NucNews - October 24, 2005 -------- NUCLEAR -------- asia Asian Division on Iranian Nukes? By Philip Dorsey Iglauer, October 24, 2005 Korea Times http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/opinion/200510/kt2005102417233354190.htm The conflict over Iran’s uranium-enriching activities crescendoed on Sept. 24 in a controversial vote, exposing divisions within the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), the Asia Pacific region and between the developing East and the wealthy West. It was the third time the IAEA board was forced to vote on adopting a resolution in 20 years, failing to get the consensus that secures the enforcement body’s international credibility. Unless a deal is soon patched together, Tehran will likely be punished again by another divided IAEA board on Nov. 24 when it re-convenes, throwing the issue before the U.N. Security Council. China or Russia would certainly veto any resolution imposing on Tehran economic sanctions that are being pressed for by the U.S. and European countries. This confrontation would split the international community still reeling from disagreements over the quagmire in Iraq into embittered camps, this time pitting the energy-starved East against a security-fixated West. Improving Indo-Iranian and Indo-American relations could stave off the above unhappy scenario. India could serve as a bridge of sorts, a moderating influence on the extreme positions of Iran and the U.S. Regardless of whether Indo-Iranian fuzziness can deflate an international nuclear crisis, however, Iranian-Korean bi-lateral trade will suffer. Uncertainty surrounding President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s promise to use trade as a weapon for attaining Tehran’s nuclear ambitions is what poses the most immediate threat to burgeoning economic relations. But in the long-term, Ahmadinejad’s inward-looking domestic politics will cast a shadow over the openness and entrepreneurism that spurred Iran’s economic relationship with South Korea. Asian countries are split on Iran’s nuclear program with Japan, South Korea and, inexplicably, India, voting last month for an IAEA resolution finding Tehran in violation of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) while China and Russia abstained. Until very recently, India was, along with China and Russia, opposed to dragging Iran’s nuclear activities before a harsh IAEA or, indeed, the United Nations Security Council. In fact, India opposes the NPT’s argument that the treaty by design stunts developing countries right to nuclear power and the pursuit of economic livelihood, to say nothing of the ``extra-legal’’ demands of Europe and the U.S. The United States, Britain, France, Germany, Japan, Singapore, South Korea, and India voted for the resolution. Pakistan, China, Russia, South Africa, Sri Lanka and Vietnam abstained. Venezuela voted against the resolution. At first, the Iranian nuke crisis did not shake the NAM. Twelve of the 14 IAEA board members from the group that refused to take sides in the Cold War met to forge a common position, but India broke ranks at the last minute and supported the U.S. and the European troika of Britain, France and Germany. The ten countries that abstained with Russia and China belong to the NAM. India voting for the U.S. and against its third world allies represents a major division in the movement. India, however, as well as the NAM, China and Russia, wants to see the confrontation fizzle out and does not want it to come before the U.N. Security Council. The IAEA has almost always adopted resolutions by consensus, because not to would open the institution to the criticism that it is politically motivated. That is poison to its credibility, which is all it has, and would damage its 35-member enforcement body and the NPT. The world regime against the spread of nuclear weapons would be irreparably undermined. How Iran will react if India supports the United States in an actual U.N. resolution condemning Iran remains to be seen. India is no doubt doing its best to avoid such a development. It appears that Iran has partially fulfilled its promise of punishing states pressuring it over its nuclear program. Media reports indicate Iran is blocking imports of British and South Korean goods. For South Korea, the import restrictions would be bad, as the openness of Iran’s consumer market translated into expansive sales of Korean cars and electronics. ``South Korean exports to Iran rose 44 percent to $1.7 billion in 2003,’’ said South Korea’s deputy head of the International Trade Association Young Lee, adding that in the six months before the meeting bilateral trade stood at $2.8 billion, a 30-percent year-to-date increase. Mohammad Khatami, Iran’s fifth president who served from 1997 to 2005, set Iran on a path of expanding trade and economic reform, including market reforms. Under his forward-thinking Islamic openness, Iran saw trade with South Korea blossom from next-to-nothing to Korea being Iran’s fifth largest trading partner. Iran’s new populist Islamic president promises to use trade to push its foreign policy goals. Though South Korea-Iran trade will suffer in the coming years, Indian-Iranian relations moderating U.S. hardliners will serve Washington’s long-term interests. Thus, Tehran and Washington can cut a deal preventing the IAEA from casting another divided vote and a crisis from erupting in the U.N. Security Council. Many experts in Washington at least seem to think so. Christine Fair, a South Asia specialist at the Washington-based Institute for Peace made the case for Iran-India relations advancing stability in the region. Even the promotion of democracy in Iran and the containment of Wahhabism in the Middle East have been proffered as benefits of Indian-Iranian relations. The following year, India and Iran signed a multibillion-dollar deal to supply India with 7.5 million tons of natural gas annually for 25 years from 2009 and Indian development of oilfields in Iran. Though India split from its NAM allies and voted against Iran on the nuclear issue, it is unlikely to take further action, as New Delhi refrained from openly condemning Iran and has instead tried to focus on the positive relations between the two countries. India was pressured to support the U.S. and is in a difficult position, because it does not want to endanger its nuclear agreement with Washington. But it also does not want to destroy its relationship with Iran. Iran seems open to India brokering a deal between Tehran and Washington, refraining from punishing India in trade matters. Iran recognizes the important role India can play as a regional partner and broker and wants to avoid damaging relations. The tightrope New Delhi walks between Washington and Tehran could be an advantage to brokering a deal between them. A successful Indian high wire act could determine if a second international nuclear crisis will be avoided. Indo-Iranian fuzziness began as a friendship of convenience in the post-Cold War world when the extremist Taliban took over Afghanistan; they both backed the Afghan Northern Alliance. Shiite Iran saw its security interests threatened by the Taliban and predominantly Sunni Pakistan’s lopsided influence in the central Asian country. India must move beyond Asian division and use its friendships of convenience with the U.S. and Iran to prevent a worldwide nuclear crisis. ephilip2005@hotmail.com 10-24-2005 17:25 -------- britain Explosive plan for power station BY DAVID GREEN October 24, 2005 07:05 East Anglian Daily Times http://www.eadt.co.uk/homeStory.asp?Brand=EADONLINE&Category=NEWS&ItemId=IPED23+Oct+2005+23%3A07%3A47%3A940 A COMMUNITY which is already living with the threat of a terrorist attack on a nuclear power site now faces the possibility of explosives being used to demolish part of the Sizewell A plant, it has emerged. Officials drawing up plans to demolish the plant at the end of its operating lifetime say they have not yet decided whether to use explosive charges. However, they have given an assurance that, if the method is employed, local residents will be informed in advance to prevent panic. Disclosure that the use of explosives is being considered comes as a result of publication of the formal Environmental Impact Assessment of plans to decommission the A station. The document has been published only a week after the revelation that drawings and slides of the layout of Sizewell B were found in a car linked to one of the alleged London tube bombers. Sizewell A is due to cease generating electricity at the end of next year after a 40-year operating lifetime. The British Nuclear Group is seeking Government approval to phase the demolition of the plant over a period of between 93 and 113 years in order to save money and reduce radiation risks for workers. The plan is to demolish non radiation-risk ancillary buildings in the first ten years and then leave the power station in a “safestore” condition until the twin reactors are dismantled and removed. However, the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, a body appointed by the Government to take charge of the work, is currently consulting on its suggestion that the demolition period can safely be reduced to 25 or 30 years. The environmental assessment identifies the likely impact of demolition work on the area and sets out plans to minimise disturbance to local residents and the coastal stretch. It makes clear that no decision has yet been made over whether to use explosives to demolish parts of the power station. “In the event that the use of explosives for demolition is proposed, members of the public and operators at Sizewell B will be informed in advance of the event. “This will avoid the surprise element of the impact. Good blasting practice will also be adopted,” the document states. Peter Lanyon, spokesman for the Shut Down Sizewell Campaign, described the idea of exploding anything radioactive as “ridiculous”, and also called for the demolition process to be as short as possible. He added: “In the Environmental Statement, they suggest a storage time of 85 to 105 years while the radioactivity reduces. “The Shut Down Sizewell Campaign favours a much shorter storage period so that the materials can be removed much more quickly, in 35 years. “This is done elsewhere, Italy are doing it to similar sorts of reactors. It's safe.” The assessment also details that noise coming from the Sizewell A site would increase by a maximum of 6.6 decibels to 58 decibels during the initial ten-year demolition period. Peak heavy good vehicle journeys are expected to be 17 a day in the first ten years and 25 a day during the final demolition phase. About 400 workers would be on site during the first phase of demolition work and 450 would be involved in final site clearance. Radioactive discharges to the sea and air will continue during the decommissioning phase but at a reduced level compared with normal operation. High level radioactive waste - primarily spent fuel elements - will continue to be sent to the Sellafield reprocessing works but intermediate level waste might be stored on site until a national dump becomes available. Most of the low level radioactive waste would continue to be taken to a dump in Cumbria but some “very low level” waste could be stored on site. Pat Hogan, Sizewell residents' spokeswoman, said decommissioning would be a “replay” of the construction period. “We would look to be reassured that all the issues identified in the document will be addressed in detail and that residents will be given similar consideration as when the B station was built,” she added. Copies of the British Nuclear Group's environmental impact assessment are available free of charge on CD-ROM from the Information and Document Centre, British Nuclear Group, Berkeley, Gloucestershire, GL13 9PB. Hard copies of the non-technical summary are also available. ---- 'No case' for new nuclear power Wales needs to consider all energy options, says Andrew Davies Monday, 24 October 2005 (BBC) http://www.oregonlive.com/newsflash/washingtonstate/index.ssf?/base/business-2/1130007242290070.xml&storylist=orwashington http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/4370706.stm Nuclear energy is not a commercial proposition in Wales, claims the economic development minister. Andrew Davies said Wales must instead capitalise on the 250m tonnes of coal that remains underground. Last week, Energy Minister Malcolm Wicks said the review of energy policy announced by the prime minister would include civil nuclear power. Friends of the Earth said nuclear power was "unacceptable" but the assembly should do more to cut carbon emissions. Mr Davies told BBC Wales that he had been in talks with Mr Wicks to highlight the need for investment in "clean coal" technology. He said that he must follow the UK government's policy on energy as it was not a fully devolved matter, but that was a situation he would like to change. The minister said all options must be considered including wind He said: "We feel strongly that we need a stronger role. "I did make the case to Malcolm Wicks that we're in an anomalous position. For example the Cefn Croes wind farm... we had no formal role. "Our role was very proscribed and restricted and we think that this is inappropriate considering the importance of energy production in Wales." Mr Davies also said that all energy options had to be considered because Wales needed a wide range of energy sources. Friends of the Earth Cymru has called on the assembly government to create a new ministerial position for Energy and Climate Change. The green campaign group said it believed new technology in renewable marine energy, such as tidal and wave power, was not being developed as a way for a drive for nuclear power to succeed. Civil nuclear power FoE Cymru director Julian Rosser said: "We need to be reduce the amount of electricity that we use - the assembly has been less effective in pushing energy efficiency. "In the long tem, we need to reduce the amount of energy in transport. That is not something the assembly is making any efforts on at all, what we're seeing is more road-building going on." Energy Minister Mr Wicks addressed the British Wind Energy Association conference in Cardiff last week to say renewable energy sources would remain a "crucial part of the mix" of the government's review of energy policy. He said: "We will be looking across the board, and that includes civil nuclear power, with proposals to be published next year." The last nuclear power plant to be built in Wales, the Magnox plant at Wylfa, on Anglesey, is due to end of production in 2010. A 1979 survey found 250m tonnes of good quality coal in Wales, but the pit closure programme during the 1980s has led to only 20m of it being mined. ---- New nuclear power base 'unlikely' 24 October 2005 Hartlepool Today (UK) http://www.hartlepooltoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=1109&ArticleID=1230677 ANOTHER nuclear power station for Hartlepool is highly unlikely, says the town's MP. But Hartlepool MP Iain Wright refused outright to say whether or not he was in favour of the idea. He said he would be extremely surprised if the town was to become home to a second nuclear power station and stressed it is not what the people of Hartlepool want. When asked by the Mail, he added: "I am not going to say if I am for or against it." Speculation has been mounting that the Tees Road site could again be used as a nuclear power centre after Hartlepool Power Station shuts down in 2014. Prime Minister Tony Blair has outlined plans that could see a new generation of nuclear power stations. The Government confirmed it would "make sense" if Hartlepool was a site for one of them. But Mr Wright, pictured, added: "I have spoken to British Energy and they have said the town would have to lobby for it. "People would have to come forward and say we want it. I don't think there is that kind of feeling in the town." At present Britain's 12 nuclear power stations provide 22 per cent of the UK's electricity. Unless they are replaced, there will be three nuclear power stations in operation by 2020, producing seven per cent of the electrical power needed. A spokesperson for British Energy, which runs Hartlepool Power Station, said any new nuclear builds are a matter for Government. MP TIGHT-LIPPED ON VIEWS THE Mail attempted to clarify Mr Wright's position on a second nuclear plant for the town. The conversation went as follows: Mail: Can you tell me what your position is? Mr Wright: "Our energy needs are increasing and we need to tackle fossil fuels in relation to oil and gas. We need to look at a broad range of things." Mail: What is your personal opinion on whether Hartlepool should become home to a second nuclear power station? Mr Wright: "I want to push the renewables. We need to look sensibly and in a grown-up manner about nuclear. My two main concerns are waste and people's fear. Mail: Can you tell me if you are for or against another nuclear power station? Mr Wright: "I am not going to say if I am for or against it. Let's see what is required. Let's push the renewables and make sure we are satisfying energy needs." Mail: Are you saying you are keeping both options open? Mr Wright: "I am not saying that. You are putting words in my mouth. My concerns are waste and people's fear. If we are going to look at nuclear we need to do it sensibly." -------- china China's Tianwan Nuclear Power Station Starts Operation Monday, 24 October 2005, 09:00 CDT BBC Monitoring Asia Pacific http://www.rednova.com/news/science/282019/chinas_tianwan_nuclear_power_station_starts_operation/index.html?source=r_science Text of report in English by official Chinese news agency Xinhua (New China News Agency) Lianyungang, Jiangsu Province, 24 October: The Tianwan nuclear power station in this coastal city of east China's Jiangsu Province started nuclear operation Sunday [23 October] morning, as fuel loading for its No 1 generator, which began last week, is proceeding smoothly. The Tianwan station boasts so far the largest generators in installed capacity in China, sources at the power station said. The nuclear power station, also the largest Sino-Russian economic cooperation project, obtained approval for fuel loading from the State Nuclear Security Bureau early last week. It began loading on 18 October and has since loaded 86 sets of nuclear fuel assembly into the reactor core. The whole loading process will last 10 days, involving a total of 163 sets of nuclear fuel assembly, the sources said. Construction work started in October 1999 on the Tianwan nuke project. Its first phase includes two pressure water reactor generators, each with an installed capacity of 1.06m kW. The sources said the nuke site can accommodate eight generators each with an installed capacity of 1m kW or more and with a combined capacity of 8-10m kW. Upon completion, the power station will generate 60-70bn kWh of electricity a year and realize more than 25bn yuan (3.08bn US dollars) in annual output value. Started in the 1980s, China's nuclear power industry now has generators with a total installed capacity of 6.7m kW, with 10 generators under construction with combined capacity of some 9.3m kW. Currently, nuclear power accounts for 2.3 per cent of electricity generated nationwide annually, yet the proportion has reached 13 per cent in economically developed Guangdong and Zhejiang provinces, as against the 16-per cent average of the world. China plans to build 31 nuclear power stations by 2020, and increase the total installed capacity of all nuke projects to 40m kW. -------- europe France launches EDF energy selloff Mon Oct 24, 2005 5:58 AM ET By Emelia Sithole (Reuters) http://today.reuters.com/business/newsArticle.aspx?type=ousiv&storyID=2005-10-24T105756Z_01_MOR439429_RTRIDST_0_BUSINESSPRO-UTILITIES-EDF-DC.XML PARIS - France's conservative government gave the green light on Monday to the sale of up to 15 percent of power giant EDF, in a politically charged partial privatization criticized by unions and opposition Socialists. Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin said the French state would keep at least 85 percent of what has until now been a jealously guarded state utility, after opening up its capital to the public in a maneuver to be launched within days. "The opening of EDF's capital will be a fine example of popular share ownership in France," Villepin told a news conference. He did not give any financial details of the flotation, which ministers have said could raise anywhere between 5 billion euros and 9 billion for the company. The government will not use the sale to raise cash directly to reduce public debt, focusing instead on less controversial plans for an 11 billion euro selloff of French motorways. Finance Minister Thierry Breton called a news conference for 1045 GMT to give more details of the EDF (EDF.UL: Quote, Profile, Research) deal, which is set to be one of Europe's largest single stock market operations. If the amount to be raised comes in at the high end of ministerial forecasts, the initial public offering would in dollar terms rival AT&T's (T.N: Quote, Profile, Research) $10.6 billion offering in 2000 and could be the biggest float since Deutsche Telekom (DTEGn.DE: Quote, Profile, Research) in 1996, according to numbers from financial data provider Dealogic. "I should think there is appetite for the stock. All of this of course will depend on its price, but there has been a lot of pent-up around the stock; the IPO has been well flagged so the market has been waiting for it," said Nishit Shaah, investment manager at Sarasin Chiswell in London. INVESTMENT HIKE The government has been pushing for assurances from EDF that it would protect the country's cherished public-service ideals in a bid to overcome heated union opposition to the flotation. Villepin pushed ahead with the sale after EDF gave tariff pledges and raised the amount it plans to invest to overcome union criticism that the world's largest nuclear power producer will be prey to the whim of financial markets. EDF chairman Pierre Gadonneix told the same news conference EDF would invest 40 billion euros over five years and pledged that tariff increases would not exceed inflation for the same period. That contrasts with a 12 percent hike in tariffs requested by EDF's already partially privatized sister company Gaz de France (GAZ.PA: Quote, Profile, Research), to which the government has given a cool response. High fuel prices and the approach of winter have made energy costs a sensitive topic, with unions saying a market-oriented EDF could raise electricity bills purely for gain. An aide to Villepin said 30 billion euros of the 40 billion euro total would be invested over three years from 2006. Initially, EDF set out plans to invest 26 billion euros over three years, but the government -- with an eye on public sentiment and elections due in 2007 -- wanted the figure to be raised to 30 billion euros to favor French production. Villepin and Gadonneix signed a deal guaranteeing the provision of public services to meet government conditions over the social impact of the selloff at the weekend. France's powerful CGT union reiterated its opposition to the flotation and asked Villepin and parliament to debate the issue publicly. The union plans a news conference at 1200 GMT. Opposition Socialists have pledged to reverse the partial privatization if they return to power in 2007 elections. A strong turnout in an October 4 general strike against government reforms and a separate dispute over the privatization of a Corsican ferry firm had raised doubts over the timing of the sale of 15 percent of EDF's capital. But in the past week the government has put it firmly back on track and sources close to the matter told Reuters last Thursday that the flotation could be launched this week. Government ministers stress that EDF needs to bolster its shaky finances to put it on a stronger financial footing, in the face of increasing rivalry on its home turf as France's energy sector opens up further to competition. ---- EU Pledges Continued Aid to Armenia By Atom Markarian Monday 24, October 2005 Armenia Liberty http://www.armenialiberty.org/armeniareport/report/en/2005/10/86A48340-52AF-4650-ABCB-090A54DEA3EB.ASP The European Union will continue its assistance to Armenia as long as the country is consistent in pursuing political and economic reforms, Torben Holtze, the top representative of the EU’s Executive Commission to Armenia and Georgia, told the media in Yerevan on Monday. In a joint press conference with Armenia’s Finance and Economy Minister Vartan Khachatrian Holtze expressed his satisfaction with the results of recent reforms in Armenia. The EU official announced that during the next two years Armenia will receive assistance worth about 20 million euros as part of the EU’s Food Security Program. He added that in late 2004 the Armenian government turned to the European Union with a request to acquire the status of a country with market economy. Now, according to Holtze, the European Commission is studying this issue and will be give a positive solution to it in the near future. During the last eight years Armenia has received assistance worth nearly 80 million euros from the European Union within the framework of the Food Security Program, spending the sums on assistance to the social sector, agriculture, as well as on the establishment of its cadastre system and national statistical service. Providing this assistance the EU also sets requirements to recipient countries, and in particular in the case with Armenia it demands that the Metsamor Nuclear Power Plant be shut down. Speaking in Yerevan on Monday Holtze reiterated that requirement. “The EU is again concerned with the safety of the nuclear plant. It is not simply a policy implemented particularly towards Armenia,” he said, adding that the EU sets similar requirements to other states having nuclear reactors of the first generation, such as, for example, Russia and also new members of the EU. “The nuclear power plant is a problem of the security of the country’s population, which we will have to address sooner or later,” Holtze stressed. The EU has long been pressing for Metsamor’s decommissioning, saying that its Soviet-era reactor does not meet European safety standards. Every year the EU allocates several million euros for the enhancement of safety standards at Metsamor through its TACIS Project. Holtze said that 5-7 million euros will be allocated for the purpose within the next two years. Vartan Khachatrian, for his part, stated that Armenia’s Nuclear Power Plant meets all international safety standards and its current condition does not yield to the conditions of the 627 nuclear stations existing in the world. -------- india India calls for action against nuclear proliferators Mon Oct 24, 6:15 AM ET (AFP) http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20051024/wl_sthasia_afp/indianucleariranpakistan_051024101525 NEW DELHI- India urged the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to take action against illegal proliferators of nuclear weapons technology such as Pakistan's disgraced scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan. The UN atomic watchdog should focus on the distributors of nuclear technology as much as the recipients, like Iran, said foreign secretary Shyam Saran "With respect to the Iran nuclear issue, we welcome Iran's cooperation with IAEA in the accounting for previously undeclared activities," Saran told a conference in New Delhi on nuclear non-proliferation on Monday. "... but it is important that remaining issues which involve Pakistan-based A.Q. Khan are satisfactorily clarified as well. "We see no reason why there should be an insistence on personal interviews with Iranian scientists but an exception granted to a man who has been accused of running a global 'nuclear Wal-Mart'," he said. Iran was put on notice last month by the IAEA, which warned the Islamic nation it would be hauled before the UN Security Council if it persisted with its uranium enrichment activities. The United States suspects Iran is using its nascent nuclear power program to develop the capability to build nuclear weapons, a suspicion Tehran says is unfounded. India, which voted in favour of the IAEA motion paving the way for Iran's referral to the Security Council, has been subdued in its criticism of arch-rival Pakistan, whose nuclear scientist A.Q. Khan last year admitted to having leaked nuclear secrets to Iran, North Korea and Libya. New Delhi, which began a peace process with Islamabad in January 2004, demanded an investigation into the illegal transfer of nuclear secrets but refrained from criticising its nuclear rival over its lenient treatment of Khan. Khan became a national hero after he helped Pakistan come out of the nuclear closet in May 1998, within days of India conducting five atomic tests. After Khan made a public confession last year, Pakistan's President General Pervez Musharraf gave him a conditional pardon. Islamabad has consistently refused to allow the IAEA to question Khan about the nuclear black market. In March, Pakistan confirmed that Khan provided Iran with centrifuges but again insisted the government was not involved in the deal. Centrifuges are needed to enrich uranium for atomic warheads. -------- iran Iran Nuclear Dispute Moves to Moscow By JUDITH INGRAM, Associated Press Writer Mon Oct 24, 7:04 PM ET http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051024/ap_on_re_eu/russia_us_iran_1 MOSCOW - The diplomatic maneuvering around Tehran's disputed nuclear program moved to Moscow on Monday as the top U.S. security official and Iran's foreign minister held separate consultations with top Russian officials, and Tehran agreed to resume contacts with Europe. But Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki also reiterated Tehran's warnings that Iran might refuse U.N. watchdog agency inspections if its case is brought before the U.N. Security Council. "If Iran's nuclear dossier is brought to the U.N. Security Council, Iran may give up the voluntary fulfillment of the additional protocol to the nuclear non-proliferation agreement," Mottaki was quoted as saying by the RIA-Novosti news agency, referring to inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency. "Even if Iran's nuclear dossier is brought to the U.N. Security Council, Iran will not give up its lawful right to create its own nuclear fuel cycle." The simultaneous visits came as Washington was pressing efforts to confront Iran over its atomic energy program, which the United States suspects is a cover for nuclear weapons development. U.S. National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley had meetings with five top-level officials, including President Vladimir Putin, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Alexander Rumyantsev, the head of Russia's atomic energy agency, which is directing construction of a $800 million nuclear reactor in the Iranian city of Bushehr that is scheduled for launch by the end of 2006. "We are conducting a wide discussion with Russia on this topic (of Iran)," Hadley was quoted as saying by the ITAR-Tass news agency. "Our positions are similar, and we are agreed on the basic points." However, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice failed earlier this month to break through Moscow's opposition to hauling Iran before the Security Council. She did say, though, that Moscow was trying to push its ally Iran back to the bargaining table. Lavrov and Mottaki met Monday afternoon, after the Russian foreign minister had received Hadley, and said that Tehran would resume contacts with European countries over the disputed nuclear program — though they did not say what form those contacts would take. Talks between Iran and the EU's three negotiating partners — Britain, France and Germany — collapsed in August after Iran resumed uranium conversion, a precursor to enriching it for use in a nuclear reactor. The two ministers called for all questions concerning Iran's disputed nuclear program to be handled through the IAEA. Lavrov said the goal was to find a "mutually acceptable decision" to secure Iran's rights concerning the peaceful use of atomic energy — one that "would not leave any doubts as to the peaceful character of such activity." Russia's Kommersant daily reported Monday that Russia was proposing to Tehran that it stop independent work in enriching uranium. In exchange, Moscow would establish a joint venture with Iran on Russian territory to enrich uranium for use in Iranian reactors. "The problem is that Tehran has not expressed the least interest in this proposal and is insisting on its own right to engaging in producing nuclear fuel," Kommersant commented. Correspondent Maria Danilova in Moscow contributed to this report. ---- Iran nuclear game too close for comfort Monday, October 24, 2005; Posted: 7:01 p.m. EDT (23:01 GMT) (Reuters) http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/10/24/iran.nuclear.game.reut/index.html?section=cnn_world TEHRAN, Iran -- U.S. special forces dart through Iran's underground nuclear facilities, gunning down any hapless Iranians standing between them and centrifuges that must be blown to bits. Much to Tehran's relief, this crack team exists only in a new U.S. computer game. But even these animated saboteurs are too close for comfort, downloadable into Iranian living rooms at the click of a mouse. The cyberspace troopers have sparked bitter press comment in Iran and a petition asking that the game be shelved. "Americans have a deep craving for an attack against Iran, but they are going to have to settle for this make-believe assault," wrote the Kayhan daily, whose editor is appointed directly by Iran's Supreme Leader. "U.S. attacks Iran" is made by U.S. firm Kuma Reality Games whose war games often tie into top news stories. Iran is at the center of a diplomatic maelstrom, flatly denying U.S. accusations it is seeking atomic warheads. It argues it needs underground nuclear facilities, such as one near the central town of Natanz, to make fuel for power stations. The United States consistently declines to rule out a military strike against Iran, but has said such an option is "not on the agenda". The game's trailer plays pounding music and starkly asks: "Diplomacy has failed ... Is nothing to be done?". U.S. troops then strafe a car, leap out of helicopters and prowl around menacingly before blowing things up. Web site www.persianpetition.com, a forum for Persian speakers in Iran and abroad, posted a notice asking Kuma to withdraw the game on October 12. Since then it has got more than 5,000 signatures. "We must make the Americans understand that Iran is different from Iraq and Afghanistan, where they just did what they wanted," the petition read. Kuma boss Keith Halper said he had no plans to take the game offline and that he had not realized the games were played in the Middle East as well. "The controversy does surprise me. I just didn't expect that there were people from Iran who were going to become aware of it," he told Reuters. Other Kuma games have been criticized in the United States for their realistic portrayal of current events, including recent battles. The Iran game has been downloaded in Iran thousands of times, Halper said, and the company has received roughly 300 e-mail messages from Iran. Some criticized the game but others had asked how to get a copy without a broadband connection. Iran has been prickly about the idea of U.S. special forces lurking around inside the Islamic Republic since U.S. journalist Seymour Hersh said in the New Yorker this year that U.S. "Black Ops" had ventured across Iran's borders. -------- korea North Korea demands US treat it as de-facto nuclear state Monday, October 24, 2005 (AP) Pakistan Daily Times http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2005%5c10%5c24%5cstory_24-10-2005_pg4_11 SEOUL: North Korea demanded on Sunday that the United States recognise the communist state as a de-facto nuclear power, accusing Washington of hypocrisy by overlooking Israel’s suspected possession of atomic weapons. The North’s official Rodong Sinmun newspaper said resolution of the standoff over its nuclear programmes will be possible “only when the US gives up the unfair and prejudiced double standards.” “The US has connived at and even cooperated with Israel in its development and production of nukes and kept mum about Japan, which has stepped up its moves to emerge (as) a nuclear power after stockpiling (more) plutonium than it actually needs,” said the commentary, carried by the North’s Korean Central News Agency. The North demanded that Washington treat Pyongyang as it does other countries which possess nuclear weapons but have not signed the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty, or NPT, a global agreement on controlling the spread of nuclear weapons and fissile material. Israel - which is not a signatory to the NPT - is believed to have commenced its nuclear programme in the 1950s, but has never denied or confirmed the widely held view that it possesses atomic bombs. North Korea has long been suspected of possessing one or two nuclear weapons in addition to enough material to make several more. In February this year, the country claimed it had built atomic weapons, although the claim could not be verified independently. Since 2003, North Korea has engaged the United States and four other regional players in talks on ending its nuclear programmes in exchange for political and economic rewards. The six-nation negotiations, which also include China, South Korea, Japan and Russia, produced a breakthrough accord at its fourth session last month in which the North pledged to abandon its nuclear programmes for economic aid, security assurances and diplomatic recognition. The nuclear talks are set to resume in Beijing next month, although no dates have been set yet. Prospects of progress at the upcoming talks are low after North Korea claimed it cannot disarm unless the US provides it with a civilian nuclear reactor for power generation. ---- N. Korea says to resume nuclear talks in early Nov By Martin Nesirky Mon Oct 24, 2005 10:31 AM ET (Reuters) http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051024/ts_nm/korea_north_talks_ministry_dc_3 SEOUL - North Korea said on Monday it would attend a new round of six-party talks over its nuclear weapons programs in early November as agreed but questioned whether Washington was prepared to stick to a deal reached last month. North Korea has agreed to dismantle its nuclear programs under the agreement reached with South Korea, the United States, Japan, Russia and China in return for aid and better ties with Washington and Tokyo. "It is our consistent and invariable stand to realize the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula through dialogue," the spokesman told the North's KCNA news agency. "We will, therefore, go to the 5th six-party talks at the date to be agreed upon early in November as the six parties had committed themselves to do so." But he questioned whether the United States held a similar commitment, saying recent behavior by Washington cast doubt on the spirit of the agreement, the spokesman said. "(The U.S.) is staging a noisy campaign to pressurize the DPRK, bringing utterly groundless charges such as human rights issue and illegal deal against it." DPRK is short for the North's official name, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. "We will hold the U.S. accountable for this situation much more deplorable than what was before the publication of the statement and keep tabs on this at the forthcoming talks," the North's spokesman said. The North's pledge to resume negotiations confirmed New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson's observation on Saturday upon his return from meetings with senior North Koreans in Pyongyang that their commitment to the talks appeared genuine. In Seoul, South Korean Foreign Minister Ban Ki-moon said his government had given Washington its ideas for a road map to take last month's nuclear deal from a joint statement to reality. Ban told guests at a lunch to mark the 60th anniversary of the United Nations it was important for all parties in the talks on North Korea's nuclear programs to keep up the momentum and build confidence. "During the last consultations in Washington DC, we presented our concept of a road map for the implementation of the Joint Statement," Ban said. "The United States also provided us with the status of their internal discussions on the implementation negotiations." Further details on the concept and internal discussions were not immediately available. Ban said last week that Seoul's top priority for the new talks would be to receive an inventory of nuclear programs from the North. The six-way talks have significance far beyond geopolitics and non-proliferation efforts. Fitch Ratings upgraded South Korea's long-term foreign currency rating by one notch on Monday, citing lower security risks on the peninsula after North Korea agreed in principle to scrap its weapons programs. The rating upgrade to A-plus from A came just before South Korea was due to start global marketing of $1 billion worth of sovereign bonds in dollars and euros, although economists said any short-term boost to foreign investment would be limited. South Korea's top policy maker on the North told parliament the talks were likely to resume in the second week of November. "The fifth round of the six-party talks that will be held in early November, probably around the second week, will focus on the issue of specifically implementing the September 19 Joint Statement," Unification Minister Chung Dong-young was quoted as saying by South Korea's Yonhap news agency. (Additional reporting by Yoo Choonsik and Jack Kim) -------- pacific Marshall Islands seeks Pacific support for nuclear compensation PORT MORESBY (AFP) Oct 24, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/2005/051024110508.tfvxbplw.html http://theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,17023604%255E1702,00.html The Marshall Islands said Monday it is receiving support from neighbouring Pacific countries in its bid to win compensation from the United States for the continuing effects of nuclear testing carried out half a century ago. The former US territory is seeking more than three billion dollars in compensation from the US for the legacy of 67 nuclear tests conducted by the US between 1946 and 1958 during the Cold War. The US government provided 270 million dollars compensation in an agreement that expired in 2001, but islanders say that level is woefully inadequate. Marshall Islands President Kessai Note met with leaders of seven other small Pacific island states in the capital of Papua New Guinea Monday and said they have promised support for efforts to win new compensation. "I'm pleased to note on that issue the Marshall Islands was given very substantial support by our neighbouring countries and our colleagues in the Pacific in our effort to get the United States to appraise adequately the problems of the nuclear testing in the Marshall Islands," Note said. He added that Pacific countries could pressure the US government to address the lingering problems of nuclear testing, including the 1954 Bravo test, the largest atmospheric nuclear test ever carried out. The Marshall Islands says there are continuing health problems amongst some of the country's population of 55,000 as a result of the testing and some islands are still awaiting resettlement after the program. Claims for additional compensation for the testing are being considered by the US Congress. The leaders of seven small island states were meeting ahead of the Pacific Island Forum meeting of 16 regional leaders beginning Tuesday. -------- terrorism World likely to face nuclear terror threats soon: Ashdown LONDON (AFP) Oct 24, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/2005/051024180203.eoxm2g16.html The United Nations will be lucky not to face threats of nuclear, chemical or biological terrorism in the next 10 years, Paddy Ashdown, the UN high representative for Bosnia, said Monday. Ashdown, who was one of the main advocates for international intervention during the Balkan conflicts of the early to mid-1990s, said the United Nations had a central role in maintaining world peace. He was speaking at a service attended by Britain's Queen Elizabeth II and Prime Minister Tony Blair in Saint Paul's Cathedral, London, to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the UN's creation. "We shall be lucky, I think, if the UN reaches 70 years without having confronted the real threat of nuclear, chemical or biological terrorism," Ashdown told the congregation. "So the dangers may be new but the challenges of our time too can only be made by standing with the instruments of global governance. "No-one can doubt the need for reform of the UN but no-one can doubt either the central role it has played in peace or the role it must play if we are to ensure peace for our time." The service included a dedication and commitment to the UN's values in the future. Ashdown, who led Britain's opposition Liberal Democrat party from 1988 to 1999, said upholding those values was vital in the "dangerous decades" ahead. The high representative's role has among its functions the implementation of civilian aspects of the 1995 Dayton Peace Agreement, brokered to end the three-year Bosnian conflict, pitting the former Yugoslav republic's Croatians, Muslims and Serbs against each other. -------- u.s. nuc weapons The Nuclear Taboo By Thomas C. Schelling October 24, 2005 Wall Street Journal http://online.wsj.com/article_print/SB113010182444876942.html http://regimechangeiran.blogspot.com/2005/10/nuclear-taboo.html The most spectacular event of the past half century is one that did not occur. We have enjoyed 60 years without nuclear weapons exploded in anger. What a stunning achievement -- or, if not achievement, what stunning good fortune. In 1960, the British novelist C.P. Snow said on the front page of the New York Times that unless the nuclear powers drastically reduced their armaments, thermonuclear warfare within the decade was a "mathematical certainty." Nobody appeared to think Snow's statement extravagant. We now have that "mathematical certainty" compounded more than four times, and no nuclear war. Can we make it through another half dozen decades? READ MORE * * * The first time that nuclear weapons might have been used was in 1950. U.S. and South Korean forces had retreated to a perimeter at the southern town of Pusan, and it was not clear that they could either hold out or evacuate. The question of nuclear defense arose, and the British prime minister flew to Washington with the announced purpose of persuading President Truman not to let nuclear weapons be used. The successful landing at Inchon removed the danger, and we cannot know what might have happened if Inchon had failed. Nuclear weapons again went unused upon the disastrous assault by Chinese troops in the north of Korea. Succeeding Truman, Eisenhower saw NATO facing a hugely superior military adversary and elevated nuclear weapons from last resort to first resort. Shortly after Eisenhower's inauguration, Secretary of State John Foster Dulles said, in the National Security Council, "Somehow or other we must manage to remove the taboo from the use of these weapons." A few weeks later the president approved the statement, "In the event of hostilities, the United States will consider nuclear weapons to be as available for use as other munitions." Six months later the U.S. position was that nuclear weapons "must now be treated as in fact having become conventional." The Johnson administration shows a striking contrast. In September 1964, Johnson said publicly, "Make no mistake, there is no such thing as a conventional nuclear weapon. For 19 peril-filled years no nation has loosed the atom against another. To do so now is a political decision of the highest order." I interpret this as Johnson's belief that 19 years without nuclear war was an investment to be treasured. Nixon did not use nuclear weapons in Vietnam. Golda Meir, Israeli prime minister in 1973, did not authorize using nuclear weapons against the Egyptian armies that had successfully crossed the Suez and were perfect targets for nuclear attack, there being no civilians in the vicinity. Margaret Thatcher did not consider nuclear weapons against naval vessels while defending the Falkland Islands against Argentina. And most astonishing, the Soviet Union fought a long, bloody and disastrous war in Afghanistan without recourse to nuclear weapons. Even the Russians were awed, apparently, by Johnson's 19 "peril-filled years," which by then had stretched to four decades. After six decades, an immediate question is whether we can expect Indian and Pakistani leaders to be adequately in awe of the weapons they now both possess. There are two helpful possibilities. One is that they share the inhibition -- appreciate the taboo -- that I have been discussing. The other is that they will recognize, as the U.S. and the Soviet Union did, that the prospect of nuclear retaliation makes any initiation of nuclear war nearly unthinkable. The risk is that one or the other may confront the kind of military emergency that invites some limited experiment with the weapons. There is no history to tell us, or to tell them, what happens next. The next possessors of nuclear weapons may be Iran, North Korea or possibly some terrorist bodies. Is there hope that they will have absorbed the near-universal inhibition against the use of nuclear weapons, or will at least be inhibited by the recognition that the taboo enjoys widespread acclaim? Part of the answer will depend on whether the U.S. recognizes that inhibition as an asset to be cherished, enhanced, and protected, or whether, like Dulles, it believes "somehow or other we must manage to remove the taboo from the use of these weapons." There is much discussion these days of whether or not "deterrence" has had its day. There is no Soviet Union to deter; the Russians are more worried about Chechnya than about the U.S.; the Chinese seem no more interested in military risks over Taiwan than Khrushchev really was over Berlin; and terrorists can't be deterred anyway -- we don't know what they value that we might threaten, or who or where it is. I expect that we may come to a new respect for "deterrence." If Iran should, despite every diplomatic effort to prevent it, acquire a few nuclear weapons, we may discover again what it is like to be the deterred one, not the one doing the deterring. (I consider us -- NATO -- as having been deterred from intervening in Hungary in 1956 and Czechoslovakia in 1968.) I also consider it crucial that Iran learn to think, if it hasn't already learned to think, in terms of deterrence. What else can Iran accomplish, except possibly the destruction of its own system, with a few nuclear warheads? Nuclear warheads should be too precious to give away or to sell, too precious to "waste" killing people when they could, held in reserve, make the U.S., or Russia, or any other nation, hesitant to consider military action. What nuclear weapons have been used for, effectively, for 60 years has not been on the battlefield nor on populations; they have been used for influence. * * * What about terrorists? Any organization that gets enough fissile material to make a bomb will require at least six, probably more, highly qualified scientists and numerous machinists and technologists, working in seclusion -- away from families and occupations for at least weeks, maybe months -- with nothing much to talk about except what the "bomb" might be used for, and by whom. They are likely to feel justified to have some claim in deciding the use of the nuclear device. (The British Parliament in 1950 considered itself, as a partner in the development of the atomic bomb, qualified to advise Truman on possible use of the bomb in Korea.) They will discover, over weeks of arguing that the most effective use of the bomb, from a terrorist perspective, will be for influence. Possessing a nuclear device, if they can demonstrate possession -- and I believe they can, if they have it, without detonating it -- will give them something of the status of a nation. Threatening to use it against military targets, and keeping it intact if the threat is successful, may appeal to them more than expending it in a destructive act. Even terrorists may consider destroying large numbers of people and structures less satisfying than keeping a major nation at bay. The U.S. was slow to learn, but eventually did learn, in 1961, that nuclear warheads demand exceptionally secure custody -- against accident, mischief, theft, sabotage or a "Strangelove-like" unauthorized attack. There is always the dilemma: reward violators of the Nonproliferation Treaty by offering them the technology to keep the warheads secure? At least we can try to educate the new members of the nuclear club to what we didn't appreciate for our first 15 years. I know of no argument in favor of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, which the U.S. Senate rejected in 1999, more powerful than the potential of that treaty to enhance the nearly universal revulsion against nuclear weapons (or its rejection to waste the opportunity). The symbolic effect of some 170 nations ratifying the Treaty, which is nominally only about testing, should add to the convention that nuclear weapons are not to be used and that any nation that does use nuclear weapons will be judged the violator of a hard-earned tradition of non-use. When the Treaty is again before the Senate, as I hope it will be, this major benefit should not go unrecognized. The most critical question about nuclear weapons for the U.S. government under George W. Bush or under anyone else is whether the widespread taboo against nuclear weapons, and its inhibition on their use, is in our favor or not. If it is in our interest, as I believe obvious, advertising our continued dependence on nuclear weapons and our need for new nuclear capabilities and probably new nuclear tests -- let alone ever using them against an enemy -- has to be weighed against the corrosive effect on a nearly universal attitude that has been cultivated through universal abstinence over 60 years. Mr. Schelling, professor emeritus at the University of Maryland, is a Nobel Laureate for economics for 2005. -------- u.s. nuc facilities -------- kansas ABC News uses own list of recommendations for safety Published on Monday, October 24, 2005 JP Wilson Kansas State Collegian http://www.kstatecollegian.com/article.php?a=7564 An ABC News report on security failures at K-State’s TRIGA Mark II Nuclear Research Reactor that aired Oct. 13 did not evaluate the facility on policies required by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, said Mike Whaley, nuclear reactor facility manager. Instead, ABC's expert evaluated the reactor against its own list of security measures on its "Primetime" program. Viewers that turned off the program after K-State's segment were not informed that K-State was graded on procedures not required by the NRC. "It was a larger question of whether the government is demanding enough of the universities," said Brian Ross ABC News chief investigative correspondent. "The fact that the NRC fails to require this is the real scandal." “We have not found anything to date at any of the reactors that we feel might be a violation of their security requirements,” commission spokeswoman Beth Hayden said. “We’ve asked for the footage to see if there were any violations in their security requirements and they have refused to give it to us.” Turning over footage to government agencies is not the practice of ABC News, Ross said. The NRC was shown parts of the footage six weeks prior to the program airing, but Ross says if the NRC wants all footage it should get a subpoena. In June, 10 Carnegie Fellows hired as ABC interns visited 25 university reactors under the pretense of tourists. Two interns visited K-State on June 29, where they reported several security failures. “ABC seems to have prepared a grade card based on what they think the right answer is for reactor security,” Whaley said. “They did not talk to me and I’m the one that helped prepare the measures for this facility. They did not talk to the NRC, they just invented a series of checkmarks.” ABC reported the commission opened five separate investigations after the perceived security lapses, but Hayden says no investigations have been opened at any of the research reactors. Although the interns were working undercover and did not identify themselves as ABC interns, Whaley said he knew they were coming after another university notified both the commission and the FBI that two females were taking tours at university research reactors and asking questions about security measures. When the interns called K-State to set up a visit, Whaley scheduled the tour with enough time to alert the FBI and campus police. An FBI agent and campus law enforcement suggested Whaley obtain a photograph of the girls and to avoid alerting the interns they were being investigated. "No one told us that [the FBI was involved] from Kansas State and I don't believe it is true, but if it is, hats off to them," Ross said. "We would have been happy to report that." The interns were given the same tour that any visitor would receive. Whaley conducted the beginning of the tour and then allowed two reactor operators, who are licensed by the commission, to finish the tour and take the picture. Commission licensing requires a minimum training period of six months, followed by a written exam and a walk-through test inside the reactor that is administered by a commission representative. The two operators discussed the best way to obtain the picture for the FBI and decided on flattery. One intern, Melia Patria, said in an article on ABC's Web site that after she and fellow intern Hsinching Wei posed for the picture, they were amused by the photo request and “realized the power of our pseudo-celebrity status, as the girls who visited the K-State reactor. So for the next hour, as the two engineering students scoped us out, we scoped out the reactor and security." The interns reported they were able get security information, but K-State’s operators said they intentionally flattered the girls to take the picture for the FBI. “My roommates are never going to believe that two cute girls visited the reactor,” reactor operator Troy Unruh said in a segment that was aired twice during the program. Patria reported that after she realized they were alone with the operators, they could have caused “serious damage” if they were terrorists. Patria also reported having free reign of the reactor, but security camera footage shows that during the entire tour, the interns were accompanied by the two operators. Once during the visit, operators said Patria tried to go unaccompanied to the restroom, but security footage shows an operator walked her out of the facility and waited for her to come back, never leaving her in the reactor unattended. After leaving the reactor, the interns were stopped by K-State Police near Hale Library. The interns were allowed to leave after answering some questions, and during “Primetime” they reported that security at the library is better than security at the reactor. “They have no idea what the security measures are at the reactor and that’s part of their problem,” said Kenneth Shultis, professor of mechanical and nuclear engineering. “They have no background in this area.” "In my point of view the Kansas State people have conducted a malicious smear against the interns," Ross said, "which is sexist in nature and reprehensible at best." Brian Mitchell of the Poynter Institute, a non-profit organization whose mission is to uphold journalistic integrity, said he had not seen the program, but said that undercover reporting should only be used in limited situations. “Journalists should consider using such techniques, such as deception or going undercover, as a last resort,” Mitchell said. "I don't consider this undercover, the students just showed up as strangers." Ross said. "When I think of undercover I think of people who have hidden cameras and we went in with our camera open as any member of the public could." ABC security expert Ronald E. Timm said security at K-State’s reactor failed when the interns were brought to the top of the reactor during a tour. Timm gave security at K-State’s reactor a failing grade because the interns were able to reach what he called “ground zero”. “This so-called expert has a very checkered past," Shultis said. "He has tried to sue the U.S. Department of Energy twice and the courts have thrown out the suits. He could possibly be a disgruntled employee, hardly an unbiased observer.” The commission allows tours at K-State that visit the top of the reactor because they do not pose a significant security threat. K-State reactor operators conduct more than 2,500 tours every year and all tours involve a stop to the top of the reactor. Patria reported that she posed above K-State’s reactor, which contained highly-enriched uranium. However, K-State’s reactor contains only low-enriched uranium, which significantly diminishes the potential threat. Ross was not aware that Patria's article reported highly-enriched uranium at K-State but said ABC will correct the article. “If all the uranium at the reactor was extracted, ground up and dispersed across campus, no one would be harmed. We would just have to clean it up,” Whaley said. The threat of car bombs or other attacks on the reactor is also minimal because of the structure of the facility and the reactor. “The reactor is in a vessel with eight and a half-foot-thick concrete walls. The core is five feet below ground level, under 20 feet of water. You can never hurt the core,” Shultis said. "This show was trying to be sensational," Shultis said. "They had a preconceived opinion. In my opinion, they were trying to look for some information to justify it, and I think they found nothing.” -------- new york Legislative Democrats want NRC to look at Indian Point Monday, October 24, 2005 Mid Hudson News http://www.midhudsonnews.com/News/OCL_Dems_IP-24Oct05.htm The Democratic caucus of the Orange County Legislature is calling on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to take “a very serious look at all safety features at Indian Point to correct any inadequacies that might exist.” The lawmakers’ request comes after the latest round of warning siren tests for the nuclear power plant failed last week when two-thirds of the sirens did not work on a backup system. “You don’t get a second chance to warn people if there is an incident that will affect the safety and welfare of people in Orange County,” said Democrat Minority Leader Anthony Marino. “The safety and welfare of the residents of Orange County cannot be disregarded regardless of what it will cost to protect them. Entergy must have a first line series of warnings and a second testing must be done as soon as possible to see that this is so.” Last week, County Executive Edward Diana demanded that the problems be fixed and that a new fail safe system promised by IP owner Entergy be put in place as soon as possible. Entergy said it will seek to move up its timetable and have it installed by the end of next year. -------- MILITARY -------- business Contract leaves Pentagon with poorly armored cars, little recourse Mon, Oct. 24, 2005 BY SETH BORENSTEIN Knight Ridder Newspapers http://www.sanluisobispo.com/mld/sanluisobispo/news/politics/12986969.htm WASHINGTON - When the Pentagon went shopping for seven armored cars for senior Iraqi policemen, U.S. officials turned to an Iraqi supplier to provide them with some hardened Mercedes-Benzes. After spending nearly $1 million, here's what they got: Six vehicles with bad armor and run-down mechanics. They also were a little more than slightly used: The newest model was a 1996; the oldest a 1994. According to the special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction, the seventh auto is missing. In a report released Monday, the inspector general said the Pentagon couldn't get its money back because it did such a bad job negotiating the no-bid deal. In June, the Pentagon's Multi-National Security Transition Command-Iraq bought the seven Mercedes-Benzes for $135,000 each. They were supposed to include high-quality armor that could withstand high-velocity rifle shots. The sheet plates provided were something less. "The armoring of the vehicles appears to be of low standard and provides only limited safety to the occupants of the vehicle," the military command unit's own mechanics wrote, according to the inspector general's report. In addition, Pentagon mechanics found "inadequate suspensions, low-quality tires, low-quality brakes and unarmored electrical systems," the report said. The mechanics concluded that "the vehicles were not worth the money paid and to bring them up to required standards would have required an investment that exceeded the value of the vehicles." The Iraqi supplier, which wasn't identified to protect its employees from retribution for working with Americans, says the vehicles are fine, according to the inspector general. Furthermore, the seller said the military "should have been more specific about requirements" if it wanted something better. The inspector general agreed, saying the military's contract specifications were "ill-defined." The inspector general faulted the agency for poor contracting practices. The multinational command spokesman, Lt. Col. Fred Wellman, said he hadn't seen the inspector general's report and couldn't comment on specifics. But he said the command unit "seeks out the best possible equipment for our Iraqi counterparts ... everything we do is quality versus delivery time versus needs." The military command has learned its lessons and has brought in auditors and lawyers to improve its purchasing, Wellman said. And it agreed with all the inspector general's recommendations, which include trying to find the missing vehicle. The purchase "is like a daydream of a used car salesman; we paid big bucks for lemons," said Keith Ashdown, the vice president of Taxpayers for Common Sense. "We're buying lemons for Iraqi allies who have bull's-eyes on their backs. That's crazy." -------- landmines ETHIOPIA: Two million threatened by landmines, survey finds UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs Monday 24 October 2005 http://www.irinnews.org/print.asp?ReportID=39988 ADDIS ABABA, 11 Mar 2004 (IRIN) - Landmines threaten the lives of 2 million people in Ethiopia, according to the findings of an international two-year survey to be released on Thursday. The Ethiopian Landmine Impact Survey also reveals that over the past two years 16,000 people have been involved in landmine blast incidents, of whom 1,295 were killed or injured. "There is a chance that anyone of these 2 million people could be injured or killed by landmines or unexploded ordnance [UXO]. Their daily lives are hindered in one way or another by landmines," Adam Combs of Norwegian People’s Aid (NPA), the survey's director, told IRIN on Wednesday. Ethiopia is one of the world's 10 most heavily mined countries – a legacy of successive conflicts over the last 70 years that have ravaged the Horn of Africa. There are around 2 million landmines, some dating back to the Italian invasion by Mussolini in 1935. The government estimates that they will take another 20 years to clear. The survey found Tigray and Afar regions in northern Ethiopia bordering Eritrea, and the Somali region in the east bordering Somalia to be the worst affected. Tens of thousands of the mines were left over from the 1998-2000 war with Eritrea and after the 1977 Somali invasion under Siyad Barre. More than 30 types of mines have been used in Ethiopia, which has about 23,000 amputees, of whom 20 percent are thought to be landmine victims. NPA, which carried out the survey with the government’s Ethiopian Mine Action Office (EMAO), says landmines and UXO affect 1,492 communities in the country. EMAO is seeking US $19 million from the international community over the next three years to help speed up its mine-clearance efforts. The funding will also support landmine victims and a mine-risk education programme for 500,000 people. EMAO is looking for an additional two manual mine-clearance companies, three specialised dog teams, and seven rapid response teams. During its survey, the team visited every district in the country, comprising 4,500 villages and towns. -------- us The "Generic" Country Nick Schwellenbach October 24, 2005 Project on Government Oversight http://pogoblog.typepad.com/pogo/2005/10/the_generic_cou.html Al Kamen's column today recounts a mildly humorous moment that I had on July 26, 2005 at an Air Force briefing. Three of the Power Point slides used in a presentation on the Air Force's Future Total Force plan (pdf) featured an unnamed country littered with targets in a hypothetical US air attack. These slides were meant to show that National Guard and Reserve units need the best aircraft since they will be facing the same threats active duty forces do and are deployed almost as often too (nowadays, Reserve and Guard units often get second-hand aircraft, rather than the latest). As an aside, I asked Air Force Brig. General Allison Hickey and two Air Force public affairs officers if the country featued in the slides was indeed Iran. There initial response was a defensive no, it's a "generic country" an artist drew up for the presentation. But as I pointed out the countries surrounding Iran, strengthening my observation, the Air Force officers moved the presentation on, but did say they should probably change the slides considering tensions with the country. Oddly, they let me keep the slides though. - May the Force be with You July 28, 2005 http://pogoblog.typepad.com/pogo/2005/07/may_the_force_b.html This Tuesday, POGO’s Nick Schwellenbach attended a personal briefing by Brig. Gen. Allison Hickey on the Air Force’s Future Total Force plan. FTF is a set of transformational initiatives to increasingly blend active-duty Air Force, Air National Guard and Air Force Reserves forces. The plan exists to more efficiently use the Air Force’s weapons systems and human resources. One way this will be done is to consolidate units, giving the Air Force greater flexibility. An additional part of the plan is to discard the practice of passing down active duty systems to the Guard and instead procure them the same brand-new equipment the active duty forces receive. The rationale behind this move is the reality that the Guard is often deployed as much as active duty. FTF attains heightened importance, according to the Air Force, because of numerous factors: increasing cost of weapons which reduces the number of planes purchased; the assumption by the Air Force that defense spending will plateau; the changing requirements of the military (e.g. more UAVs versus fewer manned fighters); and the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) process and the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR). While there has been criticism of FTF from some lawmakers and elements of the National Guard leading to a hearing last week before the House Armed Services Committee (most of the hearing was actually on BRAC), we are withholding judgment of the program until we know more. The Air Force approached POGO first; we really haven’t looked at FTF until now. It is part of their new media strategy to initiate dialogue with bloggers. The Air Force's attempt to reach out beyond the mainstream media is a good idea in our opinion, but, of course, we’re a little biased. ---- Bull's-Eyes on a Generic Nation By Al Kamen Monday, October 24, 2005 Washington Post; A17 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/23/AR2005102300948_pf.html Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice , testifying last week before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, declined to rule out the use of military force in Iran or Syria, although she said the administration prefers diplomacy. "I don't think the president ever takes any of his options off the table concerning anything," she said. In fact, Iran appears to have been on some folks' minds at the Pentagon -- even if only subliminally. For example, there was a PowerPoint presentation a few months back across the river, about the Air Force's "Future Total Force" plan. It looked at strategic needs for equipment and upgrading National Guard and reserve units with the highest-tech equipment. Air Force Brig. Gen. Allison A. Hickey and two aides gave the briefing with the required color slides and marks showing an unnamed country with locations of targets of value, including nuclear "WMD" sites and "IBMs" and "Advanced SAMs" [surface-to-air missiles] and "Deeply Buried Targets." Nick Schwellenbach of the Project on Government Oversight said he couldn't help but notice something oddly familiar about the imagined map, even though there were no city or country names. That sure looks like the Tigris and Euphrates rivers west of that country and the Persian Gulf to its southwest, Schwellenbach said. Isn't this Iran? he asked. No, no, he was told. This is just a generic country an artist drew for these slides. But that Stealth bomber headed for the nuke site sure looks as though it's flying across Kuwait and heading east. Everyone took a closer look. Well, we're going to have to change these, one aide said. -------- POLITICS -------- budget Peace group urges Congress to stop Iraq war funds 24 Oct 2005 Reuters http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N24637137.htm WASHINGTON, Oct 24 (Reuters) - As the U.S. military death toll in Iraq neared 2,000, the pacifist group American Friends Service Committee urged Congress on Monday to halt funding for the Iraqi war. "As parents, citizens and compassionate people, we have to demand that the funding of this exhausted war stops now, before one more death occurs or one more dollar is spent," Lila Lipscomb, whose son Sgt. Michael Pederson was killed in Iraq in 2003, said in a statement announcing the campaign. Lipscomb was set to speak at an anti-war event in Lansing, Michigan, on the day after the 2,000th U.S. military death is reported, one of hundreds of such demonstrations planned across the United States. As of Monday, the reported U.S. military death toll in Iraq stood at 1,997. Cindy Sheehan, who made her soldier son's death in Iraq a rallying point for the anti-war movement, said she plans to tie herself to the White House fence to protest the 2,000th death. "I'm going to tie myself to the fence and refuse to leave until they agree to bring our troops home," Sheehan said in a telephone interview last week as the milestone approached. "And I'll probably get arrested, and when I get out, I'll go back and do the same thing." The anti-war group Peace Action called on Congress to pull troops out of Iraq. President George W. "Bush's insistence on continued military occupation feeds the insurgency. Congress must now take the leadership role in bringing our troops home," said Kevin M. Martin, executive director of Peace Action. -------- propaganda wars Media, Democrats Complicit in Rush to War by Patrick J. Buchanan October 24, 2005 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC. http://www.antiwar.com/pat/?articleid=7736 While President Bush and his War Cabinet bear full moral responsibility for Iraq, they could not have taken us to war without the complicity of the "adversary press" and "loyal opposition." Today, this town is salivating over the prospect that Karl Rove and "Scooter" Libby will be indicted for outing Joe Wilson's wife as a CIA operative. Thirty months ago, many of those anxious to see the White House brought down were hauling its water. Consider the role played by our newspaper of record, The New York Times. To stampede us into a war neoconservatives had been plotting for a decade, Douglas Feith, the Pentagon's No. 3, set up an Office of Special Plans. Its role: Cherry-pick the intel that Saddam was acquiring weapons of mass destruction and was hell-bent on using them on the United States. Then, stove-pipe the hot stuff to the White House Iraq Group (WHIG) and ignore the contradictory evidence. A primary source of the hot Intel about poison gas vans and nuclear bomb programs was a tight-knit exile group led by Ahmed Chalabi, head of the Iraqi National Congress and neocon-Pentagon favorite to lead the new Iraq. But once the hyped Intel suggesting Saddam was an imminent and mortal threat had been extracted, the WHIG needed to run it through a media centrifuge to convert it into hard news. Enter Judy Miller, self-styled "Miss Run Amok" and the go-to girl for the War Party. Miller took the cherry-picked Intel and planted it on page one, enabling War Party propagandists to hit the TV talk-show circuit and reference ominous stories in The New York Times about how imminent a threat Saddam had become. These propagandists were parroting their own pre-cooked intel, but it now had the imprimatur of the Times. The White House had seduced the good Gray Lady of 43rd Street into turning tricks for war. While the Times has played this role before, it was usually in leftist causes. In the early 1930s, Walter Duranty got a Pulitzer for covering up Stalin's starvation of the Ukrainians. In the late 1950s, Herbert Matthews used the Times' front page to introduce Fidel Castro to the world as the "Robin Hood of the Sierra Maestra." And who can forget the Times columnists who assured us how much better off the Cambodian people would be under the benevolent rule of Pol Pot? But the indispensable enablers of war are the New Democrats and potential presidential nominees, Sens. Kerry, Edwards, Clinton, Biden, and Bayh. Fearful that Bush and Rove would use their refusal to authorize war in October 2002 to impeach Democrats' patriotism, they voted to give him a blank check for war. Six months later, Bush cashed it. The Democratic Senate could have slowed the stampede. And if it could not have stopped it, it might at least have gotten answers to crucial questions. How many troops would be needed? What was the probability of guerrilla war? What was our exit strategy? Instead, the Senate surrendered the war powers the Founding Fathers reserved for Congress to the president and abdicated its constitutional duty. And what of the punditocracy, which cheer-led us into war? Did they serve their country, or did they service the king and his courtiers by reciting such fairy tales as Mohammed Atta's secret meeting in Prague with his Iraqi controllers? In the run-up to war, from left, center and right, voices were asking exactly what threat Saddam posed to America. His nation had been crushed in six weeks and his army routed in 100 hours in Desert Storm. His weapons factories had been demolished. Terrified of U.S. retaliation, he had not used one WMD. The United Nations had rummaged through Iraq and destroyed other WMD and their factories. He had not imported a tank, plane, or gun in 12 years. Mohamed ElBaradei and the International Atomic Energy Agency had scoured Iraq and found nothing. Saddam had invited the CIA in to have a look. Though 40,000 U.S.-British sorties had been flown over Iraq since 1991, he had been unable to shoot down a single plane. There was no evidence he or his regime had any role in 9/11, any connection to the anthrax attack, any tie to al-Qaeda, or committed any act of terror against us. Why, then, was it necessary to go to war? Whatever the sins of the WHIG in savaging critics, however, at least most of them believed in this war. But what is to be said for those who transmitted to a trusting public what they had to know or at least suspect were propaganda fabrications to dupe the people into sending their sons and daughters to fight and die in an unnecessary war? This is the greater scandal. This is the real scandal. -------- us politics How Scary Is This? By Bob Herbert The New York Times Monday 24 October 2005 http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/102405Z.shtml http://select.nytimes.com/2005/10/24/opinion/23herbert.html?hp The White House is sweating out the possibility that one or more top officials will soon be indicted on criminal charges. But the Bush administration is immune to prosecution for its greatest offense - its colossal and profoundly tragic incompetence. Lawrence Wilkerson, a retired Army colonel who served as chief of staff to Secretary of State Colin Powell, addressed the administration's arrogance and ineptitude in a talk last week that was astonishingly candid by Washington standards. "We have courted disaster in Iraq, in North Korea, in Iran," said Mr. Wilkerson. "Generally, with regard to domestic crises like Katrina, Rita ... we haven't done very well on anything like that in a long time. And if something comes along that is truly serious, something like a nuclear weapon going off in a major American city, or something like a major pandemic, you are going to see the ineptitude of this government in a way that will take you back to the Declaration of Independence." The investigation of Karl Rove, Scooter Libby et al. is the most sensational story coming out of Washington at the moment. But the story with the gravest implications for the U.S. and the world is the overall dysfunction of the Bush regime. This is a bomb going "Tick, tick, tick . . ." What is the next disaster that this crowd will be unprepared to cope with? Or the next lunatic idea that will spring from its ideological bag of tricks? Mr. Wilkerson gave his talk before an audience at the New America Foundation, an independent public policy institute. On the all-important matter of national security, which many voters had seen as the strength of the administration, Mr. Wilkerson said: "The case that I saw for four-plus years was a case that I have never seen in my studies of aberrations, bastardizations, perturbations, changes to the national security decision-making process. What I saw was a cabal between the vice president of the United States, Richard Cheney, and the secretary of defense, Donald Rumsfeld, on critical issues that made decisions that the bureaucracy did not know were being made." When the time came to implement the decisions, said Mr. Wilkerson, they were "presented in such a disjointed, incredible way that the bureaucracy often didn't know what it was doing as it moved to carry them out." Where was the president? According to Mr. Wilkerson, "You've got this collegiality there between the secretary of defense and the vice president, and you've got a president who is not versed in international relations and not too much interested in them either." One of the consequences of this dysfunction, as I have noted many times, is the unending parade of dead or badly wounded men and women returning to the U.S. from the war in Iraq - a war that the administration foolishly launched but now does not know how to win or end. Mr. Wilkerson was especially critical of the excessive secrecy that surrounded so many of the most important decisions by the Bush administration, and of what he felt was a general policy of concentrating too much power in the hands of a small group of insiders. As much as possible, government in the United States is supposed to be open and transparent, and a fundamental principle is that decision-making should be subjected to a robust process of checks and balances. While not "evaluating the decision to go to war," Mr. Wilkerson told his audience that under the present circumstances "we can't leave Iraq. We simply can't." In his view, if American forces were to pull out too quickly, the U.S. would end up returning to the Middle East with "five million men and women under arms" within a decade. Nevertheless, he is appalled at the way the war was launched and conducted, and outraged by "the detainee abuse issue." In 10 years, he said, when this matter is "put to the acid test, ironed out, and people have looked at it from every angle, we are going to be ashamed of what we allowed to happen." Mr. Wilkerson said he has taken some heat for speaking out, but feels that "as a citizen of this great republic," he has an obligation to do so. If nothing is done about the current state of affairs, he said, "it's going to get even more dangerous than it already is." -------- ENERGY -------- alternative energy South Korea's KEPCO to Build Wind Power Plant in China SOUTH KOREA: October 24, 2005 REUTERS NEWS SERVICE http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/33115/story.htm SEOUL - Korea Electric Power Corp. (KEPCO) has started work on a wind power plant in China, making it the first foreign electricity firm to enter China's wind power market, the state-run company said on Friday. The utility giant, which supplies more than 95 percent of South Korea's electricity, has been trying to build power plants abroad to secure fresh sources of income. China, the world's second-biggest energy consumer after the United States, suffered its worst energy crisis in 20 years in the summer of 2004, sparking a new round of power plant construction. KEPCO and its Chinese partner, Datang Corp., held a ground-breaking ceremony early on Friday on the $57.5 million, 49-megawatt plant being built in Yumen, a city in the western Gansu province, KEPCO said in a statement. The wind power plant was expected to take about a year to complete, it added. The cost of the project would be met through $38.3 million in loans from Chinese banks and $19.2 million in paid-in capital, KEPCO said. The Korean power firm would chip in 40 percent of the paid-in capital, or $7.7 million, it added. Datang Corp. is the parent of Hong Kong's second-largest listed independent power producer, Datang International Power Generation Co. Ltd. KEPCO and Datang also agreed in April to build a 5 billion yuan ($600 million) thermal power plant in central China. In the summer of last year, power cuts hit more than two-thirds of China during a heatwave after power capacity had failed to keep up with breakneck economic growth. The wind power project marked the first time a Korean company had invested in a Clean Development Mechanism project, KEPCO said. The mechanism allows developed countries to acquire carbon dioxide credits by investing in emission-reducing projects in less developed countries that have signed up to the Kyoto Protocol but do not have reduction targets of their own. Since South Korea does not have reduction targets, KEPCO can sell into the market credits earned from the wind power project. ---- Outlook Bright For Hydrogen Biofuel Cell Oxford, England (UPI) Oct 24, 2005 http://www.terradaily.com/news/energy-tech-05zzzzzzzr.html British scientists say simple, cost-effective hydrogen biofuel cells could be developed from electrodes coated with a bacterial enzyme to oxidize hydrogen. Traditional hydrogen fuel cells generate energy through chemical reactions involving oxygen and hydrogen, often using precious metals as catalysts for the reactions. Now University of Oxford scientists say they've developed fuel cells using catalysts from biological organisms, or enzymes. The researchers note most microbes utilizing hydrogen live in oxygen-poor environments, and their enzymes cannot tolerate oxygen. Carbon monoxide is harmful to the enzymes and conventional fuel cells. Using a bacterial enzyme somewhat tolerant to oxygen, Fraser Armstrong and colleagues tested its catalytic activity in the presence of oxygen and carbon monoxide. The scientists created a simple fuel cell using that enzyme as a catalyst, and the resulting biofuel cell produced electricity, even without a membrane to separate hydrogen and oxygen and in the presence of high levels of carbon monoxide. The results suggest the potential of developing simple hydrogen biofuel cells unaffected by carbon monoxide and able to run on highly contaminated hydrogen. The research appears in the online early edition of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. -------- OTHER -------- environment High Levels of Toxic Chemicals Found in Minnesota Fish ST. PAUL, Minnesota, October 24, 2005 (ENS) http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/oct2005/2005-10-24-09.asp#anchor6 The livers of smallmouth bass caught in the Mississippi River near a 3M wastewater disposal site contain “the highest concentration" of perfluorochemical compounds (PFCs) in any fish tested to date, and the second highest concentration for any animal species tested worldwide, a Minnesota state scientist has found. The new record fish concentrations were reported to a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency forum by Dr. Fardin Oliaei, the coordinator for the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) program on emerging contaminants. The PFCs found in the latest study were manufactured by 3M, which used the chemical in products such as Scotchgard, Teflon, Stainmaster and Gore-Tex. 3M began phasing out use of the chemical in 2000, but through 2002, 3M dumped as much as 50,000 pounds of the chemical per year into the Mississippi River from its Cottage Grove wastewater treatment plant. Classified as a toxic, PFCs have caused birth defects and deaths in animal studies. While not yet categorized as a human carcinogen, the chemical has been associated with increased risks of liver and bladder cancers. Dr. Oleaei recommends an aggressive expansion of biomonitoring, more extensive sampling to pinpoint chemical hot spots and a review as to whether fish advisories are needed. But according to a federal civil rights suit filed in August by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER), Dr. Oleaei has been forbidden to answer questions submitted by legislators or accept invitations to speak at scientific conferences about the public health threat from emerging contaminants such as PFCs. The federal suit filed in Minneapolis names as defendants Sheryl Corrigan, commissioner of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, and her top deputies. Corrigan is a former 3M environmental health and safety manager, who PEER alleges has tried to block further investigations into the chemicals. Corrigan worked in the MPCA as a pollution control specialist between 1987 and 1990, managing and coordinating local water planning programs and the analysis of environmental regulations. Dr. Oliaei has been reprimanded for expressing opinions in media interviews that do not match official policy, forbidden from speaking at scientific seminars and had her funding cut off for investigations into chemical contaminants. The suit cites the First Amendment, federal civil rights statutes and the Minnesota Human Rights and Whistleblower Acts. Dr. Oliaei is seeking to have agency gag orders lifted and to be allowed to complete her scientific research free from further harassment. “Government scientists are protected on the job by the First Amendment precisely because they work for the public,” said Rockford Chrastil of the Minneapolis firm of Chrastil and Steinberg who is serving as the lead attorney in the case. “Forcing public science through the screen of politics does a dangerous disservice to the people whose drinking water and health may be at risk.” PEER is submitting the new findings to the Minnesota Health Department for an evaluation as to whether an immediate advisory about fish caught near the 3M Cottage Grove facility is prudent. On Tuesday, Dr. Oliaei and other MPCA scientists are scheduled to testify before the Minnesota Senate Committee on Environment and Natural Resources ---- Mercury Warnings in Markets Urged, Mercury Comment Period Reopened WASHINGTON, DC, October 24, 2005 (ENS) http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/oct2005/2005-10-24-09.asp#anchor7 Safeway and Albertsons have joined Wild Oats Natural Food stores in providing information about mercury in fish at seafood counters nationwide. Encouraged by the actions of these grocery chains, environmental groups are asking why other national supermarkets, including Whole Foods Market, have not posted similar warnings. "When you link on to Whole Foods Market website, they provide information about mercury in fish, the FDA advisory, and the list of fish that pregnant women should limit consumption of or not eat at all," said Michael Bender, director of the Mercury Policy Project, based in Washington, DC. "So why aren't they willing to inform customers directly at their stores?" Last month, a coalition of environmental groups led by the Mercury Policy Project released the results of a 22 state mercury testing project, showing that store-bought swordfish and tuna contain levels of mercury that the federal government has determined may be hazardous to human health, particularly the health of children and pregnant women. Mercury concentrations in fish tested from Whole Foods Market were among the highest. Swordfish tested from a Whole Foods stores in Providence, Rhode Island came in at 2.143 parts per million of mercury - twice the Food and Druge Administration's (FDA) action level of 1 ppm. A swordfish sample from a St. Paul, Minnesota Whole Foods store had a mercury concentration of 1.633 ppm. Samples of tuna from Whole Foods Markets also tested high for mercury. A Washington, DC Whole Foods store sample of tuna came in at 0.603 ppm mercury, and a Whole Foods market tuna sample from Anne Arundel County, Maryland had a mercury concentration of 0.591 ppm. "Based on our test results, a 44 pound child eating six ounces of tuna weekly from the Washington, DC Whole Foods Market would be four times over the EPA's reference dose," said Bender. The EPA reference dose is an estimation of the amount of methylmercury that, if consumed, would not be expected to cause an appreciable risk of adverse health effects over a lifetime. "A 120 pound woman eating just six ounces of tuna weekly from the Anne Arundel County, Maryland Whole Foods store would be eating one and one-half times EPA's reference dose," he said. The results released in the group's report, "Fair Warning: Why Grocery Stores Should Tell Parents About Mercury in Fish" were more comprehensive than any recently released by the FDA, said Bender. Tests were conducted at the University of North Carolina's Environmental Quality Institute between July 7 and August 11 on samples purchased at supermarket chains such as Safeway, Shaw's, Albertsons and Whole Foods in 22 states. An average mercury concentration of 1.1 parts per million (ppm) was found in the 24 swordfish samples tested. That level exceeds the FDA Action Level of 1.0 ppm for commercial fish, which is the amount at which the agency can take legal action to remove a product from the market. Mercury concentrations in 31 samples of fresh or frozen tuna steaks averaged 0.33 ppm, a level comparable to that of canned albacore tuna, a fish specifically targeted for limited consumption by women of childbearing age and children in the 2004 joint advisory from the FDA and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Meanwhile, the EPA has granted the public additional time to comment on portions of its cap-and-trade rule to regulate mercury emissions from coal fired power plants. Environmental and citizens groups have objected that the new rule would give these power plants eight additional years to emit mercury over and above existing regulations under the Clean Air Act. The public will be allowed to comment on the methods EPA used to assess the amount of utility-attributable mercury levels in fish tissue, the public health implications of those levels, and the legal issues underlying the decision. The agency will also take comment on certain aspects of the Clean Air Mercury Rule, the cap-and-trade approach that EPA will use to reduce mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants. Finalized in March, 2005, the new mercury rule will result in approximately 70 percent reductions in mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants when fully implemented in 2018, according to the EPA. The EPA will take comment for 45 days after the notices are published in the Federal Register and will hold a public hearing two weeks after publication. For more information on this action, visit: http://www.epa.gov/air/mercuryrule/rule.htm -------- ACTIVISTS A revealing album that is locked and loaded and setting its sights on our U.S. military Dennis Kyne Releases Rock CD 'I’m Not Resisting' Monday, 24 October 2005 /UCWE/ http://news.ucwe.com/content/view/862/9/ SAN JOSE, CA - It wasn't until Dennis Kyne returned to the US to finish his civilian duty that he learned the most painful lessons of 15 years served in the US Army. His own Military and his own countrymen let him down. Kyne was shocked to return home and learn about the side effects of his exposure to depleted uranium weapons. He was thankful that he did not swallow Pyridostigmine Bromide tablets, a requirement set forth for all military personnel during the Gulf War I. He decided to disobey orders and threw them all away. His comrades who did swallow them are now suffering from un-diagnosable diseases. Now all he wants to do is Support The Truth. With a revealing book with the same name under his belt, it was time to let the music do the talking. Kyne makes his way through 11 tracks of emotional fist waving at our government and military on his new rock album I’m Not Resisting. “All We Want Is The Truth” opens the album with Kyne sounding like Iggy Pop, a real ear catching start to an album. His high energy level bites like a pit bull and it hangs on without letting go throughout this solid release. Five of the tracks were recorded at KZSU Stanford Live and they are crackling with that live off the floor spontaneity that every artist yearns for while in the studio. The entire album has that feel from start to finish. That essential gritty edge and undying tension is just what the doctor ordered to convey such a distressing message. This CD is jam packed with powerful eye opening messages and good music to back it all up. It does not get any more sincere than this. That was the intention of Kyne all along, to carry a message to his fellow man while rocking your soul every step of the way. ---- Mother of All Protesters Talking with Cindy Sheehan, center of a rallying movement against war in Iraq by Kristen Lombardi October 24th, 2005 Village Voice http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0543,lombardiqa,69280,2.html Cindy Sheehan, the superstar of the anti-war movement, will descend upon the White House on the day U.S. casualties in Iraq hit 2,000—a grim milestone expected any day now. Sheehan, whose 24-year-old son, Casey, was killed in Iraq last year, will say a few words in protest, and then tie herself to the fence. She says she won't leave until she's arrested. Once she's out of jail, she promises, she'll go right back to the fence. And when she's done with that, she intends to set up a new Camp Casey outside President Bush's ranch in Crawford, Texas, hounding him throughout the Thanksgiving holiday. She has also been hounding the Democrats—especially Hillary Clinton. Earlier this month, Sheehan penned an article denouncing New York's junior senator as a "pro-war Democrat," calling her "a political animal who believes she has to be a war hawk to keep up with the big boys." Sheehan echoed the charge on Saturday, when she appeared at the Brooklyn Peace Fair, among other anti-war events in New York City. Delivering a speech to a crowd of 200-plus—many of whom shouted "We love you Cindy!" and "You're the best!"—she urged fellow anti-war activists to hold Clinton accountable when she runs for re-election next year. "It's time to call a war hawk a war hawk," she said, to rousing applause. "And if it hurts people politically, so be it." The Voice caught up with Sheehan after her speech. You've been credited with galvanizing a movement that had been in hibernation. Well, I think I was the spark. The movement was there, but it was like dry kiln. It needed a spark to catch on fire and, ever since, it has spread and spread and spread. How have you seen this since the first Camp Casey, in August? I've noticed a total difference at anti-war events. I used to speak before crowds of a hundred, and sometimes 50. Now the crowds are larger; the enthusiasm is greater; the counter-protests are fewer. Even before Camp Casey, I was on the Alan Colmes Show. At first, callers were all hostile. But I was on the other night and callers were supportive. One caller respectfully disagreed with me. But he did say, 'Well, I have to agree with you on that point.' So I see the mood changing. What sparked your article denouncing Clinton earlier this month? She was in California fundraising recently, and Code Pink went out to protest. They were passing out fliers on her voting record. I was going to go. But then one of her supporters, somebody I love, called me and asked me not to go. I said, 'Out of respect for you, I won't. Not out of respect for Hillary Clinton.' I challenged my friend, saying, 'How could you support someone who met with me yet still says this is not a good time to withdraw troops?' Senator Clinton has said she wants to make sure my son didn't die in vain. Don't use my son's death to justify continued killing in Iraq. So should anti-war Democrats here abandon Clinton next year and beyond? I'm not going to support another pro-war Democrat. I made that mistake with John Kerry last year and I'm not going to do it again. While I've been here this week, I've seen tremendous support for this view. The majority of New Yorkers are against this war. So if the senator will start speaking out against the war and calling for withdrawal of troops, then support her. But if she is for more troops, don't. Do you think New Yorkers would kick the senator out of office over one issue? Yes. It's the mood I get. It's more than dissatisfaction. People know this war is the most important issue, and they know it's not like bringing home pork for your state. It's life and death; it's flesh and blood. I'm challenging Senator Clinton to speak out, but I'm also challenging the people of New York to exercise their vote and force their senator to represent their values. What have you learned as an icon for the movement? Politics are really frustrating. I realize that I have to work within the system but it's frustrating. Every decision a politician makes is weighed. They ask, 'If I do this, am I going to get re-elected?' This war is one issue where they should vote from their hearts, with courage and integrity. I've also learned that people have power and we're the ones who have to effect true change. Look back in history at the civil-rights movement, the women's suffragist movement, the labor movement. The grassroots forced change, and that's what the peace movement is doing. You're going to the White House this week. What's the message you want to bring? We have to invest everything we have right now to ensure our children and their children have a future. I believe what the Bush administration is doing is harmful to our present but it will be more harmful to our future. It's contaminating a region with depleted uranium. It's depleting our treasury. And if it has its way, it'll wage an eternal war in the Middle East. We have to change this. I'm going to Washington with my sister, Dede, who was my partner in crime in Crawford. I'm going to relay this message, and get arrested. And when I get out of jail, I'm going to go back and do the same. ----- Group to mark war's toll with 100,000 Rings Monday October 24, 2005 Herald-Mail http://www.herald-mail.com/?module=displaystory&story_id=122760&format=html SHEPHERDSTOWN, W.Va. - Bells will toll tonight through Friday in Shepherdstown and other communities in the United States and overseas, marking the one-year anniversary of a British study concluding that approximately 100,000 Iraqis have died as a result of the invasion and occupation of the country. The vigil, called 100,000 Rings, is scheduled to begin at 6 p.m. at the McMurran Hall wall at King and German streets, according to news release from the Shepherdstown-based group West Virginia Peace. A bell will be rung each minute until 9:30 p.m. to represent the death of an Iraqi attributed to the war and occupation, the release stated. According to the Web site www.iraqmortality.org, peace organizations in approximately 100 communities in the United States, United Kingdom, Switzerland and elsewhere will be participating in the vigil. "We are appalled by the silence surrounding the suffering and death of the Iraqi people, caught on a battlefield without borders in the crossfire of a war they didn't start or invite," the news release stated. According to the release, the protest marks one year since the Oct. 29, 2004, the publication of a study in the British medical journal, The Lancet, estimating "100,000 Iraqis have died as a consequence of the U.S. occupation of Iraq." According to the article that appeared in The Lancet, the study was based on a survey of approximately 1,000 families comprising more than 7,800 people in 33 communities. The estimate was of the number of excess deaths not attributable to natural causes since the war began in 2003.