NucNews - November 26, 2005 -------- NUCLEAR -------- canada Clarington hopes Premier okays new reactors By KAREN HOWLETT Saturday, November 26, 2005 Page A14 Toronto Globe & Mail http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20051126/DARLINGTON26/TPNational/Canada Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty is widely expected to give the green light to build the province's first new nuclear reactors in more than two decades to help address the looming electricity crisis. When he does, he will make John Mutton a very happy man. Mr. Mutton, the mayor of Clarington, has been tirelessly lobbying Mr. McGuinty to expand the Darlington Nuclear Generating Station in the fast-growing community about 80 kilometres east of Toronto. The government will not formally announce its nuclear strategy until after it receives a report from the Ontario Power Authority, which will recommend what role nuclear energy should play in the province. The government agency plans to deliver its report early next month. Mr. Mutton said the government has no choice but to endorse nuclear energy. He is not alone in this belief. The government has promised to close all of the province's aging coal-fired generating stations by early 2009. The coal stations produce about one-quarter of the province's electricity. "When you're taking this much coal off, your only choice is new nuclear," Mr. Mutton said in an interview yesterday. "You cannot put up enough windmills or solar panels to provide energy." New Democratic Party Leader Howard Hampton also said he expects the government to roll out an ambitious plan to build new reactors not just at Darlington but also at the Bruce Nuclear Station on Lake Huron. "I don't think Darlington is the only piece of the picture," he said in an interview yesterday. Industry officials support Mr. Mutton's argument that the Darlington station would be the best choice for building new reactors. For starters, they say, the station has room to expand -- it is designed for eight reactors but has four. As well, residents of Clarington would support the expansion -- the city passed a resolution two weeks ago to that effect. "Community acceptance is vital," especially on something as divisive as nuclear reactors, one industry source said. He added that officials from the Ministry of Energy and the Ontario Power Authority have been asking lots of questions about Darlington. Mr. Mutton discussed Darlington with Mr. McGuinty this month in China, where he was part of the Premier's trade mission. "He needs to know, if he's going to have [new reactors] that he has a willing host community," Mr. Mutton said. He also met with deputy energy minister James Gillis this week. No decisions have been made, said Erika Botond, a spokeswoman in Energy Minister Donna Cansfield's office. "Until then, it would be premature to discuss whether there would be new nuclear, let alone a specific site." Mr. Mutton said the attraction for Clarington is the opportunity to create new jobs. Two years ago, the community lost out on a race to host a $12-billion experimental project seeking to harness nuclear fusion, which is the way the sun produces energy. Canada's bid was withdrawn because of a lack of support from the federal government. Mr. McGuinty gave his strongest signal yet last September that his government is considering building new nuclear reactors. "We are prepared to go ahead with economical, safe, new nuclear if that is recommended by the OPA," he said. -------- depleted uranium Iran President: Charges Bush for War Crimes By NASSER KARIMI Associated Press Writer Nov 26, 2005 (AP) http://www.aljazeerah.info/News%20archives/2005%20News%20Archives/November/27nb/Iran%20President%20Charges%20Bush%20for%20War%20Crimes.htm TEHRAN, Iran -- Iran's president said Saturday the Bush administration should be tried on war crimes charges, and he denounced the West for pressuring Iran to curb its controversial nuclear program. "You, who have used nuclear weapons against innocent people, who have used uranium ordnance in Iraq, should be tried as war criminals in courts," Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said in an apparent reference to the United States. Ahmadinejad did not elaborate, but he apparently was referring to the U.S. military's reported use of artillery shells packed with depleted uranium, which is far less radioactive than natural uranium and is left over from the process of enriching uranium for use as nuclear fuel. Since the Iraq war started in2003 , American forces have fired at least 120 tons of shells packed with depleted uranium, an extremely dense material used by the U.S. and British militaries to penetrate tank armor. Once fired, the shells melt, vaporize and turn to dust. "Who in the world are you to accuse Iran of suspicious nuclear armed activity?" Ahmadinejad said during a nationally televised ceremony marking the36 th anniversary of the establishment of Iran's volunteer Basij paramilitary force. Iran has been under intense international pressure to curb its nuclear program, which the United States claims is part of an effort to produce nuclear weapons. Iran denies such claims and says its program is aimed at generating electricity. Iran insists that it has the right to fully develop the program, including enrichment of nuclear fuel - a process that can produce fuel for nuclear reactors or atomic bombs. On Thursday, the European Union accused Iran of having documents that show how to make nuclear warheads and joined the United States in warning Tehran it could be referred to the U.N. Security Council for possible sanctions. Iran has temporarily stopped its enrichment program, but negotiations with Britain, France and Germany broke off in August after Tehran restarted another part of its program: the conversion of raw uranium into the gas that is used as the feeder stock in enrichment. Iran also has rejected European calls to halt work at its uranium conversion facility near the central city of Isfahan. Ahmadinejad dismissed Western concerns over his country's nuclear program. "They say Iran has to stop its peaceful nuclear activity since there is a probability of diversion while we are sure that they are developing and testing (nuclear weapons) every day," Ahmadinejad said. "They speak as if they are the lords of the world." State-run TV said more than 9 million Basij members formed human chains in different parts of the country to mark their militia's anniversary. Thousands linked hands to make a12 -mile chain along an expressway in northern Tehran. Some Basij members also formed chains around an enrichment plant in the central city of Natanz and a nuclear plant under construction in the southern city of Bushehr, symbolizing their readiness to defend the country's nuclear program, Iranian TV reported. It is estimated that the Basij comprise 15 percent of Iran's population, or about 10 million people. -------- europe Poland risks Russia's wrath with Soviet nuclear attack map · Defence chief reveals old Warsaw Pact plans · UK spared as European cities faced destruction Nicholas Watt in Warsaw Saturday November 26, 2005 The Guardian http://www.guardian.co.uk/russia/article/0,2763,1651315,00.html Poland's new rightwing government yesterday risked a damaging confrontation with Russia when it published a Warsaw Pact map showing detailed plans for Soviet nuclear strikes against western Europe. Poland threw open the doors of its military archives to show how most of Europe would have been laid to waste in a nuclear conflagration between east and west. Dating from 1979, when presidents Jimmy Carter and Leonid Brezhnev were discussing detente, the map showed how Warsaw Pact forces would have responded to an attack by the Nato alliance. A series of red mushroom clouds over western Europe show that Soviet nuclear weapons strikes would have been launched at Germany, the Netherlands, Denmark and Belgium if Nato had struck first. Red clouds are drawn over the then German capital, Bonn, and other key German cities such as the financial centre of Frankfurt, Cologne, Stuttgart, Munich and the strategically important northern port of Hamburg. Brussels, the political headquarters of Nato, is also targeted. Blue mushroom clouds, representing the expected Nato nuclear strikes, are drawn over cities in the eastern bloc, including Warsaw and the then Czechoslovakian capital, Prague. France would have escaped attack, possibly because it is not a member of Nato's integrated structure. Britain, which has always been at the heart of Nato, would also have been spared, suggesting Moscow wanted to stop at the Rhine to avoid overstretching its forces. The exercise, entitled Seven Days to the River Rhine, indicated Warsaw Pact forces aimed to reach the Franco-German border within a week of a Nato attack. Standing next to the fading map in Warsaw yesterday, Radoslaw Sikorski, the Polish defence minister, said: "The objective of the exercise on this map is to take over most of western Europe - all of Germany, Belgium and Denmark." Mr Sikorski, who made a name for himself working for the rightwing American Enterprise Institute thinktank in Washington, made clear he was prepared for a backlash from Russia, whose president, Vladimir Putin, has lamented the demise of the Soviet Union. Announcing the release of 1,700 Warsaw Pact papers from Poland's military archive, he said: "This is crucial to educating the country on the way Poland was an unwilling ally of the USSR in the cold war. The map shows a classic Warsaw Pact exercise - it was a 'counter' attack to defend itself by going all the way to the Atlantic." Mr Sikorski, who was appointed after the Law and Justice party won a surprise victory in the recent elections after pledging to cleanse the country of its communist past, believes the map shows how Moscow was prepared to sacrifice Poland to save the Soviet Union. Nato's policy of retaining the right to a first nuclear strike - because the Soviet Union had far superior conventional forces - meant Polish troops dug in by the River Vistula would have been wiped out. "This map is a moving and shattering personal experience," Mr Sikorski said of the exercise, which estimated that 2 million Polish civilians would have been killed. "It shows that the Polish army was being used to participate in an operation that would have resulted in the nuclear annihilation of our country." With ties between Poland and Russia at one of their lowest ebbs since the break-up of the Warsaw Pact, Mr Sikorski was asked whether he feared a Kremlin backlash. He said: "We think the Soviet regime was very detrimental to Russia - the Russian people suffered the most." Commander Waldemar Wojcik, the head of Poland's Central Military Academy, said: "This was an exercise based on the assumption of a Nato attack. The doctrine of the day was that the Warsaw Pact countries were peace loving." He added: "I visited the Pentagon in 2001 and was shown maps that were the mirror image of this." Other papers released covered Operation Danube, the invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968, and details of a massacre of Polish strikers in 1970 at Szczecin which led to the downfall of Wladyslaw Gomulka, the relatively moderate leader. Kazimierz Marcinkiewicz, the new Polish prime minister, insisted Warsaw was not trying to provoke Russia, even though it released the map without consulting Moscow. "The future should be built on the truth about the past. If the truth is damaging to international relations that is a bad thing ... I am sure this will not spoil our relations with Russia." -------- iran U-enrichment, new red line in Iran N-showdown Saturday, November 26, 2005 - IranMania.com http://www.iranmania.com/News/ArticleView/Default.asp?NewsCode=38087&NewsKind=Current%20Affairs LONDON, November 26 (IranMania) - Enriching uranium is the new red line the West has set in the showdown with Iran over its nuclear ambitions but Tehran insists on its right to this possibly weapons-related technology, diplomats and analysts told AFP. "The United States and Europe have clearly moved away from uranium conversion to set enrichment as the new red line but it's not clear if Russia, the key diplomatic player at this point, buys this," Mark Fitzpatrick, a non-proliferation expert at London's International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) think tank, said. Conversion is the first step in enriching uranium into what can be fuel for nuclear power reactors but also the raw material for nuclear bombs, AFP noted. The UN nuclear watchdog International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on Thursday put off taking Iran to the UN Security Council to give time for new Russian diplomacy. Talks on a Russian proposal to allow Iran to conduct uranium enrichment, but in Russia and not in Iran in order to keep Tehran from obtaining nuclear technology crucial to making atom bombs, will now take center stage, AFP said. The IAEA's35 -nation board of governors had in September found Iran in non-compliance with the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), a finding that requires eventual referral to the Security Council for possible international sanctions. It also called on Iran to halt conversion work it had resumed in August and which torpedoed EU-Iran talks on guaranteeing that Iran will not make nuclear weapons. But the Russian proposal is based on Iran being allowed to convert uranium ore into the gas that is the feedstock for enrichment. So the conversion that in September was the cut-off point for taking Iran to the Security Council has now become accepted as something Iran could retain in an eventual compromise solution, diplomats admitted, according to AFP. German ambassador Herbert Honsowitz indicated the new red line when he told the IAEA board Thursday that the concern over unilateral nuclear moves by Iran was "particularly true regarding threats to start enrichment. It must be absolutely clear that this would immediately put an end to our efforts" for a compromise. Iran however stubbornly defends its "right" to enrich uranium, as stipulated in the NPT. Iran's IAEA ambassador Mohammad Akhundzadeh told Iranian media Friday: "Like all member countries in the International Atomic Energy Agency, the Islamic Republic of Iran has the right to enrich uranium," he said. Diplomats in Vienna told AFP they had seen a four-page intelligence document that claims to report a meeting on October 24 at which the secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council Ali Larijani discussed options for possibly resuming enrichment at Iran's Natanz facility, where there is already a cascade of 164 centrifuges. The report could not be independently confirmed. Fitzpatrick said the Iranians had succeeded in advancing their nuclear program while dealing with the IAEA "by taking the minimal half-step to prevent being sent to the docket in New York." He said he now wondered about "salami slicing tactics" the Iranians might use, such as holding off from running the cascade in Natanz but testing, for instance, some20 centrifuges there which are not under IAEA seals, as is the cascade, but only television surveillance, AFP added. The Iranian goal would be for enrichment to become a fait accompli, as was done for conversion. In any case, a diplomat close to the IAEA said that even if Iran moved ahead with enrichment, it would not be enough to get non-aligned states and countries like Russia, which defend Iran's right to peaceful nuclear technology, to favor Security Council referral. "Even enrichment would not do that because in terms of legality Iran is not denied the right to do this," the diplomat, who is from a non-aligned country, said. The NPT, which empowers the IAEA in its verification work, guarantees signatories the right to the peaceful use of nuclear energy, including enrichment. The European Union and the United States claim however that Iran is using its civilian nuclear program as a cover for secret development of nuclear weapons. They say Iran should be kept from obtaining the "breakout capability" to make nuclear weapons which enrichment represents. ---- Iran hardline President defiant on nuke program Saturday, November 26 , 2005 - © 2005IranMania.com http://www.iranmania.com/News/ArticleView/Default.asp?NewsCode=38115&NewsKind=Current%2520Affairs LONDON, November 26 (IranMania) - Iran's hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad defiantly brushed off Western concerns about its nuclear program in a feisty speech Saturday marking the25 th anniversary of a revolutionary militia, said AFP. In remarks aimed at countries "which are suspicious of Iran's nuclear activities," Ahmadinejad demanded: "Who has given you the right to prevent Iran from acquiring the nuclear technology?" Ahmadinejad was speaking to thousands of the voluntary Basij militia on the25 th anniversary of the corps created by Islamic revolutionary leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini to defend the country during the1980 - 1988war with Iraq. "You have no rights to ask questions" about Iran's nuclear activities, he thundered, said AFP. The International Atomic Energy Agency on Thursday put off taking Iran to the Security Council to give time for new Russian diplomacy to resolve the nuclear crisis, but the United States warned that referral would happen soon if Tehran did not meet its non-proliferation obligations. The European Union and United States suspect that the Islamic republic is using an atomic energy drive as a cover for nuclear weapons development, charges Iran has denied, AFP added. Under the Russian plan, it would enrich uranium on Iran's behalf but Tehran has already rejected the proposal, refusing to give up what it says is its right to enrichment, a process which can make both nuclear fuel and the explosive core of a weapon. "Enrichment and the fuel cycle are things that the Islamic Republic of Iran consider to be natural and legitimate rights and within the framework of the NPT," Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said last week. In his speech, Ahmadinejad also pointed an accusing finger at "the ones in Iran who ask us to compromise and make concessions". "The Iranian nation has crushed them under their feet and will defend its nuclear rights with wisdom, power and unity," he said, drawing chants of "Death to America" and "Death to Israel" from the crowd. Iran's conservative newspapers gloated Saturday at the "victory" at the IAEA meeting, according to AFP. "Europe bailed out," the hardline Kayhan newspaper trumpeted, while the Jomhuri Eslami spoke of the "retreat" by the IAEA's board of governors. "The retreat by the Europeans proves more than ever that proceeding with dignity is the most realistic approach to counter the extortionists," Jomhuri Eslami wrote in an editorial. Iran, the government daily, said: "The board of governors on the path of rationality: the US and Britain were left alone in the meeting," referring to calls by the two countries to bring Iran before the Security Council. The crisis has escalated since Ahmedinejad, a former member of Iran's ideological army the Revolutionary Guards, took office in August after an election victory opponents allege was an orchestrated fraud by regime elements such as the Basij militia and the Revolutionary Guards. Praising the Basij for its efforts during and after the war with Iraq, Ahmadinejad watched thousands of Islamic militiamen parading in camouflage fatigues and forming a human chain along a Tehran highway. Headed by commanders of the Revolutionary Guards, the nine million strong Basij acts as the populist guardians of the regime against domestic or foreign "threats" and has members in all institutions, ministries, universities and large state-run industries. -------- pakistan German convicted in Pak N-tech supply case Indian Express, Saturday, November 26, 2005 http://www.indianexpress.com/full_story.php?content_id=82707 MUNICH: A German businessman was sentenced on Thursday to seven years and three months in prison for illegally supplying Pakistan with equipment to build nuclear weapons. Rainer V. (61) was found guilty by a Munich court on a range of charges, including providing false information to to obtain authorisation to supply dual use equipment to Pakistani companies.Prosecutors said that from 1999 to 2004, Rainer V.’s Munich-based company, Vacom Gmbh, bought and shipped equipment worth around 400,000 euros to Pakistan,in violation of German laws governing foreign trade and weapons restrictions. Reports in the German press say the equipment was sent to disgraced nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan ‘s research laboratories. -------- security American Hiroshima - the next 9/11 By Shaheen Chughtai Saturday 26 November 2005, 1:55 Makka Time, 22:55 GMT Aljazeera http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/D99265B2-4402-46FE-A905-1F086F513A3D.htm When Australian police announced recently that eight men arrested on terrorism charges were planning a bomb attack against a nuclear reactor near Sydney, many security observers elsewhere were not surprised. Officials and analysts in the United States have been warning that al-Qaida or associated groups are planning such attacks on American soil. Dubbed American Hiroshima, the plan apparently targets New York, Miami, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, Chicago, San Francisco, Las Vegas, Boston and Washington, DC. Former US Defence Secretary William Perry says there is an even chance of a nuclear attack on the US this decade. Renowned investor Warren Buffet has predicted "a nuclear terrorist attack ... is inevitable". David Dionisi, a former US army intelligence officer, is convinced that plans for a nuclear attack are under way. Once a conservative Republican, Dionisi enjoyed success as a Fortune 500 business executive after leaving the army. But he later rejected his political beliefs and now advocates peace, social justice and humanitarianism. In his new book, American Hiroshima, Dionisi argues decades of unjust US foreign policies will be largely to blame for sowing the seeds of hostility and vengeance which could lead to a nuclear catastrophe. Aljazeera's Shaheen Chughtai caught up with Dionisi in London. Dionisi had just flown from Liberia where he helps run a Catholic orphanage. Aljazeera.net: You were once a conservative Republican. What made you change your beliefs? Dionisi: The transformation was a discovery process. When I joined the military, I had a very limited view of what the US was doing around the world. Through my experiences as a military intelligence officer and later as a business executive doing international volunteer work, I started to see our foreign policies were often hurting people and making the world more dangerous. One of the more dramatic moments in this process was when I was assigned to a unit focusing on implementing US foreign policy in central America. I was part of a rapid deployment team designed to go in and suppress forces working for social justice in places such as Honduras, Nicaragua, El Salvador and Guatemala. You describe the US public as uninformed - why? The major media outlets are owned by a handful of corporations interested in promoting advertising and pro-government messages. Anything that challenges the existing power structure very often fails to receive air time. I highlight Fox as an extreme example of the Republican propaganda machine. But when your country is fighting a war, you have an obligation to understand what's really going on. If you don't, you can become an agent of injustice. If people can find the time to watch baseball or soccer etc, they can make an effort to read, travel, talk and not be limited to the messages of fear. They also need to understand their history. In 1962, the Joint Chiefs of Staff presented a plan called Operation Northwood, which is now declassified. It proposed conducting mass casualty attacks on American targets and blaming it on Cuba to rally public support for war against Fidel Castro. President Kennedy rejected the plan. So we shouldn't just assume any future attack on our soil is the work of al-Qaida. Your book condemns alliances with repressive regimes. Can't these be justified if they serve a greater cause? History teaches us that when you form alliances that promote injustice, you can only expect injustice in the future. Kindness begets kindness and the inverse is also true. The US fought the largest secret war in its history during the 1980s in Afghanistan - over $6bn was funnelled into that war. As a result, US collaboration with and responsibility for al-Qaida goes well beyond what most even informed Americans understand. If you consider that there are over 500 prisoners in Guantanamo Bay from over 40 countries - though not a single one is from Iraq - and that the CIA recruited thousands of people from over 40 countries to be part of that war - none from Iraq - you can better understand how the US played a direct role in creating what became the Taliban and al-Qaida. Bush supporters argue the removal of Saddam and the Taliban was beneficial and therefore justified military action. That starts from an artificial premise. When the Bush administration says, "Well, it's great that Saddam's gone," it fails to acknowledge that Bush's father and President Ronald Reagan were key forces that helped create Saddam Hussein. Looking at what happened in 1979 it can put a lot of this in perspective. As Reagan came into office, the US embassy hostages in Iran were released after 444 days in captivity. Americans don't know this wasn't a coincidence. The US had agreed in writing not to attack Iran and also paid Tehran $8bn. That's why that media event (of the hostages' release during Reagan's inauguration ceremony) occurred with such precise timing. How do you know this? These are facts that were subsequently published. The agreement with Iran was submitted for review by the current administration to see if it would be binding and prevent an attack in the near future. Bush administration attorneys concluded it was signed under duress and therefore not binding. I know this from a former senior member of the Bush administration, a seasoned CIA officer named Ray Flynn. The US felt humiliated; the Reagan administration wanted to hurt the Iranians but its hands were tied. So Saddam Hussein was used as the agent for that. He ended up invading Iran ... and you had this brutal war from 1980 to 1988 that killed over a million people. What was the US role in that war? By 1982, Iran had recaptured lost territory and Saddam asked the US for help. So President Reagan signed a National Security Decision Directive - NSDD 114 - to provide all means of support to Saddam Hussein. Donald Rumsfeld then went on a very sensitive mission to deliver satellite intelligence, other forms of intelligence and weapons of mass destruction (WMD). That's why the current Bush administration was so confident Saddam had chemical and biological weapons; they knew the US had supplied the ingredients in the 1980s. Saddam broke with the US, however, when he found out we were selling weapons to Iran in the mid-1980s - the Iran-Contra affair. All this puts the invasion of Kuwait into perspective. Saddam got clear messages from the US saying he could invade; plus he felt the US owed him one after betraying him over Iran. All these wars form a continuum of injustice. Look at the UN economic sanctions in the 1990s that the US and UK refused to lift: over a million Iraqis died, including 500,000 children. That's more than the number who died from the Nagasaki and Hiroshima atomic bombings. You list numerous "unjust" actions that led to attacks on US targets - isn't that justifying terrorism? I talked to the CIA's Michael Scheuer, head of the "find Bin Ladin" team, and he stresses that people in the Muslim world are not fighting us because of our freedoms or elections but our foreign policy. This is something the Bush administration constantly twists. The basic principle is: if you hurt someone, they're going to want to hurt you. We need to ask questions like: Why did 9/11 happen? Bin Ladin has a very clear articulation of why he's at war with the US, Britain, Israel and others. If Americans read it, they'll see it's very clear about things such as US forces on Arab land. And it's not just an Arab or Muslim issue. I learnt this in South Korea where the US has had troops since 1950. When you're there that long, it sends a powerful message that you're not there to liberate, you're there to occupy. You describe the US as the biggest WMD proliferator. Why? The US has spent $5 trillion on 70,000 nuclear weapons since 1945 - more than the rest of the world combined. A Congressional report in 1999 found the designs for every deployed nuclear warhead - and for some not built yet - had been stolen and passed to China. Israel acquired its programme from the US too. Despite this, ordinary Americans are more concerned about the Bush administration's lies and hyped-up warnings about WMD in places such as Iraq. Is Iran really a threat to the US? An alliance between Shia Iran and Sunni-led al-Qaida seems far fetched. Iran will not attack the US if the US does not attack Iran. Congressman Curt Weldon (who accuses Tehran of plotting to attack the States) talks about attacking Iran but such talk makes the world more dangerous. If we were Iran, we'd develop nuclear weapons simply because Israel has them. So the US should facilitate a process whereby Israel eliminates its nuclear weapons. As for the religious differences between Iran and al-Qaida, yes, that's been true - but Bush's War on Terror has been pushing the sects together. Intelligence reports indicate Bin Ladin's son Saad has been based in Iran. No, we can't be certain they're helping each other. But in any case, the Bush administration does not want peace with Iran. You say "kindness begets kindness". What's your evidence? After the first world war, the Treaty of Versailles punished Germany harshly, producing hardship and hostility that the Nazis exploited. But after the second world war, when the Marshall Plan helped rebuild Germany and Japan, the US did more to promote democracy than at any time during the Cold war. To make the world a safer place, we must aggressively attack the causes of suffering and hostility. Imagine if Bush had said after 9/11: "People are capitalising on our mistakes in the Middle East. So, let's ensure there is no hunger, lack of clean water, lack of education etc in the Muslim world." We would have made more friends and drained support for our enemies. If we can't expect US foreign policy to change soon, isn't it too late to stop an American Hiroshima? It's not too late although your point is realistic. But we can still influence the US response. Far more people will die in the retaliation and the counter-retaliation. If the US had the wisdom, we could make the world safer. The US military budget was over $420 billion in 2005. We could split that three ways: a third on economic development in the Middle East, especially Iraq; a third on tackling injustice at home, such as providing universal healthcare - and that would still leave us with the world's biggest military budget. People have to become more involved. The anti-Vietnam war movement is an example - but it failed to hold government to account. If we had tried (former Defence Secretary) Robert McNamara or (former Secretary of State) Henry Kissinger for crimes such as the illegal bombing of Cambodia, it would have sent a powerful message to future leaders. The Bush government today wouldn't have been so bold. Ultimately, Americans need to understand many of them will die and parts of their country will become uninhabitable unless they hold their government to account. -------- u.n. UN nuclear watchdog ends meeting in Vienna Saturday, November 26 , 2005 - IranMania.com http://www.iranmania.com/News/ArticleView/Default.asp?NewsCode=38086&NewsKind=Current%20Affairs LONDON, November 26 (IranMania) - Non-aligned countries protested a call by Britain to hand over key Iranian nuclear documents to the world's five main atomic powers for analysis, as the UN nuclear watchdog wrapped up a week-long meeting, AFP reported. Diplomats told AFP that some non-aligned countries opposed handing over the document to the nuclear weapons states on the UN Security Council for analysis, which Iran submitted to the watchdog International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The paper is a blueprint for making the explosive core of a nuclear bomb. The IAEA's35 -nation board of governors on Thursday put off taking Iran to the Security Council to give time for new Russian diplomacy to resolve the crisis over Iran's nuclear program, but the United States warned that referral would happen soon if Tehran did not meet its non-proliferation obligations, AFP added. British ambassador Peter Jenkins had said "it would be helpful if the (IAEA) director general could arrange for the document to be seen by experts from the five nuclear weapons states" in the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), namely Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States. Non-aligned states, which back Iran's right to the peaceful use of nuclear energy, as well as non-nuclear states in the NPT said the issue should remain within the framework of the IAEA, AFP noted. States which spoke included Algeria, Brazil, Cuba, Egypt and South Africa, a non-aligned diplomat said. British atomic governor Robert Wright told the board that Britain was not trying pressure the IAEA on this matter and was merely making a suggestion "to help clarify the contents of the document," a diplomat added. Jenkins had said Thursday, in comments echoed by other Western ambassadors, that the European Union "sees grounds for deep concern" that Iran "has admitted to having in its possession a document which was supplied" by an international black market and which is a guide to making the explosive core of an atom bomb. The document tells how to melt and cast enriched uranium into hemispheres, the IAEA reported last week. Experts said the only use for such a technology is to make nuclear weapons, AFP said. But Iranian ambassador Mohammad Akhondzadeh said Thursday that this was "simple and non-sophisticated information which could be found in open literatures and on Internet". Greenpeace nuclear expert William Peden told AFP however: "The Internet did not exist as it does today in1987 . Iran's claim is not credible and is totally laughable because this is highly detailed, classified information on how to work with uranium to make it into a bomb." Meanwhile, the IAEA decided Friday to give the over half a million euros (dollars) the agency had won with the Nobel peace prize for aid to developing countries, AFP added. The IAEA board of governors "agreed that the agency's share of the monetary award ( SEK5 mln, ?525,000, $630,000) should be used for funding the needs of developing countries in the peaceful application of nuclear energy, specifically in the human health and food production sectors," the IAEA said in a statement. IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei and the agency itself were joint recipients of this year's Nobel Peace Prize, which is to be awarded in Oslo on December10 . An IAEA spokesman said ElBaradei was "expecting to use his portion of the money (also ?525,000) for charitable purposes." ElBaradei proposed using the agency's half for cancer management "to provide practical training in radiation oncology" and for nutrition to help "ensure the healthy development of children using nuclear techniques," the statement said. The meeting of the35 -nation IAEA board opened Monday. It considered technical questions from Monday to Wednesday and then on Thursday the issue of Iran's nuclear program. -------- ENERGY -------- alternative energy Chile's Bachelet says greens back her energy plan Posted: Sat Nov 26, 2005 Alertnet http://peakoil.com/fortopic15158.html Leading presidential contender Michelle Bachelet said on Saturday she has the endorsement of Chile's biggest environmental groups for her energy and mining policies including creating a minister of the environment. Bachelet, seen as a fiscal conservative with liberal social policies, pledged to make 15 percent of the country's energy come from renewable resources by 2010. "During my government I'm not going to develop nuclear energy," she said. President Ricardo Lagos, Bachelet's socialist party mate, has proposed exploring nuclear alternatives. Bachelet said that by 2009 Chile would have a regasification plant to import liquid natural gas and that she would push for a natural gas ring that would connect Chile, Argentina and other countries to the rich natural gas fields in Peru and Bolivia.