by all of this," said Mr Parkin, surrounded by Australian TV cameras and media, soon after his arrival at Los Angeles international airport.

Mr Parkin was in Australia as part of a six-month holiday in Australia, New Zealand and Asia. He arrived on June 1.

An activist for 15 years, he said he gave talks while in Australia about the war in Iraq and helped organise one protest against US energy company Halliburton.

"In the talks I gave I wasn't even openly critical of Australia," Mr Parkin said.

"I was being openly critical of the US occupation (of Iraq) and I was being openly critical of Halliburton."

Mr Parkin said authorities never made it clear why he had been arrested.

"They were very vague," he said. "They said I violated sections of the migration act and they said I was a direct or indirect risk to their national security."

Mr Parkin was housed alone in a jail cell that contained two concrete slabs to sleep on, a TV set and a sink.

"They gave me three couch cushions and three really crummy blankets and fed me three times a day," he said.

Mr Parkin was also handed a bill for almost $11,700. It included $4235.03 for his airfare back to LA and $6675.39 for the return airfares of his two corrective services escorts as well as their accommodation in Los Angeles.

"They're staying in Anaheim on Disneyland Drive I heard," Mr Parkin quipped.

The five-day stay at the Melbourne Assessment Prison will cost him another $777.

"They said if I ever decided to return to Australia I'd have to pay them back," Mr Parkin said.

The activist was also banned from entering Australia for three years. He plans to fight his removal from Australia and is desperate to find out why authorities were concerned about him.

"I'd love to know the assessment in which the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) made of me to lock me up for five days in solitary confinement and then remove me from the country essentially forcibly," Mr Parkin said.

Mr Parkin warned the incident raised great concerns about freedom of speech in Australia and the US.

"I think we are seeing a crisis in freedom of speech and freedom of expression in Australia, the United States and lots of places and people need to be aware," he said. 

----

Women to bike for peace across Middle East

By IRIN News.org
Friday, September 16, 2005

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&categ_id=4&Article_id=18524

DAMASCUS: A group of more than 300 women from 34 countries are due to ride on bicycles into the Syrian capital, Damascus on Sunday as part of a regional tour to promote peace and change the stereotypes about Arab women in the Middle East, organizers said. The Middle East Women's Bicycle Ride will begin today in the Lebanese capital, Beirut. From Damascus it will stop in Jordan before continuing to the Palestinian territories.

Almost all the countries the women will pass through are conservative societies.

"The main goal of the Women's Bicycle Ride is to support women. Women and children suffer more from wars than others and could make peace by raising awareness in society," Mona Ghanem, chairperson of the Syrian Commission for Family Affairs said.

"We plan in future to organize exhibitions and seminars to promote the concept of accepting others and build leaders in our society," she added.

Leen Husary, public relations coordinator at Areeba Company, one of the organizers, said the goal is to support Arab women and children and strengthen their ability to express themselves, especially on the subject of peace.

"The impact of the Women Bicycles Ride in 2004 encouraged us to organize it this year again," she said. The event is sponsored in Syria by the Syrian Commission for Family Affairs, Women for Peace, an organization established in Sweden in 2002, and the Areeba Company.

The women, who will be riding for about 50 kilometers a day, belong to an international group called "Follow the Women," which aims to help end violence in the Middle East.

They include professional women, nurses, doctors, policewomen and mothers who say they have decided to take a break "for a good cause."

They have also sent messages to U.S. President George W. Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair to act and bring peace to the Middle East.

From Damascus, the riders will continue on September 19 to Quneitra in the Golan Heights and then to the historical site of Bosra, about 100 kilometers south of the capital on their way to the Jordanian capital, Amman.

The final destination will be the Palestinian city of Ramallah in the West Bank.

The riders will visit the Palestinian refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila camps in Beirut, as well as Martyrs' Square. They will also visit the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights and exchange messages of peace with Syrian and Israeli women.

In the course of their trip, they will meet with a number of political leaders in these countries.

Husary said the event was also aimed at encouraging women to take part in decision-making with regard to security, conflict prevention and resolutions. - IRIN

----

The Militarization of New Orleans: Jeremy Scahill Reports from Louisiana

Friday, September 16th, 2005 Democracy Now!

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/09/16/1222257

We go to Louisiana to speak with Democracy Now! correspondent Jeremy Scahill who has been in New Orleans this past week. He has been looking into how the city has changed to a militarized zone and what that means for the residents who left. [includes rush transcript] Well the Central Business District and the historic French Quarter were neighborhoods in New Orleans that saw relatively little damage. This weekend the city will start re-opening those areas and a few others for businesses and residents to return. However, many are concerned about what will happen to the city's poor, black residents whose neighborhoods were mostly destroyed.

Democracy Now correspondent Jeremy Scahill has been in Louisiana this past week. He has been looking into how the city has changed to a militarized zone and what that means for the residents who left.

    * Jeremy Scahill, Democracy Now! producer and correspondent.

RUSH TRANSCRIPT

AMY GOODMAN: He joins us on the phone from Baton Rouge. Welcome, Jeremy.

JEREMY SCAHILL: Good to be with you, Amy.

AMY GOODMAN: Can you talk about what you have been seeing, who you�ve been talking to this week?

JEREMY SCAHILL: Well, I mean, in the days that have passed, the week or so since you were here this past weekend, we have seen a real increase in the militarization of the city. It's turned into a much greater state of lockdown. You have more military checkpoints set up. You have less of a civilian presence in large parts of the city and much more of a military presence. I mean in fact, I still have only seen one FEMA vehicle, the entire time I have been here. That wasn't even staffed. It was just a FEMA vehicle parked on a median near the Hyatt hotel where the main headquarters is of the so-called Operational Emergency Command of the military and various branches of the government coordinating their so-called disaster response. But there are soldiers all over the city. What's incredible is that you see them doing almost nothing. They're either just standing around or sitting around. There's very little work being done by the military. You do see units like the 82nd airborne patrolling the streets. It looks like the aftermath of a massacre or war zone where you have soldiers patrolling around. You also see a tremendous increase in the number of private security contractors who have arrived on the scene.

It's interesting, we talked earlier this week about the Blackwater mercenaries and I talked about my hour-long conversation with them when they had first arrived here, and I reported that they were saying they were on contract with the Department of Homeland Security. This, of course, was denied by the federal government. Well, now they have been forced to admit, the federal government, that Blackwater is on federal contract with FEMA to protect -- so-called protect, its rebuilding or reconstruction efforts in Louisiana. This is just one of the firms that is getting now federal money. I think that these firms view the current situation in Louisiana as the biggest pot of federal money to put their hands into since the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. I also, two days ago, had the chance to meet one of the wealthiest of citizens of New Orleans, F. Patrick Quinn III. He is the single greatest owner of private rooms in New Orleans. He owns the largest hotel chain in the state of Louisiana, to cater to hotels. He is currently -- he told me that his hotels are being looked at by FEMA to house the workers for the long haul of the so-called reconstruction. I was talking to him, as his head of security and after he pulled off in his S.U.V., about 30 Mexican workers came out of his hotel, and one of his security guards said that they had been brought in from Texas, and in fact another news report, about Patrick Quinn, said that he had brought in workers from Texas as well. So, we have the reality of these shelters full of people wanting work and then you see Mexican workers being brought in from Texas, and when they're done, doing this dirty work, they will be put on the back of trucks, piled into trucks and they go to wherever it is that they were staying.

This man, Patrick Quinn is bidding for these contracts where FEMA potentially could come in and rent out hundreds and hundreds of rooms in his hotel and other businesses are struggling to simply stay alive or scramble to get federal money to rebuild, he is standing to gain a tremendous amount of money from these lucrative federal contracts. It must be noted that he is a major contributor to the Republican party. In fact, his wife was just elected in the special election to the state Senate. Her name is Julie Quinn. And Amy, he has brought in security from a company called B.A.T.S. in Alabama: Bodyguard And Tactical Services. And I was talking to his head of security, I told him I was from New York, he said, I�ve been to New York during the daily news strike, referring to the strike the at the New York Daily News. Democracy Now! co-host, Juan Gonzalez, is a Daily News columnist was one of the leaders of the strike. I told him that Juan Gonzalez was a colleague of mine and he told me that he spiked Juan Gonzalez's car. He said he had put sugar in the gas tank of Juan Gonzalez's car. The man's name is Michael Montgomery, and he is the head of security for B.A.T.S. Security in Alabama, bragging about spiking the car of Juan Gonzalez and other strike leaders in the New York Daily News strike. He is heading up security for the Decatur Hotel chain, owned by Patrick Quinn, a major businessman in New Orleans, his wife a Republican state senator. This is just one example of cronyism that we see on the ground where the wealthy Republican contributors are being considered now for these tremendous federal contracts.

AMY GOODMAN: We're talking to Jeremy Scahill, he is the Democracy Now! Correspondent on the ground now in New Orleans, Baton Rouge. You also spent time at the jail, which is the converted Greyhound Train Station, is that right? Run by the head of the Angola prison, the largest prison in this country.

JEREMY SCAHILL: Right. One of the things that happened, and it was something we're going to be looking at very closely on democracy now!, continue to in the coming weeks, that is what happened to the prisoners who were inside the Orleans parish prison as well as other facilities as prisoners now start to get released. They're going to be telling their stories, and one of the makeshift places that they took people was the -- they converted the Greyhound and Amtrak terminals into prisons where they brought people, and so they're using the concrete areas where the buses would pull in to house prisoners and they shipped them off to various parts of the country. In that downtown area, it's really sort of desolate and abandoned, and now they call it �Camp Greyhound� where they're running a prison. This is the major question that still looms in the air here, and that is-- what is going to happen to all of these people who were arrested the night before the hurricane struck, for instance, on minor violations who should have been processed in a matter of hours and then released, and they have been shipped all over the country, all over the state. Now you have lawyers scrambling to try to track down where people are, and make sure that they can get out.

One of the great concerns right now in New Orleans is businessmen talking openly of wanting to see New Orleans change, to change it completely in a demographic sense, geographically, politically, racially. You have this overt rhetoric. Well, as residents of New Orleans come back in and they try to go back to the apartments they were rent stabilized, the houses they were renting, they face a city that has repressive laws that do not protect tenants. You have an overt agenda to change the racial makeup of the city, the economic makeup of the city, and you have these very wealthy people hiring private mercenary types to guard their property and their interests. Then you also have the National Guard and the Army inside of the city now, and so the potential for conflict with residents coming back in is very great. A lot of people are very concerned now with this Marshal Law still in effect with the military curfew in effect, that that is going to remain as people come back and live here. It's one thing to have Martial law when you have a depopulated city. It's another thing to have it when you have people who want to go about the business of rebuilding their lives, particularly when they are being told by very wealthy, powerful people backed up by men with guns that they are not welcome in the city that they have lived in their whole life. We have a potential, I think, for serious, overt conflict, hot conflict here in New Orleans as people start coming back in.

AMY GOODMAN: And Jeremy, we all went over to Southern University, a black college in Baton Rouge where some of the evacuees had gathered to talk about how they can be a part of the planning for the reconstruction. Very difficult, because the most disempowered people have been sent off to areas all over the country, from Utah to Cape Cod, often not knowing when they were getting on a bus or perhaps a plane, where they were actually going to land. While they were sent off there, do they have the money even to return, let alone be a part of how this city will be rebuilt?

JEREMY SCAHILL: Right. I was just watching CNN and they were interviewing a guy they're called the pied piper of hurricane Katrina, a guy from Ohio, who has come to the Houston Astrodome to recruit 100 people who are -- who had left New Orleans to try to bring them to settle in Ohio. I mean, what they're really trying to do is to settle the poor and the African-American populations of New Orleans elsewhere. And to make New Orleans a nice, white city, for white, rich businessmen. There's no other way to put it. That's exactly what we're seeing right now. They want to take areas for instance like the ninth ward and turn them into big -- you know, Wal-Mart type neighborhoods. In fact, we heard mayor Nagin talk yesterday about how one of the first things they want to do is set up a gigantic Wal-Mart so people returning can have a place to shop in New Orleans. This hurricane is the greatest thing to happen to Wal-Mart since the superstore. And this is a very serious racist series of actions that we're seeing here right now. This is has everything to do with class and everything to do with race, and it's very, very frightening. And yes, we attended a conference where grassroots activists are talking about a plan for rebuilding New Orleans, but it's on right now, and they're not a part of it. The people that are a part of it are old-time Louisiana white Republican families working in conjunction with their friend, mayor Ray Nagin, and there's no other way to put it. They love Ray Nagin. He's pro-business. He's their guy.

Look at the comments of James Rice, a local businessman, who is one of the leaders of the private Audubon Place, the gated community. The only privately owned in the city of New Orleans. He told The Wall Street Journal, �Those who want to see this city rebuilt want to see it done in a completely different way, demographically, geographically and politically. I'm not just speaking for myself here. The way we have been living is not going to happen again or we�re out.� James Rice has brought in Israeli para-militaries to guard his facility. It's Israeli company that brags about having former members of the Shin Beit, the GSS, the Israeli Defense Forces. He has brought them in. I was talking to them in front of his property. Some of them participated in the Israeli invasion of Lebanon, and these are guys now who are patrolling outside on St. Charles avenue in front of Audubon Place and will potentially come into conflict with residents of New Orleans. What on earth are Israeli paramilitaries doing on the streets of New Orleans? These are the questions that people need to ask right now, defending a man like James Rice who was called for the poor to not be allowed back into New Orleans.

AMY GOODMAN: And Jeremy, as people are -- some people slowly making their way back, reports of the spraying of the city with pesticide that's never been used on urban populations and they're mixing it with blue dye so that the pilots can see where they have sprayed, I think its called something like NALID, have you seen planes dispersing this pesticide?

JEREMY SCAHILL: I remember the other night you called me and you alerted me to this, and just today I had seen what I thought were some sort of spy drones because really, what we have seen here is sort of -- some people are calling it �New Oraq� instead of New Orleans, because of all of the various forces, the Halliburtons, the KBR's, the Blackwaters that are here now, the connections to Iraq are so incredible. The same looters who have raided the federal funds in Iraq, U.S. funds in Iraq, are looting federal funds here in New Orleans. Yes, I saw the drones flying overhead. I'm concerned, very concerned of the toxic waste that they're now dumping on the city in addition to the horribly unsafe waters that flow through the city and continue to flow through the city.

AMY GOODMAN: Jeremy Scahill, thank you for being with us. Jeremy, speaking to us from Baton Rouge, Louisiana. This is democracy now! 

----

Students can opt out of this war

By Amy Pincus Merwin
and Steven Merwin
Published: Friday, September 16, 2005
Eugene OR Register-Guard

http://www.registerguard.com/news/2005/09/16/ed.col.merwin.0916.p1.php?section=opinion#

The death toll of our American soldiers in Iraq approaches 2,000. Those returning may face lifelong challenges from physical or mental wounds. Meanwhile, the armaments industries increase their profits, the national debt skyrockets, gas prices climb and public support of the Bush administration erodes.

In the midst of all this, how do we say that it is not acceptable to send our young people to war?

Parents of high school-age kids can make sure that their children's names are not given to military recruiters. Section 9528 of the No Child Left Behind act requires public secondary schools to provide military recruiters not only with access to facilities, but also with contact information for every student. Schools that do not comply face a cutoff of all federal aid.

The law allows parents and students to opt out of having their names given to military recruiters. This is backward - students or parents who want their names given to recruiters should have to opt in. Giving students' names to recruiters is an invasion of privacy, and we believe it is a violation of the Fourth Amendment. We urge students or parents to use the method that their schools will accept to prevent the student's name from being given to military recruiters.

The Eugene School District has provided two methods for parents and students to opt out: A form on Page 20 of the district's annual school calendar, and a similar form in every high school packet. Students can turn them in to their high school office.

Parents and students also can simply create their own statement, addressed to the principal: "I do not wish for (insert school's name here) to release directory information about (insert student's name here) to military recruiters." The statement should be dated and signed by the student, a parent or a guardian. Opt-out statements or forms should be turned in to school principals or school offices by Oct. 15.

Even those who opt out still might receive letters and phone calls from recruiters. When our son began receiving calls, we told them clearly not to call again. We said that our son was not interested in joining the armed forces, and that neither he nor we supported a never-ending war with an ever-changing rationale and without purpose. If they continue to call, ask to speak to their commanding officer and request that the calls be stopped.

Eugene's Committee on Counter-Military Recruiting, an effort of the Community Alliance of Lane County and Eugene Peaceworks, learned that in 2002, before any publicity went out to parents, only 10 percent of Eugene School District students opted out. In 2003, the year the committee began educating the community about opting-out, the figure rose to 32 percent.

By last November, the number had risen to 43 percent. It will be interesting to see this year's statistic.

Many school districts don't realize that just as they have a legal obligation to give students' names to military recruiters, they have an equal obligation to inform students and parents about their rights to opt out. Informing students and parents is the key - if people know that they have a choice, they use that option to protect themselves and their families from military recruiters' unwanted intrusions and pressures.

U.S. Rep. Peter DeFazio is a co-signer for House Resolution 551, known as the Honda Bill, which would reverse Section 9528 and direct local educational agencies to release secondary school student information to military recruiters only if the student's parent provides written consent. Please support this effort.

Choosing peace can mean that students might begin to build their personal files of peaceful writing and activities in order to establish their identities as conscientious objectors. They might choose to register online as a CO at www.pointofclarity.org and on many other online registries.

Living with a commitment to peace does not mean that people cannot defend themselves or their families, nor does it mean that they cannot be passionate about standing up for what they believe in. But is does mean that they've had "a point of clarity" - the moment of realization when, for reasons of conscience, one refuses to take part in warfare.

We must learn how to be peaceful people, and then our children will learn peace from their homes and practice it in our communities and our world.

Amy Pincus Merwin is a writer and a radio and TV producer. Steven Merwin, a Vietnam-era veteran, is a family therapist in private practice in Eugene and Corvallis. They began pointofclarity.org, an online registry for conscientious objection. 

----

Debating Cindy Sheehan
Bill O'Reilly vs. Phil Donahue

By CounterPunch News Service
September 16, 2005

http://www.counterpunch.org/oreilly09232005.html

Transcript from the O'Reilly Factor, FoxNews

O'REILLY: In the past Miss [Cindy] Sheehan has criticized Israel, saying it is occupying Palestine, has called Iraqi insurgents "freedom fighters," has accused Americans of killing people ever since we stepped on this continent, has threatened Hillary Clinton with the loss her job unless she calls for a pullout of US troops from Iraq and has called the US action against Afghanistan a failure. Quite a resume and with us now is Phil Donahue, who supports Miss Sheehan's "dissent." So, I'm assuming you don't - you don't support all her positions that I just chronicled.

DONAHUE: Let's understand what's happening here. Once again we have a woman who got to be just a little too famous for the people who support this war, a minority of the American population, by the way, and so the effort to marginalize this woman is underway and you're helping out.

O'REILLY: I'm the leader of the pack!

DONAHUE: You're suggesting ...

O'REILLY: I'm the leader of the pack!

DONAHUE: First of all, Cindy Sheehan is one tough mother and nothing you say or anyone else is gonna slow her down.

O'REILLY: That's fine. She has a right to ...

DONAHUE: You can't hurt her. She's already taken the biggest punch in the nose that a woman can take.

O'REILLY: How?!

DONAHUE: She lost a son.

O'REILLY: Oh. OK.

DONAHUE: She's lost a child.

O'REILLY: But look - I'm not puttin' words in her mouth ...

DONAHUE: And by the way, she is going to be at the center of one of the largest rallies since the Vietnam War. Proud, patriotic Americans who will show up in Washington this week for one of the most massive, largest demonstrations - protest demonstrations ...

O'REILLY: OK. And we'll cover it.

DONAHUE: ... right outside the President's window.

O'REILLY: And we'll cover it.

DONAHUE: And FOX is in the business of saying that this woman is somehow saying un-American things - hyperbole.

O'REILLY (getting angry): No. No. No. No.

DONAHUE: Listen to what she's saying.

O'REILLY (checking his notes): Nobody said she said anything un-American. We say that her positions are radical. And they are radical!

DONAHUE: Let me tell you what's radical. (getting a little angry himself) What's radical is to send more Americans to die in this war, which is a monumental blunder by a President ...

O'REILLY (under his breath): Alright.

DONAHUE: ... who swaggered us into it with - by the way - the at least tacit approval of the Democratic Party.

O'REILLY (shifts in his chair, upset): You know what's radical ...

DONAHUE: There's a lot of sin to go around here!

O'REILLY (angry, wags finger at Donahue): What's radical for this -

DONAHUE (won't let O'Reilly finish sentence): Do you want to send more people to this war?

O'REILY: Hey listen ...

DONAHUE: Is that your postiion?

O'REILLY: If we cut and run outta there, like you wanna do, we would be putting every American in a thousand times more jeopardy than they're in now.

DONAHUE (forcefully): We're going to cut and run anyway, Bill.

O'REILLY: Well, that's your opinion. I don't think we are.

DONAHUE: It's not my opinion. American military leaders have said we're gonna draw down beginning next year. The reason they've said that ...

O'REILLY(angry now): There's a difference between drawin' down and cuttin' and runnin'!

DONAHUE: Alright....

O'REILLY (angry, jabs finger at Donahue): You're a cut and run guy and I don't want my family in danger because of you ...

DONAHUE: You wanna stay the course, don't ya'?

O'REILLY: Look.

DONAHUE: You don't ...

O'REILLY (getting angrier): Here's what I want to do. I want to give the Iraqis a chance to train their army so they can defeat these people who are tryin' to turn it into a terror state.

DONAHUE (calmly): Bill

O'REILLY: That's what I want to do! Go!

DONAHUE: Bill. This - Iraq was not a terrorist state.

O'REILLY (exasperated): Oh, no!

DONAHUE: I hope I don't patronize you for saying ...

O'REILLY (dismissive hand gesture) : Saddam was a swell guy!!

DONAUME: Saddam ...

O'REILLY (loudly, sarcastically): He was just a great guy!!

DONAHUE (louder): Saddam - Saddam was a bastard, but he was our bastard!!

O'REILLY: He wasn't anybody's ...

DONAHUE: Donald Rumsfeld shook his hand in the 80s.

O'REILLY: Alright. Well that's great.

DONAHUE: You saw the pictures! (reasonable tone of voice) Now listen - listen. You wouldn't send your children to this war, Bill.

O'REILLY (very angry, pointing): My nephew just enlisted in the Army. You don't know what the hell you're talkin' about!!!

DONAHUE: Very good. Very good. Congratulations! You should be proud ..

O'REILLY (starts to lose it, shouting, pointing finger, hand shaking): And he's a patriot, so don't denigrate his service or I'll boot you right off the set!!!

DONAHUE: I'm not ... I'm not ...

O'REILLY (very, very loud): That boy made a decision to serve his country!!! Do not denigrate him or you're outta here!!!

DONAHUE (calmly): I'm not Jeremy Glick, Billy.

O'REILLY: That's right!!

DONAHUE: You can't intimidate me!!

O'REILLY: You're a little bit more intelligent that he is!!

DONAHUE: I'm not somebody you can come and just spew all your ...

O'REILLY: Don't tell me I wouldn't send my kids.

DONAHUE: Loud doesn't mean right!

O'REILLY: My nephew just enlisted. You don't know what you're talkin' about!!

DONAHUE: Your nephew is not your kid. You are like ...

O'REILLY: He's my blood!

DONAHUE: You are part of a loud group of people who wanna prove they're tough ...

O'REILLY (shifts angrily in his chair, under his breath): Aw fer ...

DONAHUE: ... and send other people's kids to war to make the case.

O'REILLY (very loud): You have no clue ...

DONAHUE: This ..

O'REILLY: ... about how to fight a war on terror or how to defend your country. You are clueless! So is Miss Sheehan and for Miss Sheehan to say that the insurgents have a right to kill Americans and you're shakin' her hand! You oughta just walk away.

DONHUE (quieter): How many more young men and women are you gonna send to have their arms and legs blown off ...

O'REILY: Hey, this is a war on terror!

DONAHUE: ... so that you can be tough (points his finger at O'Reilly) and point at people in a kind of cowardly way..

O'REILLY (disgusted, under his breath): Oh, yeah.

DONHUE: Take people like Jeremy Glick who comes on to - in memory of his parents ...

O'REILLY: Oh bull.

DONAHUE: ... and you go off on him.

O'REILLY: Jeremy Glick accu ...

DONAHUE: ... like a big bully.

O'REILLY: Hey!

DOAHUE: Billy, you hafta be - you hafta feel sorry ...

O'REILLY: Mr. Donahue, with all due respect ...

DONAHUE: Have you apologized to him for that?

O'REILLY: Baloney!

DONAHUE: Do you know ...

O'REILLY: Jeremy Glick came on this program ...

DONAHUE: Do you know what I'm talking about?

O'REILLY: ... and accused the President of the United States ...

DONAHUE (sarcastically): Oh, and you had to ..

O'REILLY: ... of orchestrating 9/11. That's what he did. Right after 9/11!! Do you know what the pain that brought the families who lost people in 9/11?

DONAHUE: This war ...

O'REILLY: You buy into left-wing propaganda ...

DONAHUE: This war ..

O'REILLY: ... and you're a mouthpiece for it. (shifts in seat, clenched mouth) Go ahead.

DONAHUE: This war is not fair to the American troops. This war is unconstitutional. This war turned its back on the people who framed the most fabulous document in the history of civilization. I speak of the United States Constitution.

O'REILLY: Alright. Why ...

DONAHUE: This ... By the way ...

O'REILLY: Why isn't the Democratic party speaking that way?

DONAHUE: I'm sorry that it isn't. I am. But let's understand something ...

O'REILLY: Are we all ...

DONAHUE: Excuse me.

O'REILLY: Are well so misguided ...

DONAHUE: Excuse me. Twenty-one Democrats in the Senate voted against this war as well as Jeffords, an Independent, and- may the Lord shine His blessings down upon Lincoln Chaffee ...

O'REILLY: Alright. I'm gonna say something and I'm gonna ...

DONAHUE (louder, refuses to be stopped): I'm almost finished, Billy!!

O'REILLY: I'm gonna give ya' the last word.

DONAHUE: I'm almost finished!

O'REILLY: Alright.

DONAHUE: Lincoln Chaffee, the only Republican in the Senate to vote against this war. We should be building statues to all these people. October 2002 ...

O'REILLY: Alright;

DONAHUE: ... they stood up to as President and they knew that, first of all, only Congress can declare war. Why is that unimportant to you, Billy?

O'REILLY: Listen. It's not - I'm not ...

DONAHUE: Become the patriot that your loud voice proclaims you to be ...

O'REILLY: The loud voice ...

DONAHUE: ... and stand behind the Constitution and insist that we never go to war again without the approval and the consent of the United States Congress.

O'REILLY: Alright . That's why we have the Congress. If they want to take action, they can take action. Now I'm gonna say somethin' then I'll give you the last word. The Iraq War is not something I embrace.

DONAHUE makes surprised sound.

O'REILLY: It absolutely could be a tactical error.

DONAHUE: Well you should ...

O'REILLY (louder): Just listen.

DONAHUE: It's hard to know this.

O'REILLY (louder): Listen ta' me ..

DONAHUE: It's hard to know this.

O'REILLY: ... and I'll give you the last word. Not something they embrace. Could be a tactical error and we have not waged it the way I had hoped we would wage it.

DONAHUE: But, what?

O'REILLY: But ,,,

DONAHUE: You want to send more kids ...

O'REILLY: The war on terror ...

DONAHUE: ... to die.

O'REILLY: We're in a war on terror. Our cause is noble.

DONAHUE: It has nothing to do with the war on terror.

O'REILLY (louder again): Yes, it does. And if you don't understand geopolitics, if you don't understand Iraq would be a terrorist state if we pulled outta there...

DONAHUE (loudly): It's a mistake.

O'REILLY: ... then you don't know anything. Go ahead.

DONAHUE: It was poorly planned ...

O'REILLY: Go ahead.

DONAHUE: ... and poorly executed but Bill O'Reilly wants to send more kids to fight and die. We've already had two thou - almost thousand - (gestures for O'Reilly to hold off) - just let me have the last word. In the last year two things have doubled. The number of dead American troops in Iraq has doubled and you know what else doubled, Billy? The price of Halliburton stock.

O'REILLY (upset): Alright.

DONAHUE: From $33 to $66. That doesn't shame you? That doesn't make you wonder ...

O'REILLY: I'm not upset by Halliburton stock.

DONAHUE: ... whether this is an enterprise that is worth the support of the American people. We need you at this rally on Saturday, Billy..

O'REILLY: OK. I'm not gonna be at your rally.

DONAHUE: We need you out there in front of it to protest.

O'REILLY: I'm not gonna be at your rally.

DONAHUE: There is no democracy without dissent.

O'REILLY: I'm not gonna protest.

DONHUE: You should be proud of people who stand up and dissent.

O'REILLY: I am. I respect your ...

DONAHUE: A lot of fine men died to give me that freedom.

O'REILLY: You got. You got it. I respect your dissent. I think you're way off in your analysis of the war on terror.

DONAHUE: You want to send more people to die? Is that your position?

O'REILLY: I wanna win the war in Iraq.

DONABHUE: Win. What does "win" mean?

O'REILLY: Means ...

DONAHUE: Tell me what "win" means?

O'REILLY: Means those people have a chance at democracy.

DOPNAHUE: How long's that gonna take.

O'REILLY: I gotta go. I gotta go.

DONAHUE: How long's that gonna take?

O'REILLY: Those people deserve a chance at freedom.