NucNews - December 23, 2005 -------- NUCLEAR -------- accidents and safety Emergency services called to Scottish nuclear plant LONDON (AFP) Dec 23, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/2005/051223021528.ltifjixs.html Police and fire services were called to a nuclear power station in Scotland after staff alerted them to "anomalous behaviour" of irradiated substances, operator British Energy said Friday. The alarm was raised just before 9:00 pm (2100 GMT) Thursday by employees disposing of spent fuel in ponds at the Torness plant 30 miles (48 kilometres) southeast of Edinburgh. A British Energy spokesman said officials were monitoring the situation but there was no major panic. "Nobody has been evacuated and the plant is continuing to generate electricity. The emergency services were called as is normal in this situation but we will continue to monitor the fuel pond," he said. The spokesman said he could not elaborate on the behaviour of the fuel that prompted the concern. All 38 staff working at the time had been accounted for and were continuing to work, he added. Torness, which lies near the main A1 trunk road between the Scottish capital and Newcastle, northeast England, was opened in 1988 and employs about 475 people. The plant had been expected to close in 2023 but British Energy announced earlier this month that updating vital equipment could extend its operating life. British Energy has a two billion pound (2.92 billion euro, 3.47 billion dollar) a year turnover. It generates about 55 percent of Scotland's electricity from Torness and the Hunterston "B" nuclear power station about 45 miles (72 kilometres) southwest of Glasgow. ---- Workers exposed to plutonium at Los Alamos Dec. 23, 2005 (UPI) http://www.sciencedaily.com/upi/index.php?feed=Science&article=UPI-1-20051223-14355200-bc-us-losalamos.xml LOS ALAMOS, Calif.-- Five workers at New Mexico's Los Alamos National Laboratory are being monitored after an accident resulted in plutonium being found inside their noses. Details of the accident inside building TA-55 Monday are sketchy, but lab official Kevin Roark verified automated sensors picked up the plutonium release, the San Francisco Chronicle reported Friday. Four other workers in the room weren't contaminated and no contaminants escaped into the environment, Roark told the Chronicle. Roark said none has shown symptoms that required any medical treatment, but "as a standard precaution, (they) are being monitored by the laboratory's Occupational Medicine group." Plutonium-239, used in nuclear bombs, is highly carcinogenic, if inhaled into the lungs. The Chronicle was told of the accident by the Washington-based Project on Government Oversight, which unveils confidential memos about accidents at the laboratory. -------- depleted uranium Iraq: Depleted Uranium aka Baghdad Boils?! jouna, iraq-war.ru December 23, 2005 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NucNews/pending There’s a possibility that the US Department of Defense (DoD) is hiding the US casualties under a disguise of 'Baghdad Boils’, a disease plaguing the US troops in Iraq, claimed to be caused by the sand fly bites, but possibly by depleted uranium (DU) radiation. To explore this issue I’ve forwarded the following article to DU experts in the world to have it checked and I’m now publishing it as a preliminary announcement here in iraq-war.ru. I’ll keep you updated on this as soon as I hear of them (if confirmed you can’t miss the fat mainstream headlining). DEPLETED URANIUM Recent evidence proves that depleted uranium (DU) is the definite cause of Gulf War Syndrome. Fourteen years after its introduction, DU has revealed as a death sentence, lately brought forth by Leuren Moret (cf. e.g. http://www.sfbayview.com/081804/Depleteduranium081804.shtml and the sources to this article). The biological particulate effect targets the Master Code in the DNA and causes numerous diseases difficult to define, but in effect devastating the human body for example with multiple malignancies and developing cancers. Out of 580,400 soldiers in first Gulf War, 11 thousand have died and already by 2000 there were 325,000 permanently disabled, the number increasing by 43,000 every year. Besides, DU has internally contaminated their sexual partners, who have developed endometriosis and have been forced to have hysteroctomies due to health problems. 67 percent of a test group of 251 soldiers have had babies with severe birth defects (missing members, organs, immune system diseases). The United States has deliberately developed the DU in order to utilize the deadly properties of the DU and contaminated not only 42 states in United States, Sinai in Yom Kippur war (1973), Yugoslavia, southern Iraq (and areas nearby) in the first Gulf War and from 2003 on again in Iraq. One of the reasons that the US deploys it allies in the southern parts of the Iraq, because it does not want to expose its own troops to the deadly radiation there from the first Gulf War. Thus the British, and the other coalition troops have been generously given the responsibility of the southern Iraq. BAGHDAD BOIL In a story 'Skin ulcers plague men from N.C. unit’ (cf. http://www.charlotte.com/mld/observer/news/local/13454217.htm ) we are told: "In addition to the combat casualties suffered during a tour of duty in Iraq last year, an N.C. National Guard brigade also had to medevac 13 men back to a U.S. hospital after volleyball games left them vulnerable to one of the Iraq war's most exotic hazards – an outbreak of skin ulcers that can grow for years. The victims, all men from the same small unit, contracted cutaneous leishmaniasis, characterized by weeping sores that refuse to heal, said Lt. Col Tim Mauldin, the brigade's top medical officer. The illness is nicknamed "Baghdad Boil." At the time the guardsmen contracted it last year, the only way to treat it was to fly them back to Walter Reed Army Medical Center for up to three weeks of intravenous treatments with a drug called Pentostam" Using Pentostam in the treatment of sand fly bite is most curious for two main reasons: (1) One is tempted to suspect the US diagnosis, because for leishmaniasis, phlebotomus argentipes (also known as Kala-azar), a disease indeed caused by the bite of sand fly, there is a new, oral drug (Miltefosine( is now available. The medicine is effective (cf. http://www.who.int/tdr/diseases/leish/press_release.htm ), which makes the US use of sodium stibogluconate (commercial names: Pentostam or Stibanate) instead very curious, until we read the comment of Lt. Col Tim Mauldin concerning the sores (rather: 'malignancies’) known as Baghdad Boils: "No matter what you do, it just keeps getting bigger and bigger.") (2) Pentostam is administered into veins and "results in a greater than 50% decrease in parasite DNA, RNA protein and purine nucleoside triphosphate levels" (cf. http://emc.medicines.org.uk/emc/assets/c/html/displaydoc.asp?documentid=2182, section 5, Pharmacological properties ). It is not immediately obvious how the bites of tiny sandflies could cause changes in the Master Code in the DNA? (3) Although the sand flies are unlikely cause for the Baghdad Boils, we can seek a different, more natural explanation for the disease is from the the unit itself, to which all thirteen man belong. The 30th Enhanced Heavy Separate Brigade (Mech), "Old Hickory", has one battalion of M-1 Abrams Main Battle Tanks and two battalions of M-2 Bradley Fighting Vehicles (cf. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/agency/army/30in-bde.htm ). The main weapon of the M1A1 is the M256 120mm smoothbore cannon, designed by the Rheinmetall Corporation of Germany. Engagement ranges approaching 4000 meters were successfully demonstrated during Operation Desert Storm. The primary armor-defeating ammunition of this weapon is the armor-piercing, fin-stabilized, discarding sabot (APDS-FS) round, which features a depleted uranium penetrators (cf. http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m1.htm ). On the other hand, we know already from the first Gulf War that: "Soldiers who served in Bradley fighting vehicles, where it was common to sit on ammunition boxes where depleted uranium ammunition was stored, are now reporting that many have rectal cancer." CONSEQUENCES: Having recognized the previous facts we are left with the following consequences: (1) Depleted uranium explains the changes in the Master Code in the DNA caused by Baghdad Boils much better than the 'sand flies’ (if the sand flies are not simply considered as an army code word for 'uranium particles’ or alike). In fact, the diagnosis of Baghdad Boils as 'leishmaniasis’ put forth in several connections by Dr. Roger Bate is itself highly suspicious as Dr. Bate is a visiting fellow at American Enterprise Institute, a front for international armed looting around the world. (2) As the United States treats the cancer developing multiple malignancies of its tank crews with Pentostam (and not Miltefosine), this shows that the US Armed Forces and the Pentagon are indeed aware of the effects of the depleted uranium, which again shows that they are lying in their denials of its cancer-producing effect, thus giving a direct answer to "QUESTION 11. WHAT DOES THE U.S. GOVT. KNOW ABOUT DU?" in http://traprockpeace.org/moret_25nov03.pdf. They know everything, even how to slow down the mutations caused by DU. (3) More than 2000 U.S. service members have officially contracted the disease since the Iraq War began in early 2003, most of them in Iraq (though some also in Afghanistan). When these 'walking dead’ are added to the current DoD casualty figure (2160) as soon to be dead, the US death toll tops 4,000 with a single jump. The entire US colonial expeditionary force, the 300,000 having served in Iraq are soon to be counted as US Casualties, either dead or disabled by DU. (4) As the depleted uranium penetrators are the main rounds of the US M1A1 tanks, and the extra rounds for the tanks are carried in the M2 Bradleys, there is no doubt, that after 1000 days of war, the entire US armored equipment in Iraq is totally contaminated making these vehicles literarily dead man’s chests. Actually the US tank crews are more safe outside than inside of them, despite the current conditions in Iraq. (5) As the US Armed Forces in Iraq are actually living dead, a zombie army soon to follow the destiny of the previous army in the First Gulf War and their Armored Vehiles hopelessly contaminated by DU, the US army actually has no troops nor tanks. This means that its fate is sealed. The United States has lost the war in Iraq as soon as the troops get the information of how they are and have been deceived by an enemy worse than that they face in Iraq, the US government. (6) Despite of this we may have even more to worry: in her recent articles Leuren Moret tell that the US has used more DU since 1991 than the atomicity equivalent of 40,000 Nagasagi Bombs, making four nuclear wars together. This, according to her may be enough for a death sentence for all of us, who will die in silent ways. To prevent this from happening we must not listen to Mr. Bush, who claims that the future generations will be grateful for sacrifices in Iraq (cf. http://www.denverpost.com/nationworld/ci_3331907 ). The current deception of the US solders themselves by the US Government could not make the issue more clear: no matter whether you are friend or foe, there is nobody the Government of the United States wouldn’t betray. To stop them all you have to do is pass this story to the US combat troops in Iraq. Explaining them what exactly stepping into US tanks means, will leave them unmanned. This in turn will stop the armoured brigades, which in turn stops the US divisions and armies – and in the end the US government war. As soon as the war is stopped, the entire human kind must step in and help the Iraqi people to clean the country from the depleted uranium. I’m most thankful for your assistance in this already. jouna, iraq-war.ru Section I: Depleted Uranium (more sources from articles themselves) 1. Depleted uranium: "Dirty bombs, dirty missiles, dirty bullets: A death sentence here and abroad" LINK: http://www.sfbayview.com/081804/Depleteduranium081804.shtml 2. Depleted Uranium: The Trojan Horse of Nuclear War LINK: http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2004/DU-Trojan-Horse1jul04.htm 3. QUESTION 11. WHAT DOES THE U.S. GOVT. KNOW ABOUT DU? LINK: http://traprockpeace.org/moret_25nov03.pdf 4. A Monumental War Crime ... DU http://www.iraqwar.mirror-world.ru/article/74185 5. Leuren Moret Speaking on Depleted Uranium LINK: http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2003/DU-Leuren-Moret21apr03.htm 6. Cancer Epidemic Caused by U.S. WMD LINK: http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/cancer_epidemic_.html 7. Marin Depleted Uranium Resolution Heats Up GI's Will Come Home To A Slow Death LINK: http://www.coastalpost.com/04/08/01.htm 8. The United States is Actively Engaged in War Crimes and Polluting with Deadly Nuclear Materials LINK: http://www.albasrah.net/en_articles_2005/1205/HRA_141205.htm 9. New Information on Iraq LINK: http://www.albasrah.net/en_articles_2005/1205/du_141205.htm 10. The UNITED STATES of MONSTERS: DEPLETED URANIUM LINK: http://uruknet.info/?p=18218&hd=0&size=1&l=x 11. Iranian president calls for war crimes charges on US LINK: http://www.iraqwar.mirror-world.ru/article/71438 12. Squeezed To Death LINK: http://uruknet.info/?p=18640&hd=0&size=1&l=x 13. World Uranium Weapons Conference 2003 LINK: http://www.uraniumweaponsconference.de/speakers.htm 14. International Criminal Tribunal For Afghanistan at Tokyo LINK: http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2004/Afghanistan-Criminal-Tribunal10mar04.htm 15. Leuren Moret: Depleted Uranium Is WMD LINK: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0510/S00138.htm 16. Discounted casualties – the human cost of depleted uranium LINK: http://www.chugoku-np.co.jp/abom/uran/index_e.html 17. Heads roll at Veterans Administration Mushrooming depleted uranium (DU) scandal blamed LINK: http://www.sfbayview.com/012605/headsroll012605.shtml 18. Casualties in Iraq LINK: http://democracyrising.us/content/view/46/74/ 19. Pentagon Brass Suppresses Truth About Toxic Weapons LINK: http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/pentagon_brass.html Section II: Baghdad Boil (some samples, google yourself for more hits): Baghdad Boil to Return? (by Dr. Roger Bate, 05/13/2004) LINK: http://www.techcentralstation.com/051304C.html Topic: BAGHDAD BOIL: parasites infect many U.S. troops LINK: http://knoxville.wate.com/sound_off/index.php/topic,132.0.html Baghdad Boil' Afflicting U.S. Troops LINK: http://www.veteransforpeace.org/Baghdad_boil_041804.htm Soldiers, Civilians Returning from Middle East: Be Aware of "Baghdad Boil" LINK: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=27577 RELIEF FROM BAGHDAD BOILS LINK. http://www.tothepointnews.com/content/view/1346/44/ ---- USFK lost depleted uranium bombs: activist December 23, 2005 KAZINFORM, Korea Times http://www.inform.kz/txt/showarticle.php?lang=eng&id=138734 http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/200512/kt2005122317370310230.htm SEOUL - The United States Forces Korea (USFK) has about 2.7 million depleted uranium (DU) bombs, some 24,000 of them missing, raising concerns about its potential damage to human health and the environment, a civic activist claimed. In a contribution article to Tongilnews.com, a progressive online news service, on Dec. 19, anti-war activist Lee Si-woo said the USFK keeps more than 2.7 million DU weapons in its Air Force bases here, citing a declassified dossier from the U.S. Pacific Command in Hawaii. The document dated in August 2003 says that the U.S. base in Suwon of Kyonggi Province has some 1.3 million DU bombs; 930,000 in Chongju, North Chungchong Province; 470,000 in Osan, Kyonggi Province, Kazinform cites The Korea Times. The total figure is eight times as many as the 300,000 that Kadena Air Base on Okinawa, Japan, reportedly has. Lee said he obtained the document from the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC), a U.S. religious group for peace movements, noting Kyle Kajihiro, a chief secretary of the AFSC in Hawaii, had asked the U.S. Pacific Command to make public data related DU weapons under the Freedom of Information Act in February 2001. Citing other documents from the air bases concerned, the activist also said the U.S. military has appeared to have lost about 28,000 of its depleted uranium weapons. Depleted uranium is a by-product of the nuclear fuel and weapons industries, that can cause radioactive damage to people and the environment. The progressive Democratic Labor Party (DLP) called on the government to conduct a thorough inspection of the storage of DU bombs here and ask the U.S. to withdraw the weapons. A spokesman for the USFK dismissed Lee’s claim on the alleged missing DU weapons, declining to comment how many DU bombs the USFK currently has on the grounds of military secrecy. ``It’s true and not a new thing that the USFK has kept the weapons in case of an emergency. But they have never been used, even in exercise training, so there is no reason to believe, I think, that the materials were missing,’’ Kim Young-kyu at the public affairs office of the USFK told The Korea Times. Kim added that the South Korean government has already been informed of the matter by the USFK. DU is used in many forms of ammunition as an armor penetrator because of its extreme weight and density. DU weapons were first used during the first Gulf War against Iraq in 1991. During the 2003 invasion of Iraq, U.S. and British troops used more than five times as many DU bombs and shells as the total number used during the Gulf War, reports said. -------- iran Iran says committed to India pipeline - official December 23, 2005 India Gazette http://story.indiagazette.com/p.x/ct/9/id/eb3b7abfe9b70175/cid/701ee96610c884a6/ NEW DELHI - Iran remains committed to a proposed $7 billion natural gas pipeline running to India via Pakistan despite objections from the United States, its deputy oil minister said on Thursday. "We will continue to do our best to implement it," Mohammad Hadi Nejad-Hosseinian told a news conference. The pipeline faces opposition from the United States which accuses Iran of seeking nuclear arms, funding anti-Israeli militias and stirring militant attacks on U.S. forces in Iraq. But after talks with officials in New Delhi, Nejad-Hosseinian said: "I don't think Pakistan and India will yield to pressure of the United States. This pipeline will bring peace to the region." India's petroleum secretary, S.C. Tripathi, said more negotiations on the project were needed. "India wants a world-class project and gas availability at steady and stable basis at affordable prices," he said. "We have stated the positions of both sides. The positions are not identical," he added referring to differences in deciding on the pricing of the gas. Nejad-Hosseinian spoke of different options for the project, including each country building sections in their own territory. "So if we choose this option, there is no sanction on that because no one will invest in Iranian territory," he said. Several foreign firms have invested in Iran and U.S. sanctions on the country have not been effective, he added. MARCH MEETING India and Iran said in a joint statement they were discussing pricing options for the gas, to be taken forward at a meeting in March between oil ministers of the three countries in Tehran. "We are going to prepare a draft agreement in March which will include the structure of the project, framework agreement, responsibility of each government and framework of price formula," Nejad-Hosseinian said. The statement said Iran reiterated a commitment to the agreed scheme of sale and purchase of gas at India's border and agreed to India's suggestion to study alternatives India proposed. Pakistan and India said this month they hoped to start building the pipeline from Iran by 2007 despite U.S. objections. The proposal has been on the drawing board for years but uneasy relations between the nuclear-armed rivals prevented progress. Nejad-Hosseinian said they hope to deliver gas to customers from the pipeline by 2011 to 2012. "We do not have estimates for the project. It may cost $6 to $7 billion," he said. The project is expected to be owned and operated by a consortium of Iran's National Iranian Gas Export Co. and National Iranian Oil Co., GAIL (India) Ltd. and Pakistani as well as international energy companies. An Indian official said on Monday the three countries had agreed to set a four-to-six month target to finalise the tripartite agreement. Iran also signed a deal with India in June to export 5 million tonnes of liquefied natural gas a year for 25 years after 2009. Nejad-Hosseinian said Iran was trying its best to get it ratified by the cabinet's council of economy as soon as possible. ---- Iran will defend nuclear right to last drop of blood: cleric TEHRAN (AFP) Dec 23, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/2005/051223103004.uyhaxeyw.html Tehran's newly appointed Friday prayer leader said that his countrymen will defend their country's right to nuclear technology to their last drop of blood after talks with the European Union was revived two days ago. "The Westerners should know that during the eight years of imposed war -- the Iran-Iraq war 1980-88 -- we did not give up an inch of our land so in the matter of nuclear energy they should know that our people will defend it to their last drop of blood," Hojatoeslam Ahmad Khatami said in his sermon broadcast live on state radio. Khatami, a conservative cleric and a member of the Assembly of Experts -- the body which selects the supreme leader and supervises his activities -- was appointed by Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei less than a week ago. "We are not any seeking special status for ourselves, nor we will accept any oppression. As the signatory of Non-Proliferation Treaty we have been committed to it, and according to it we have rights and we will not give up our legitimate right," he added. His sermon was accompanied by the habitual "Death to America and Death to Israel," chant by the congregators in the campus of Tehran University. Iran resumed talks on its nuclear program with the European Union in Vienna on Wednesday, agreeing after five hours to meet again in January with the aim of agreeing on terms for further negotiations. However, EU and Iranian officials maintained that the two sides remain far apart, with Iran insisting on its right to make nuclear fuel and the West fearful that this could be used to manufacture atom bombs. At earlier negotiations which broke off in August, EU representatives Britain, France and Germany had offered trade and security incentives for Iran to abandon uranium enrichment. Enrichment at one level makes fuel for power reactors, but at a higher level can produce nuclear atom bombs. Iran says it is allowed to pursue the process under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty but denies it wants to make weapons. -------- israel Israeli nukes, their history and politics The following article by Akiva Orr is sceduled to appear in Global Dialogue in January 2006 From: FoE Sydney - Nuclear Campaign Date: Fri Dec 23, 2005 10:26pm In July 1956 President Nasser of Egypt nationalized the Suez Canal. This was a major event in world politics - and history. Anthony Eden's government in Britain and Guy Mollet's government in France saw this as a major blow to their prestige and interests. They decided to invade Egypt, overthrow Nasser, conquer the Canal, and hand it back to the Suez Canal Company in which they were major shareholders. However, most British and French citizens opposed this policy. They did not want their sons to risk their lives in a war for a colonial empire in which they no longer believed. After WW2 the era of empires and colonies was over. The people of the colonies had information, and ability, to become free, and struggles for national liberation started in every colony of Britain, France, Portugal, Holland, and Belgium. The US too opposed an invasion of Egypt. It wanted Egypt to join the Baghdad Pact directed against the Soviet Union. But the Soviet Union provided arms and political support to most liberation struggles against Colonial Powers. It agreed to finance and to build the High Dam in Aswan. Nasser saw no reason to antagonize it. He refused to join the Baghdad Pact. The US wanted to change Egyptian policy by economic pressure, not by use of force. So Eden and Mollet decided to disguise their war as a "Peace keeping operation". They agreed with Ben-Gurion, Israel's PM, that first Israel will invade Egypt, conquer the Sinai Peninsula, approach the Suez Canal from the east and only then will they issue an ultimatum to both Israel and Egypt to withdraw 10 miles from either side of the Canal, to "ensure freedom of passage in the Canal to ships of all nations". They knew Nasser could not accept this ultimatum while Egypt was invaded yet Ben-Gurion will accept it as it invites him to annex the Sinai. Ben-Gurion flew to Paris on 22.10.1956 and signed this secret pact with Eden and Mollet. In Israel he denied he did so and kept denying this till his death in 1973. So too did Shimon Peres, who only admitted this 30 years later, in 1986. Israel, itself a product of British Imperial politics in the Middle-East in WW1, always depended on political, financial, and military support of foreign powers dominating the M-E. Military presence of the British Army in the region enhanced Israel's security. BG opposed the departure of the British from Egypt, Iraq, Cyprus and Jordan and of the French from Algeria and Tunisia. .The Israeli secret service used contacts with Jewish communities in North Africa to help the French in their struggle against the liberation movements in Morocco, Algeria, and Tunisia. Most Israeli citizens did not know about these clandestine operations and would have opposed them, had they known about them. BG knew this and therefore withheld the truth from them. In 1956 most Israelis opposed collaboration with colonial powers. So BG. used Shimon Peres - who was not a member of the Cabinet or Knesset - as his personal messenger to France to bypass the Cabinet, the Knesset, and the Press. One of the bonuses France offered Israel was - to construct a nuclear reactor in Israel capable of producing Plutonium for nuclear bombs. B.G. was afraid the majority in the Knesset and in his Cabinet will oppose his decision to invade Egypt, and also his decision to construct nuclear weapons in Israel. So Peres never informed the Cabinet or the Knesset about his negotiations in Paris. He commuted between Paris and Jerusalem to negotiate the military agreement between B.G. Mollet and Eden and reported only to B.G. On October 29, 1956 Israeli paratroopers under the command of Ariel Sharon landed in the Sinai, Israel conquered the Sinai as planned and reached the Suez Canal. Eden and Mollet issued their ultimatum and their troops invaded the Suez Canal zone. At first it looked as if the plan is going to succeed. But President Eisenhower of the US was outraged and forced Israel, Britain, and France to withdraw from Egypt. The whole affair ended in a fiasco. Eden and Mollet had to resign but BG stayed in power as he presented this war to the Israelis as a "Preventive War" that prevented an Egyptian war on Israel. Actually, Nasser offered BG a peace treaty rather than a warŠHe offered this in a public statement in the Bandung Conference in 1955. Despite being forced by the US to withdraw from the Sinai (and from the Gaza strip) BG (and Peres) considered the construction of the nuclear reactor in Dimona by France to be a major achievement well worth the losses in this war. They did not say this to the families of the soldiers killed in this war. The decision to build nuclear weapons in Israel was never discussed or debated in the Knesset, in the Cabinet, in the Army, in the Press, or in the Security Service. This decision was taken by one man alone - Ben-Gurion. In 1956 the Israeli population was around 1.5M. The surrounding Arab States had many millions of citizens, their armies were much bigger, and had plenty of Soviet weapons. BG feared that a combined attack by Egypt, Syria, Iraq and Jordan, could destroy Israel. He decided to build atom bombs as an insurance policy against such a possibility. In 1956 France agreed to sell Israel a nuclear reactor of the type it just installed at Marcoule, near Avignon. Built in 1952, the G1 reactor in Marcoule was France's first plutonium production reactor; it used natural uranium, graphite moderated, and gas-cooling. Its first plutonium separation plant was known as UP1. Two reactors were built. One in Marcoule, the other in Dimona, Israel. The Israeli reactor began to produce Plutonium in the early 1960s. The French G1 reactor was dismantled after 30 years of service. The Israeli one continues to work for 50 years and has become a health hazard, causing many deaths by cancer to its workers. So far the Israeli government refuses to compensate them. B.G. knew that the US is opposed to nuclear proliferation and being dependent on US support he denied construction of nuclear weapons. Israel's official policy is neither to deny nor to admit that it has - and builds - nuclear weapons. This policy of "Ambivalence" is presented in Israel as profound wisdom. Actually it fools no one. Its only purpose is not to embarrass the US where Senator Stewart Symington introduced an amendment forbidding the US to provide economic aid to countries producing or keeping nuclear weapons. This policy was never applied to Israel. Of course the US knows very well what Israel's nuclear capabilities are. But an open Israeli admission that it has nuclear weapons would embarrass the US and expose the duplicity of the nuclear non-proliferation policy of the USA. Actually, already in the 1960s the U2 spy planes of the CIA photographed the Dimona reactor as it was built and President Eisenhower knew about it in 1960. However, the US did nothing to stop construction of the reactor nor did it force Israel to accept international inspection of it. Israel has always refused to sign the Nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT) or to allow any international inspection of its nuclear facilities and continues to do so also today. Israeli nuclear capability forced many Arab States to seek weapons of mass destruction - mostly biological and chemical ones - to counter the Israeli nuclear capability. So Israel started an arms race for mass-destruction weapons in the Middle-East. BG did not consider the possibility that an Arab State might acquire nuclear weapons. He knew that neither the US nor the Soviet Union will give such weapons to an Arab State. He did not believe the Arabs could build such weapons themselves. The collapse of the Soviet Union (making nuclear weapons available for money) and the construction of nuclear weapons by Pakistan and Iran were possibilities he failed to foresee. When this happened the situation changed. Israel's nuclear deterrent changed from an asset into a liability. Israel's small area and high population density, especially the urban areas of Tel-Aviv and Haifa can be destroyed by just two H-Bombs - one on each centre. The destruction of these two urban centers amounts to the destruction of Israel. This is the area where most of the Israeli economy and population are concentrated and after a nuclear attack they will be uninhabitable for years. Iran - with its vast mountainous territory cannot be destroyed like this and is far less vulnerable. Even if Israel launches a second strike after being attacked it cannot destroy Iran. Israeli second-strike capability, recently achieved by acquiring two nuclear submarines from Germany, will not repair the damage caused to Israel by just 2 H-Bombs nor will it deter Iranian religious fanatics. It is therefore essential for Israel to change its nuclear policy from threatening Iran and continuing the nuclear arms race into a policy for making the entire M-E a nuclear-free zone under international control. This does not seem imminent. The Iranian nuclear threat has been described recently by Dr. Yuval Steinitz, Chairman of the Knesset committee for Foreign policy and defense. He said: "Iran plans to set up 54000 centrifuges for enriching Uranium. This means that they want to become a nuclear world-power capable of producing 20 to 30 bombs per year, not 2 or 3 bombs that will make them a regional power." ("Ma'ariv" 9.10.2005, p.24) Facing this situation - and the coming Israeli elections in March 2006 - there is a growing concern among Israelis about Iranian long range missiles, capable of reaching Israel, and the imminent ability of Iran to build nuclear weapons. So election candidates propose various Israeli nuclear policies to attract voters. The Israeli daily "Ma'ariv" reports on 5.12.2005, the following statements: P.M. Ariel Sharon, leader of the new "Kadimah" Party is quoted as saying: "We shall not accept a situation where Iran has nuclear weapons. We act with Europe and the USA. The correct expression on this matter was Bush's statement where he said that he does not think this matter can be left without treating its foundations. I hope the Security Council will soon decide to impose sanctions on Iran to stop the process" But Chief of Staff of the Israeli Army, Dan Halutz, commented that the diplomatic efforts to stop the process will fail and raised a second possibility of applying physical pressure, or military pressure, to Iran. He is reported as saying: "Who will apply the military options? This is not a question I shall answer. When will this option be applied? I shall not answer this either. But there are options" Benjamin Netanyahu, the candidate of the "Likud" Party declared: "I shall lead the next government to stop the Iranian threat, including all the necessary operations. If this will not be done by the present government I intend to lead the next government to stop this threat. This includes all operations necessary to stop Iran from threatening us with nuclear weapons." Amir Perez, the new Chairman of the Labor Party said: "I hope the Israeli government will do whatever is required ignoring foreign consideration" The Minister of Defense, Mofaz, said: "The latest statements on this issue are irresponsible. The nuclear issue must not be part of the election campaign". ("Ma'ariv" 5.12.2005 p.1 and 2) However, since the Israeli public is worried about the issue no candidate can ignore it. The crucial - and revealing - point is the fact that no Israeli politician, journalist, or academic, proposed the simple option of declaring Israeli support for a nuclear-free Middle-East under international control. This omission also exposes the hypocrisy of US policy on this issue. The honesty of US nuclear policy in the M-E is proportional to the pressures it puts on Israel to sign the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and support a nuclear-free M-E. As long as the US does not apply any such pressure its policy cannot be accepted as honest. A recently published US report (funded by the Pentagon) proposes that Israel switch its nuclear policy. Its authors, Henry Sokolsky and Patrick Clawson in their 314 page document ("Getting ready for a nuclear-ready Iran") say "the idea is not that Israel give up its nuclear weapons unilaterally hoping that others will too. Instead, Israel should simply take a small, reversible, step, in an effort to promote a reciprocal process that would de-escalate the region's nuclear arms race." But Israeli officials dismissed the idea that Israel would lead a regional nuclear disarmament process in response to a nuclear-ready Iran. Israel's position, an official said, is that a nuclear-free Middle-East could be achieved only through comprehensive regional peace treaties. In 1986 Israeli nuclear whistle blower Mordechai Vanunu provided technical proof to the London "Sunday Times" that Israel had some 200 nuclear war heads. Today this number is much higher. Israel's persistent refusal to allow international inspection of its nuclear facilities renders all attempts to force Iran to do so as sheer hypocrisy. Vanunu joined the "Nuclear Research Centre" in Dimona in 1978 as a technician. At this time he was a follower of the Religio-Nationalist Rabbi Kahana. Like every candidate for a job in Dimona he was checked by the Israeli Secret Service. His support for Rabbi Kahana was not seen by the Israeli Secret Service as a hindrance. After working a few years he became a student of Philosophy in the Be'er-Sheeva University. As a project for a Master's degree he chose the issue of "Moral issues in the nuclear era". Reading material on this issue he gradually became convinced that nuclear weapons are immoral since their main use is against civilian populations. They are weapons to destroy whole cities. He also discovered that in Israel there was never a public debate and a democratic decision for building nuclear weapons. The decision to do this was the private decision of one man - David Ben-Gurion. Vanunu therefore decided to resign from his job in Dimona and protest in the Israeli Press about the secret - and illegal - activity in Dimona. To prove his claim he took some photos of his work before leaving his job. He resigned in 1986. He soon realized that if he informs any Israeli Newspaper he will be arrested. He therefore decided to leave Israel. For a few months he traveled in Europe, passed through the Soviet-Union, and finally reached Australia where he converted to Christianity. He never approached any Foreign Embassy to offer the photos he took in Dimona. After a few months in Sidney a friend convinced him to inform the "Sunday Times" in London. He did so and the "Sunday Times" invited him to London to check the reliability of his information. He was interviewed by nuclear specialists who checked his photos and information and concluded that they are reliable and Israel manufactured some 200 nuclear bombs. Vanunu was not paid for this information. His aim was to warn the world and Israel's citizens - about the illegal activity of producing nuclear weapons in Israel. This activity is illegal because it was never endorsed by any majority representing the Israeli citizens. The "Sunday Times" published Vanunu's report in October 1986 and the Israeli Secret Service began to hunt him down. Finally they lured him to Italy, from there they hijacked him to Israel. He was tried in secrecy, no journalist was allowed into the courtroom. Finally he was sentenced to 18 years in prison. In 2004 he was released after serving the full sentence (11 years in solitary confinement) but he is not allowed to leave Israel or to talk to journalists. The Vanunu trial was a travesty of Justice since Israel does not admit it has nuclear weapons. How can someone be punished for revealing something that does not exist? From a nationalistic perspective Vanunu rendered Israel a service. As the purpose of Israeli nuclear weapons is to deter Israel's enemies from destroying it these enemies must be convinced that Israel has such weapons. They will not be deterred without proof Israel has such weapons. Whoever provides such proof renders Israel a service. For this reason there were observers in Israel, like former General turned Historian Meir Pa'eel who insisted Vanunu was an agent of the Secret Service and his revelations were organized by the Secret Service. But as Vanunu was sentenced to 18 years in prison, and served the full sentence (unlike criminals who get a remission of one third of their sentence) this raises questions about the treatment of Secret Service agents by their own government. To reward a man who rendered a service to his country by an 18 years prison sentence is unusual, to say the least. Those who really want to create a nuclear-free M-E must apply international diplomatic pressure, including economic sanctions, to ALL M-E governments to accept international inspection of all their nuclear research facilities. Economic, political, and PR pressures must be applied to every country that opposes international inspection of its nuclear facilities. This is a minimal demand since "inspection" is not "disarmament". Israel persistently and emphatically opposes any international inspection of its nuclear facilities. So far no one has put ANY pressure on Israel to sign the NPT and declare its support for a nuclear-free M-E. although such a declaration alone is still a long way from dismantling nuclear weapons. The latest farce in this saga is the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to ElBaradie and the International Atomic Energy Authority for their efforts to reduce the threat of nuclear energy. The Nobel Peace Prize for 2005 was awarded to IAEA and Mohamed ElBaradei for their "efforts to prevent nuclear energy from being used for military purposes and to ensure that nuclear energy for peaceful purposes is used in the safest possible way". Why did the Nobel Prize Committee prefer ElBaradei to Mordechai Vanunu who was 18 years in Israeli prison for informing the world press about Israel's nukes? Awarding the Peace Prize to Vanunu would have been a bold step against nuclear armament. It seems the Nobel Peace Committee is afraid of antagonizing the Israeli government, or - of being branded as anti-Semitic. Yet what are the facts? 1. Israel was the first to introduce nuclear weapons into the M-E and thus started the nuclear Arms race in the Middle-East. 2. For 40 years Israel refuses to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) 3. Israel refuses to allow an IAEA inspection of its Dimona nuclear pile. Those who REALLY want to stop the nuclear arms race in the M-E must take active steps, like economic sanctions, political pressure, severing diplomatic relations, etc. against Israel to make it sign the NPT and allow an IAEA inspection of Dimona. This will indicate to all other governments in the region that the efforts to make the M-E a nuclear-free zone are not biased. If Israel persists in its refusal to sign the NPT, and its refusal to allow inspection of its nuclear facilities and refuses to hand back to Norway the 30 tons of Heavy Water lent for nuclear research on the condition that it is not used for the production of nuclear weapons, then the same steps the USA and IAEA applied to Iraq must be applied to Israel. What did ElBaradei do about Israeli nukes? Nothing. What did he say about Israel's refusal to sigh the NPT? Nothing What did he say about Vanunu being jailed for 18 years for informing the world Press about Israel's nukes? Nothing He visited Jerusalem and refused to meet Vanunu lest this antagonize the Israeli government. No wonder Israel congratulated ElBaradei and the IAEA on receiving the Nobel Peace Prize. The IAEA applied to Israel a very different policy from the one it applied to Iraq. It tries to solicit co-operation on nuclear disarmament from a government that refuses for 40 years to do so. This policy has failed for 40 years. Why continue with it? Why reject any pressure on such a government to make it change its nuclear policy? The USA, IAEA, and the Nobel Committee know very well that Israel has nuclear weapons and keeps building them in Dimona, and refuses to sign the NPT and refuses an IAEA inspection of Dimona. Yet the USA, IAEA, and the Nobel Peace Prize Committee adamantly refuse take any step against Israeli nuclear policy. This makes them accomplices to Israeli nuclear policy. Israel persists in its refusal to sign the NPT, ElBaradei and the IAEA do not even criticize this - and get the Nobel Peace Prize. Albert Einstein, Bertrand Russell, and Niels Bohr, would have denounced such duplicity. Very impartial. Or, as Niels Bohr used to say: "VERY interesting" The M-E doomsday clock is ticking. Today the danger of nuclear war in the M-E is greater than it ever was in the past. An Israeli academic recently tried to calm down those worried about nuclear war in the M-E. Dr.Ephraim Kam, Head of the Yaffe Centre for Strategic Studies in Tel-Aviv University said: "We must not forget that even when Iran will have nuclear weapons it will live under major constraints, mainly American deterrence. If Israel succeeds to make the U S declare that it will consider a nuclear attack on Israel as an attack on the U S it will improve deterrence of Iran. But even without such a declaration the Iranians know that by launching a nuclear attack on Israel they risk a U S attack on them. They will also take into account an Israeli retaliation that will destroy Teheran. During the cold war mutual deterrence prevented war between the US and the USSR" ("Ma'ariv" 9.10.2005. p.24) This ignores the profound differences between world politics and regional M-E politics. M-E Politicians lack a sense of responsibility for Humanity that Kennedy and Khrushchev had during the Cuban nuclear missile crisis in 1962. In the M-E, politics - and leaders - are motivated by considerations of honor, nationalism and religion, rather than by concern for all humanity. If outside pressures are not applied to ALL M-E States a nuclear war in the M-E will be unavoidable. Its consequences will not be confined to the M-E. 30.11.2005 By Aki ORR (Member of the Israeli Committee for a M-E free of all weapons of mass-destruction ) -------- security FBI official defends radiation monitoring By LARRY MARGASAK ASSOCIATED PRESS WRITER Friday, December 23, 2005 http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/1152AP_Domestic_Surveillance.html WASHINGTON -- A classified radiation monitoring program, conducted without warrants, has targeted private U.S. property in an effort to prevent an al-Qaida attack, federal law enforcement officials confirmed Friday. While declining to provide details including the number of cities and sites monitored, the officials said the air monitoring took place since the Sept. 11 attacks and from publicly accessible areas - which they said made warrants and court orders unnecessary. U.S. News and World Report first reported the program on Friday. The magazine said the monitoring was conducted at more than 100 Muslim sites in the Washington, D.C., area - including Maryland and Virginia suburbs - and at least five other cities when threat levels had risen: Chicago, Detroit, Las Vegas, New York and Seattle. The magazine said that at its peak, three vehicles in Washington monitored 120 sites a day, nearly all of them Muslim targets identified by the FBI. Targets included mosques, homes and businesses, the magazine said. The revelation of the surveillance program came just days after The New York Times disclosed that the Bush administration spied on suspected terrorist targets in the United States without court orders. President Bush has said he approved the program to protect Americans from attack. Ibrahim Hooper, spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, a Washington-based civil rights group, said Friday the program "comes as a complete shock to us and everyone in the Muslim community." "This creates the appearance that Muslims are targeted simply for being Muslims. I don't think this is the message the government wants to send at this time," he said. Hooper said his organization has serious concerns about the constitutionality of monitoring on private property without a court order. Brian Roehrkasse, a Justice Department spokesman, said Friday that the administration "is very concerned with a growing body of sensitive reporting that continues to show al-Qaida has a clear intention to obtain and ultimately use chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear" weapons or high energy explosives. To meet that threat, the government "monitors the air for imminent threats to health and safety," but acts only on specific information about a potential attack without targeting any individual or group, he said. "FBI agents do not intrude across any constitutionally protected areas without the proper legal authority," the spokesman said. In a 2001 decision, the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that police must get warrants before using devices that search through walls for criminal activity. That decision struck down the use without a warrant of a heat-sensing device that led to marijuana charges against an Oregon man. Roehrkasse said the Justice Department believes that case does not apply to air monitoring in publicly accessible areas. Two federal law enforcement officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because the program is classified, said the monitoring did not occur only at Muslim-related sites. Douglas Kmiec, a professor of constitutional law at Pepperdine University, said the location of the surveillance matters when determining if a court order is needed. "The greatest expectation of privacy is in the home," said Kmiec, a Justice Department official under former presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush. "As you move away from the home to a parking lot or a place of public accommodation or an office, there are a set of factors that are a balancing test for the court," he said. Despite federal promises to inform state and local officials of security concerns, that never formally happened with the radiation monitoring program, said an official who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the information. The official said that after discussions with attorneys, some state and local authorities decided the surveillance was legal, equating it to air quality monitors set up around Washington that regularly sniff for suspicious materials. "They weren't targeting specific people, they were just doing it by random, driving around (commercial) storage sheds and parking lots," the official said. Asked about the program's status, the official said, "I'd understood it had been stopped or significantly rolled back" as early as eight months ago. Such information-sharing with state and local officials is the responsibility of the Homeland Security Department, which spokesman Brian Doyle said was not involved in the program. Associated Press Writer Lara Jakes Jordan contributed to this story. On the Net: Justice Department: http://www.usdoj.gov Homeland Security Department: http://www.dhs.gov -------- u.n. Iran appoints new ambassador to UN atomic watchdog TEHRAN (AFP) Dec 23, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/2005/051223162643.ro25cqjz.html Iran's hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has appointed Ali Asghar Soltanyeh as Islamic republic's ambassador to the United Nations atomic watchdog in Vienna, the student news agency ISNA said Friday. Soltanyeh's previous positions were the head of nuclear center of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization, deputy of general director of international affairs in the foreign ministry and member of Iran's atomic negotiation team. He will be replacing Mohammad Mehdi Akhondzadeh. ISNA also reported that Soltanyeh's credential had been delivered to head of IAEA's (Mohamed ElBaradei) office on Thursday, and he will meet Soltanyeh after returning from the New Year holidays. -------- u.s. nuc facilities -------- california Missing nuclear fuel rods to cost PG&E $96,000 by Heather Muller, 12/23/2005 Eureka Reporter http://www.eurekareporter.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?ArticleID=6676 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission announced Wednesday the proposal of a $96,000 civil penalty against Pacific Gas & Electric Company for violations related to the storage of nuclear fuel rods at Humboldt Bay Nuclear Power Plant. The violations came to light in July 2004 when PG&E reported to the NRC that it did not know the whereabouts of three 18-inch segments of fuel rods containing highly radioactive material known as SNM, or special nuclear material. The NRC announcement stated that three violations were involved: “1) failure to keep adequate records of SNM inventory, transfer or disposal, 2) failure to establish adequate procedures for control and accounting of SNM, and 3) failure to conduct adequate physical inventories of SNM.” The violations were categorized by the NRC as Severity Level II, which is the second-highest level of severity. “We accept the violations and the civil penalties and have no intention of protesting them,” PG&E spokesman Jeff Lewis said.”We regret that shortcomings in our record-keeping in the past have led to this.” While PG&E has suggested possible scenarios for the disappearance of the fuel rod pieces, it has ruled out from the start any possibility of theft. Lewis said the removal of the fuel rod pieces would require “enormous equipment” to prevent the death of any person handling the material. At minimum, he said, the material would need to be sealed in “lead casements of a thousand pounds or more. It’s not the sort of thing you could stick in a lunchbox and walk off with.” While the NRC stated that the missing SNM was most likely shipped to a low-level radioactive waste facility before 1989, PG&E believes that the fuel rod pieces are still at HBPP. “They could be part of the fragments in the (used fuel) pool,” Lewis said, but added that because of their condition they can probably never be conclusively identified. The NRC said the $96,000 fine was the base civil penalty for a Severity Level II violation. In a letter to PG&E, the NRC stated that it had declined to give PGThe NRC said the $96,000 fine was the base civil penalty for a Severity Level II violation. In a letter to PG&E, the NRC stated that it had declined to give PG&E credit for identifying the problem and reporting it to the NRC, because PGThe NRC said the $96,000 fine was the base civil penalty for a Severity Level II violation. In a letter to PG&E, the NRC stated that it had declined to give PG&E credit for identifying the problem and reporting it to the NRC, because PG&E had missed opportunities to identify tracking problems associated with SNM as early as 1966. A second opportunity occurred in 1975, according to the letter, when the NRC provided specific instructions for dealing with broken or divided fuel rod segments. But, the NRC said, “HBPP took no specific actions to strengthen its accounting and control programs at that time.” However, the NRC concluded credit was warranted for the corrective actions PG&E has taken following the report of the loss. “PGHowever, the NRC concluded credit was warranted for the corrective actions PG&E has taken following the report of the loss. “PG&E’s investigation of the missing fuel rod segments was thorough and complete, and PGHowever, the NRC concluded credit was warranted for the corrective actions PG&E has taken following the report of the loss. “PG&E’s investigation of the missing fuel rod segments was thorough and complete, and PG&E’s physical inspection process of the HBPP spent fuel pool was prompt and comprehensive,” the letter stated. PG&E’s investigation, Lewis said, was “a reflection of the seriousness with which we took the issue. We did everything we could to get to the bottom of this.” Michael Welch, a volunteer from local anti-nuclear group Redwood Alliance, said he considers the fine a slap on the wrist. “It’s actually pretty typical for the NRC. Fines are usually not commensurate with the level of problems seen at nuclear power plants,” Welch said. While Welch believes HBPP is “probably safer than it’s ever been,” he said there is still some danger from earthquake because of HBPP’s placement on top of a seismic fault. Dry cask storage will reduce this threat, he said, but “we’re still watchdogging it pretty good.” Lewis said, “There are not going to be any problems of this nature going forward. We take our commitment to safety seriously, and when things like this happen it’s really hard on all of us.” Citing safety concerns, the NRC ordered the shutdown of HBPP’s nuclear reactor in 1976. A decommissioning process is expected in 2009. -------- new mexico New Los Alamos chief takes over, takes charge On UC/Bechtel team, ex-Livermore director unquestionably is leader By Ian Hoffman, STAFF WRITER 12/23/2005 Inside Bay Area http://www.insidebayarea.com/localnews/ci_3337285 Even with an apparently unwieldy academic-corporate team taking control of Los Alamos National Laboratory, the lab's incoming chief says the buck "absolutely" stops with him. A day after his team won a half-billion-dollar contract to run the birthplace of the bomb, former Livermore Lab Director and weapons designer Mike Anastasio waved off questions about who would do what at Los Alamos by saying he will shoulder everything from safety to security and science to overall management. "I'll be responsible, as the laboratory director," he said Thursday. Anastasio hopped a plane for New Mexico almost immediately after Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman named his team, Los Alamos National Security, as winner of the Los Alamos contract. The team is headed by the University of California and engineering giant Bechtel National, along with nuclear-operations experts BWXT and Washington Group International and New Mexico's three largest universities. Yet it took months for UC and the corporations to hammer out a teaming agreement, and there were indications that questions of each team member's power remained unsettled even as Los Alamos National Security put up its proposal to run the troubled weapons lab. On Wednesday, however, federal officials said they were satisfied that the LANS team's performance would be "integrated." "We think we've demonstrated that we are in fact an integrated team that will lead and run the laboratory in that way," Anastasio told reporters Thursday. "LANS is one team that is working together and has one leader — me," he said. He and deputy John Mitchell, a former Bechtel executive with 12 years' experience at the government's Y-12 Site, the Nevada Test Site and Yucca Mountain, said they will pull in executives and management ideas from across the weapons complex to resolve persistent problems at Los Alamos with safety, security and financial management. Anastasio and Mitchell in turn will answer to a board of mostly UC and Bechtel officials and expect to turn to the board when they need help. "They look to me to run the laboratory," Anastasio said. "They will hold me accountable for my success or lack of success at doing that." Colleagues at Livermore say Anastasio's laid-back demeanor masks an insistence on accountability from subordinates. They found that he often knew their budgets and performance as well or better than they did. Attention to the bottom line at Los Alamos is expected to be more acute than in the past. Congress has provided relatively stable federal budgets for Los Alamos and the other two U.S. nuclear weapons labs in recent years and going into 2006. But lawmakers are offering no new money to cover the significant new costs of management competition at Los Alamos. The lab's $1.8 billion budget soon must carry eight times as much in contract fees, up to an average of $74 million a year, plus new pension contributions and — with the greater role of private corporations — the possibility of tens of millions in state taxes that the nonprofit University of California never had to pay. Contact Ian Hoffman at ihoffman@angnewspapers.com. -------- MILITARY -------- business US lawsuit could dent global war-contractor boom Friday December 23, 2005 News International, Pakistan http://www.jang.com.pk/thenews/dec2005-daily/23-12-2005/world/w6.htm WASHINGTON: An unprecedented lawsuit stemming from the gruesome killing of four American civilians in Iraq is slowly making its way through the US legal system, closely watched by companies estimated to field up to 100,000 contractors alongside the US military. Lawyers and military experts say the case highlights legal gray zones, a lack of regulation and little oversight of a booming global industry believed to bring in more than $150 billion annually. Civilian military contractors now perform scores of functions once restricted to regular troops, and a trend toward "privatising war" has been accelerating steadily. The suit was brought by the families of four civilian contractors shot last year by Iraqi insurgents, who burned their bodies and hung the charred remains from a bridge across the Euphrates river in the city of Falluja. The four- Stephen Helveston, Mike Teague, Jerko Zovko and Wesley Batalona-worked for Blackwater Security Consulting LLC, one of the companies fielding armed civilians in Iraq under contract with the Pentagon. All four had military experience and signed contracts assuming all risks and waiving their right to sue. The suit against Blackwater says the company broke explicit terms of its contract with the men by sending them to escort a food convoy in unarmored cars, without heavy machine guns, proper briefings, advance notice or pre-mission reconnaissance, in teams that were understaffed and lacked even a map. "Sending four men out on the security mission instead of the required six essentially took away the team’s ability to defend itself," the suit says. "Not having one driver, one navigator and a rear-gunner with a 180 degree field of fire, the team never had a chance...the insurgents were literally able to walk up behind the vehicles and open fire upon them at close range." Alleging wrongful death and fraud, the suit is the first of its kind in the US. The way it is resolved, experts say, could have major implications for the future of military contracting and result in more rules and regulations. Blackwater, which declines comment on the suit, filed motions this week to have the case moved to a federal court from a state court in North Carolina where it originated in January. Blackwater’s headquarters are in Moycock, North Carolina. Marc Miles, an attorney for the families, said he expected the suit to come to trial next year. "This is an important case," said Jeffrey Addicott, director of the Centre for Terrorism Law at St Mary’s University in San Antonio. "While the volume of contractors pouring into Iraq has been enormous, there has been very little effort at regulation or standardising training. It’s the Wild West out there." Addicott, a retired Special Forces officer, estimates that the number of civilian contractors in Iraq surpassed 100,000 this year. "That takes into account not only people specifically hired to provide armed security, but also those in transportation, construction, food services, housing, laundry etc. Americans and non-Americans." Other experts agree with that estimate. Despite the large sums of money and large numbers of civilians paid by the Department of Defence, the Pentagon does not have a precise tally of either. The estimate of contractors it gives - around 20,000 - dates back to a remark by Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld almost two years ago. Such estimates cover what is known as "arms-bearing contractors" who work for firms including Blackwater, Triple Canopy, Aegis Defence Services and Military Professional Resources Incorporated (MPRI) - all run by retired military officers. There are about 173,000 US and allied troops now in Iraq, led by the United States with 155,000. US armed forces can no longer function without civilian contractors, neither in combat nor in the post-combat stability and reconstruction operations that the Pentagon last month declared a "core mission," experts say. According to Peter Singer of Washington’s Brookings Institution, private companies that sell warfare-linked services to governments represent "the corporate evolution of the age-old profession of mercenaries." The firms involved bristle at the term "mercenary," which evokes images of white guns-for-hire working for African dictators and staging coups and countercoups on behalf of the highest bidder. Civilian contractors say they provide protection and support personnel rather than war fighters, but the line is often thin. Some of the most advanced weapons systems used in combat in Afghanistan and Iraq were manned by civilians. But while "mercenary" has been replaced by "private military firms" or "private military companies" - PMFs or PMCs-there is no doubt that the driving force is money. PMFs have operated in more than 100 countries. In 1990, revenues from their activities were estimated at around $55 billion, a sum thought to have tripled by this year. The government’s rationale for outsourcing military services is that it saves cost and increases flexibility - similar to corporations which cut their work forces then outsource functions to contractors working without health or pension benefits. There are no recent studies, however, on the long-term cost benefit of replacing regular troops with contractors. The downsizing of the US armed forces has been substantial and relentless - from 2.1 million when the Berlin Wall came down in 1989 and the Cold War ended to 1.4 million today. More cuts are under consideration. One tricky consequence is the free-market competition between the military and the private sector for people who have been trained - often at considerable cost - by the military. PMFs pay up to 10 times more than the military for very similar functions. Special Forces expertise is in particular demand, and operators can make more than $200,000 a year, a good part of it not subject to US income taxes. To counter the lure of private contractors, the army has begun to offer re-enlistment bonuses of $150,000 for special forces soldiers who agree to stay on an additional six years. -------- iraq Hussein disrupts, but doesn't impress Iraqis Former leader's antics came amid sobering testimony about torture By Ilene R. Prusher | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor December 23, 2005 http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1223/p01s04-woiq.html BAGHDAD – Alia Khalaf flips on the television, a new flatscreen, and turns to what many Iraqis see as the greatest show on earth - the trial of Saddam Hussein. "We find this trial very funny, actually. It is really a comedy," says Miss Khalaf, who teaches English literature at Mustansiriyah University in Baghdad, where she tries to turn young Iraqi minds on to the plays of William Shakespeare and the poetry of Robert Frost. She sees the trial as a mix of comedy and tragedy. But, she hastens to add, Mr. Hussein is no tragic figure: He has yet to have the sort of epiphany that engenders sympathy. "When I compare him with any figure in literature, Saddam Hussein fails to be a tragic hero," Khalaf explains, donning the professorial hat that she wears well. "Because in the tragic hero, there is the knowledge that he made terrible mistakes, and then there is a moment of recognition of them towards the end, when it is too late. "Saddam," she pronounces, "has not had that moment of recognition." Quite the contrary. The former Iraqi dictator seems to be on a campaign to upstage the judge, prosecutors, and witnesses by repeating allegations Thursday of having been beaten while held in US custody. "The White House is the No. 1 liar," Hussein told the court, pointing to the Bush administration's failure to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Those claims may be winning points with some Iraqis, particularly Sunnis whose grievances against US- driven regime change are growing - from claims of fraud in last week's election to evidence of abuse of Sunni prisoners at the hands of both US forces and Shiites. But a diverse cross section of Iraqis find the Hussein trial at turns amusing and amazing, and many seem to doubt the seriousness of the proceedings. Some find it surreal to see the former president making complaints and waiting for his turn to speak; others are baffled as to why he and his half-brother, Barzan Ibrahim al-Tikriti, are being given so much leeway to disrupt proceedings. The fact that large sections of the trial are blocked out, sometimes at the most sensitive of moments (there's a 20-minute delay rather than a live broadcast) prods suspicions that Iraq is still far from being free. Thursday, Hussein accused witnesses of lying, saying: "It is an insult to your president of 35 years, and Iraqis do not like liars." Five witnesses testified during the two-day session this week that started Wednesday. Saddam and seven codefendants are on trial for the deaths of more than 140 Shiites after a 1982 attempt on Saddam's life in the town of Dujail, north of Baghdad. When the court gave the former leader an opportunity to cross-examine witnesses, he instead expanded on earlier claims he had been abused in custody. The first witness to testify Thursday spoke from behind a curtain and had his voice disguised. He said he was 8 during the killings in Dujail. He said his grandmother, father, and uncles had been arrested and tortured, and he never saw his male relatives again, implying they had been killed. Sitting down on the rug to watch the trial over a meal of masgouf - an Iraqi fish speciality - Khalaf and her mother appear to agree with Hussein that some witnesses are lying. The Khalaf family, part of the al- Janaby tribe, are Shiite and they have had relatives who were killed during Hussein's reign. But they are not terribly impressed by the credibility of the testimony so far. They don't doubt that Hussein's regime routinely tortured and murdered, but they view some of the witnesses as sounding professionally prepped. "Come on, come on," Khalaf says, listening to the testimony of one witness, who had just finished rattling off the names of nine men he saw hauled away - and who later turned up dead - after the 1982 attempt in the Dujail. "Do you think he has all of those names at the tip of his tongue? He's been well trained." "I think he's taking this chance to embellish the story with a bit of imagination," adds Khalaf's mother, a retired schoolteacher. "That's the problem. We always exaggerate - [people are either] all good or all bad," she says, shaking her head. "In the past, we pretended Hussein was all good. Now we're pretending he's all evil - nothing in the middle. "They're worse now," her mother continues. "They're still torturing people. Nothing changes. [The regime] didn't allow people to have decent houses or salaries, but at least there was security, some law and order." In addition to their new TV and a DVD player, there are changes in the Khalaf family's situation. With the help of small raises for university staff, they have two mobile phones and the use of a desktop computer in their tiny apartment in Baghdad. But to Khalaf, the gadgetry doesn't make up for the violence and insecurity. On many occasions, she has come to class to learn of a student who has been killed. Many of the Shiite shrines she frequents have been the target of terrorists. For certain, much of what Iraqis find funny in the trial might be considered gallows humor. The testimony of a witness carries on, and then the sound is cut. "See," Khalaf says. "They are taking out all the parts they don't want you to hear." • Wire material was used in this article. ---- Iraqis March, Say Elections Were Rigged Friday December 23, 2005 2:01 PM By SINAN SALAHEDDIN Associated Press Writer http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-5500000,00.html BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - Large demonstrations broke out across the country Friday to denounce parliamentary elections that protesters say were rigged in favor of the main religious Shiite coalition. Meanwhile, a lawyer for Saddam Hussein said he saw evidence that his client had been beaten. Several hundred thousand people demonstrated after noon prayers in southern Baghdad Friday, many carrying banners decrying last week's elections. Many Iraqis outside the religious Shiite coalition allege that the elections were unfair to smaller Sunni Arab and secular Shiite groups. ``We refuse the cheating and forgery in the elections,'' one banner read. During Friday prayers at Baghdad's Umm al-Qura mosque, the headquarters of the Association of Muslim Scholars, a major Sunni clerical group, Sheik Mahmoud al-Sumaidaei told followers they were ``living a conspiracy built on lies and forgery.'' ``You have to be ready during these hard times and combat forgeries and lies for the sake of Islam,'' he said. Sunni Arab and secular Shiite factions demanded Thursday that an international body review election fraud complaints, and threatened to boycott the new legislature. The United Nations rejected the idea. Their demand came two days after preliminary returns indicated that the current governing group, the religious Shiite United Iraqi Alliance, was getting bigger-than-expected majorities in Baghdad, which has large numbers of Shiites and Sunnis. On Friday, more than 2,000 people demonstrated in Mosul, where some accused Iran of having a hand in election fraud. About 1,000 people demonstrated in Tikrit, Saddam's hometown. The former leader claimed at his trial this week that he had been beaten by his American captors. Defense lawyer Khalil al-Dulaimi said Friday that he had seen marks on his client's body. Speaking in Amman, Jordan, Dulaimi said that he had filed a compliant Thursday with the court hearing Saddam's case. The chief prosecutor, Jaafar al-Mousawi, told The Associated Press on Friday that he hadn't seen a complaint but planned to visit Saddam and his seven co-defendants to review their health and ``listen to their demands and supply them with everything they need.'' Meanwhile, gunmen Friday attacked an Iraqi army checkpoint in the city of Adhaim, in religiously and ethnically mixed Diyala province, killing eight soldiers and wounding seventeen, an Iraqi army officer said on condition he not be identified for fear of reprisal. ``There were too many to count,'' said Akid, a 20-year-old soldier from Diwanayah being treated for gunshot wounds to both thighs. ``They tried to kill everybody.'' Akid, who would only give his first name for fear of reprisal, said his battalion of about 600 men had already suffered over 250 desertions after a Dec. 3 ambush in Adhaim killed 19 Iraqi soldiers. ``They gave up,'' he said. ``They said, 'The hell with this.''' In Balad Ruz, 45 miles northeast of Baghdad, a suicide bomber detonated his explosives belt outside a Shiite mosque, killing four people and wounding eight, Diyala police said. Among the dead was a policeman guarding the mosque. Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said Friday that President Bush had authorized new cuts in U.S. combat troops in Iraq, below the 138,000 level that prevailed for most of this year. Rumsfeld did not reveal the exact size of the troop cut, but Pentagon officials have said as many as 7,000 combat troops could be leaving. Criticisms of last week's elections are seen by some as jockeying for position by both Sunnis and former Prime Minister Ayad Allawi, a secular Shiite, before negotiations on forming a new coalition government begin. No group is expected to win a majority of the legislature's 275 seats. The formerly dominant Sunni minority fears being marginalized by the Shiite majority, which was oppressed during Saddam's reign. Associated Press writers Jason Straziuso, Robert Burns and Anthony Castaneda contributed to this report. -------- israel / palestine Israel plans aerial siege of Gaza Israeli fighter planes have destroyed much of Gaza Friday 23 December 2005, 17:28 Makka Time, 14:28 GMT http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/6C81361A-0C90-4328-9C83-1F5D23ABE120.htm Israel has given a green light for intensified airstrikes inside the Gaza Strip to enforce a buffer zone meant to stop Palestinian fighters from firing rockets. The approval comes a day after Israel threatened to cut off power to Gaza, a move condemned by human rights groups. But in a sign of growing friction over the cross-border violence, Palestinian security forces said they had refused an Israeli request to evacuate the area. The makeshift rockets rarely cause casualties, but could have big political fallout as Ariel Sharon, the Israeli prime minister, campaigns for re-election. Sharon's campaign relies on the strength of a withdrawal from Gaza this year that he said would improve Israel's security. Despite the withdrawal, the rocket firing has not stopped, and Israel has mounted air and artillery strikes on Gaza. Vengeance Fighters say the rockets are to avenge Israeli raids in the occupied West Bank as well as its strikes into the Gaza Strip. Mofaz has ordered restricted movement in the West Bank On Thursday, four Israeli soldiers were wounded when a rocket hit their base after Israeli troops killed three fighters in the West Bank. One rocket fell on Friday. Shaul Mofaz, the defence minister, "has ordered a restriction of movement in those areas from which the Palestinian terrorist organisations fire rockets into Israel", his office said. Another security source said that this meant use of air power, not ground operations. But Palestinian forces said they had refused an Israeli request to evacuate the border zone and were continuing their own efforts to prevent rocket firing from the rubble of former Jewish settlements at the border. Al-Sayid Shaban, commander of forces in northern Gaza, said: "We will not move one inch. We are [also] making a 100% effort to prevent rocket firing." Soured hopes The cross-border violence has quickly soured any hopes that the Gaza pullout could lead to a quick return to peacemaking. Israel rules out any talks on statehood in the West Bank and Gaza until the Palestinian authorities disarm fighters, a process that is meant to start under a US-backed peace plan. Israeli security sources said further steps were being considered if the rocket fire did not stop. These include cutting off Gaza's electricity - a proposal denounced by human rights groups as collective punishment. A ground offensive to reoccupy parts of Gaza is unlikely unless rockets cause heavy casualties, the sources said. High stakes The stakes are particularly high for Sharon ahead of the election on 28 March, for which the ex-general quit his right-wing Likud party to move towards the political centre. Polls suggest that Sharon's Kadima party is in the lead Opinion polls suggest that his Kadima party has a big lead. But more attacks, particularly from Gaza, could strengthen the hand of his main challenger from the right, Benjamin Netanyahu, the Likud member who denounced the Gaza pullout as a surrender to Palestinian fighters that would only encourage attacks. A surge in violence could also create problems for a Palestinian parliamentary election on 25 January, and potentially force a delay. Abu Abir, of the Popular Resistance Committees, said: "We will not tremble from these threats." Fighters said they would keep up the barrages whatever Israel did. -------- landmines `Mines kill,' villagers are told BY TYLER BRIDGES Knight Ridder Newspapers Fri, Dec. 23, 2005 http://www.macon.com/mld/macon/news/world/13473460.htm KUSHAPUCUS, Ecuador - The round metal object found in the jungle was intriguing, said Luis Guillermo Espinoza, a Shuar Indian living in this Amazon village. So, when his 18-year-old son, Nilo, brought it home one day last year, the teenager put it on his knee and tried to open it with his machete, while his 5-year-old brother, Byron, stood nearby. Both brothers bled to death after the land mine exploded, Espinoza recalled as he sat in front of his simple wood home in this village on the Ecuador-Peru border, the site of a war in 1995 that has left about 11,000 mines strewn about. The mines are still killing people, but the Organization of American States is making headway with a campaign to educate the 15 Shuar villages in this area about the dangers of land mines. Posters bearing yellow-and-red mine warnings are plastered on houses in the 12 villages that the OAS team has visited. ''Mines kill,'' the warning says in Spanish and Shuar. ''If you step on one, it explodes,'' said Geovanny Kajekai, an 11-year-old Shuar, as he stood in a cluster of other indigenous schoolchildren in the nearby village of Penas. He was carrying a book bag with the land-mine warning stamped on it. The warning is also stamped on pencils, notebooks and rulers. ''It's good to start with them when they are young,'' said Nelson Castillo, an OAS official with firsthand knowledge of the subject. He lost both of his legs to a land mine as an Ecuadorean soldier during the war. Jorge Jimpikit knows that the land mines mean he can no longer hunt in certain areas. ''It makes me afraid,'' said the 85-year-old Jimpikit, who had a single-shot rifle slung over his left shoulder. He and his wife had just returned from picking yucca that will provide the entire content of their lunch. Their chickens were feeding on an anthill brought home by Jimpikit's wife, Amalia. ``I have neighbors who were mutilated by land mines.'' That would be neighbors like Luis Sandu, a 42-year-old Shuar who lives in the village of Jempekat. It was in 1997. Sandu and a buddy had been asked to help find three other Shuars who had gotten lost in the jungle while hunting. ''I thought my friend had played a dirty trick and shot me,'' Sandu said. When he couldn't stand up, he realized that he had stepped on a land mine. Sandu took off his rubber boot to show his gnarled left foot. He has only two toes now, a handicap that he said makes it difficult for him to provide for his five children. ''I try not to complain,'' Sandu said. -------- prisoners of war Unable to End 'Unlawful' Detention, Judge Says By Josh White Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, December 23, 2005; A04 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/22/AR2005122202118_pf.html A federal judge in Washington ruled yesterday that the continued detention of two ethnic Uighurs at the U.S. prison facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, is "unlawful," but he decided he had no authority to order their release. U.S. District Judge James Robertson criticized the government's detention of Abu Bakker Qassim and Adel Abdu Hakim, who have been jailed at Guantanamo for four years; they have been cleared for release because the government has determined they are not enemy combatants and are not a threat to the United States. But Robertson said his court has "no relief to offer" because the government has not found a country to accept the men and because he does not have authority to let them enter the United States. Robertson wrote that the government has taken too long to arrange a release for the men, who cannot return to their Chinese homeland because they would likely be tortured or killed there. U.S. authorities have asked about two dozen countries to grant the men political asylum, but none has accepted, in part out of fear of angering China. The Uighurs -- along with seven other detainees who have been found to be "no longer enemy combatants" -- are in Guantanamo's Camp Iguana, a less-restrictive area of the prison. They were cleared by a combatant status review tribunal about nine months ago, but no solution for their release has been reached. Robertson wrote that their situation is untenable. "The detention of these petitioners has by now become indefinite," Robertson wrote in a 12-page opinion. "This indefinite imprisonment at Guantanamo Bay is unlawful." In a hearing last week, Robertson called the cases of the Uighurs (pronounced wee-gurs) a "classic dilemma" and proposed allowing them restricted asylum in the United States. He rejected that concept yesterday, deciding that the executive branch has control over immigration and that such a move "would have national security and diplomatic implications beyond the competence or the authority of this Court." Robertson believes that his court has nothing to offer such cleared detainees because the Supreme Court, in its landmark 2004 ruling Rasul v. Bush , did not decide what relief might be available to Guantanamo Bay detainees who file habeas corpus petitions, nor what to do with those who are determined to be "no longer enemy combatants." The judge also lashed out at the military's term for those who pose no threat. "The government's use of the Kafka-esque term 'no longer enemy combatants' deliberately begs the question of whether these petitioners ever were enemy combatants," he wrote, adding that there is nothing that shows the government could fear their return to battle. Both men were captured as they tried to head toward Pakistan while fleeing Afghanistan in late 2001, allegedly after training for combat with the Taliban. The Uighurs have been in a struggle with the Chinese government over their homeland, and China considers them terrorists. Numerous Uighurs have sought asylum in the United States, and they have a small community in the Washington area. Yesterday's opinion was moved into the record quickly because the detainees' lawyers feared that pending legislation headed for President Bush's desk could strip their clients of the ability to ask the federal courts for assistance. Language added to the Defense authorization bill, which has been approved by Congress, would restrict Guantanamo detainees' access to U.S. courts. Military law experts fear that the language, written by Sens. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) and Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.), could allow the government to hold detainees at Guantanamo indefinitely. Seton Hall law professor Baher Azmy, who represents a Guantanamo detainee, called the legislation "outrageous" and said it could leave detainees with little to no legal protection. "This frees the government to bring anyone it wants to Guantanamo, which is why they chose it in the first place," Azmy said. "It could end up as a place beyond the law where the executive branch can do whatever it wants to do." Graham has said he believes suspected foreign terrorists should not have access to U.S. courts, except to have their combatant status reviewed and for limited appeals of military commission verdicts. Graham, instead, advocates more congressional oversight. "We're not going to turn the war on terror over to the judges," Graham said in a conference call with reporters last week. "If you're an enemy combatant, they will look at your case every year. If there's someone who is there untold years, Congress will get involved." Robertson, in the Uighurs' case, found he has no option but to allow the detainees to appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals. Ultimately, the Clinton appointee's ruling leaves the men at Guantanamo indefinitely. "The question in this case is whether the law gives me the power to do what I believe justice requires," Robertson wrote. "The answer, I believe, is no." -------- spies Justice Dept. Admits Spy Program Does Not Comply With FISA Friday, December 23rd, 2005 Headlines Democracy Now! http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/12/23/1450211 The disclosure comes as the Justice Department has admitted that the President's eavesdropping program does not comply with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Along with another wiretapping statute, FISA defines itself as: "the exclusive means by which electronic surveillance . . . may be conducted." The admission came in a letter to Congress Thursday. -------- POLITICS -------- propaganda wars News-planting firm has millions in contracts By Gordon Lubold and William Matthews Air Force Times staff writers December 23, 2005 http://www.airforcetimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-1429312.php Just two years ago, the Lincoln Group was a small start-up communications firm with an idealistic vision and a handful of employees, many of them former service members. Today, the company boasts 300 employees worldwide, is drawing $100-million contracts from the military and is at the center of a Washington mini-scandal as the firm that planted pro-American news articles in Iraqi newspapers on behalf of the Coalition Provisional Authority. Even though the placed stories were apparently factually correct, critics worried the contract amounted to a U.S. propaganda campaign that ran roughshod over the fledgling independence of Iraqi media. Representatives from Lincoln Group, based in Washington, say they were only performing the duties as laid out in the contract and did nothing wrong. Defense officials, who seemed surprised by revelations of the existence of the contract, are investigating. But Lincoln Group has its eye on bigger fish. The growing firm has a visionary streak that seeks to “spread peace through commerce” by building information and intelligence networks in emerging Third World countries as it expands its own market share, according to company representatives who spoke with Times reporters and editors Dec. 20. Officials declined to talk in much detail about the nature of their work or with whom they are contracted. But Paige Craig, a 31-year-old former enlisted Marine who co-founded the company, said it is active in Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon, Pakistan and the United Arab Emirates and is hoping to make inroads in Africa and Asia. He said the firm’s goal is to promote commerce in hostile environments by “bridging the cultural divide” between those nations and Western governments and businesses. Lincoln employs an eclectic mix of former military personnel — a former Special Forces medical sergeant works alongside a former New York University professor — as well as public relations specialists, television producers, business development consultants and research analysts. The company, whose founders pride themselves on being on the ground and in the field, have lost some 18 Iraqi employees since arriving on the international scene two years ago, Craig said. The company’s vision is rooted in the notion that commerce can flourish if people and institutions have the right tools. In countries like Iraq, there is a hunger for information and entertainment content, said Craig, a bearded West Point dropout who joined the Corps to seek broader international experience. In Pakistan, for example, Lincoln Group is looking at selling syndication rights to an American teen television program. If successful, young children in Pakistan — a key ally in the war on terrorism — would hear news and entertainment with an American bent. The company earlier contracted with the Marine Corps to distribute plastic water bottles imprinted with a friendly message to thousands of Iraqis. “A lot of the issues we face are due to ignorance and misperception,” said Craig, who left the Corps in 2000. “One belief we have … is that as the Middle East stabilizes and as the economy diversifies, you’ll see a huge demand for content.” Lincoln is trying to help build that demand — and then meet it. Company officials consult with psychologists, psychiatrists, historians and other experts to determine the best ways to make favorable impressions on local populations. For example, Craig said a U.S.-built school in Afghanistan was burned down because U.S. forces had excluded a local tribal leader from the process. Had U.S. personnel been aware of local customs and politics and brought the local chief into the project, the school might not have been destroyed, company officials said. The private sector definitely has a role to play in efforts to gather and dispense information, said Eric Larson, a senior policy analyst at the Rand Corp. in Santa Monica, Calif. And private marketing and advertising firms tend to attract the kind of “creative types” who can think of ways to get an effective message through to native populations. “The government and the military are limited,” both in manpower and other resources, to do this kind of thing, he said. “These are complementary skills that are out there in the private sector [and] could be helpful.” Lincoln Group was one of three firms hired last summer by the Defense Department to work in Iraq to improve public opinion of the America and its military. The arrangement became controversial last month when the Los Angeles Times and other news outlets reported that Lincoln received a contract worth up to $100 million to do work on behalf of Multi-National Forces Iraq, to include planting favorable stories produced by the U.S. military in Iraqi newspapers and on Iraqi radio. The question of whether the military should have hired Lincoln to wage a public-relations offensive in Iraq has sparked a Pentagon inquiry and discussion of a congressional probe. But Craig said the clamor over the contract has not hurt Lincoln Group’s business. William Matthews is a writer for Defense News. -------- us politics Daschle: Congress Denied Bush War Powers in U.S. By Barton Gellman Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, December 23, 2005; A04 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/22/AR2005122202119_pf.html The Bush administration requested, and Congress rejected, war-making authority "in the United States" in negotiations over the joint resolution passed days after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, according to an opinion article by former Senate majority leader Thomas A. Daschle (D-S.D.) in today's Washington Post. Daschle's disclosure challenges a central legal argument offered by the White House in defense of the National Security Agency's warrantless wiretapping of U.S. citizens and permanent residents. It suggests that Congress refused explicitly to grant authority that the Bush administration now asserts is implicit in the resolution. The Justice Department acknowledged yesterday, in a letter to Congress, that the president's October 2001 eavesdropping order did not comply with "the 'procedures' of" the law that has regulated domestic espionage since 1978. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, established a secret intelligence court and made it a criminal offense to conduct electronic surveillance without a warrant from that court, "except as authorized by statute." There is one other statutory authority for wiretapping, which covers conventional criminal cases. That law describes itself, along with FISA, as "the exclusive means by which electronic surveillance . . . may be conducted." Yesterday's letter, signed by Assistant Attorney General William Moschella, asserted that Congress implicitly created an exception to FISA's warrant requirement by authorizing President Bush to use military force in response to the destruction of the World Trade Center and a wing of the Pentagon. The congressional resolution of Sept. 18, 2001, formally titled "Authorization for the Use of Military Force," made no reference to surveillance or to the president's intelligence-gathering powers, and the Bush administration made no public claim of new authority until news accounts disclosed the secret NSA operation. But Moschella argued yesterday that espionage is "a fundamental incident to the use of military force" and that its absence from the resolution "cannot be read to exclude this long-recognized and essential authority to conduct communications intelligence targeted at the enemy." Such eavesdropping, he wrote, necessarily included conversations in which one party is in the United States. Daschle's article reveals an important new episode in the resolution's legislative history. As drafted, and as finally passed, the resolution authorized the president "to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations or persons" who "planned, authorized, committed or aided" the Sept. 11 attacks. "Literally minutes before the Senate cast its vote, the administration sought to add the words 'in the United States and' after 'appropriate force' in the agreed-upon text," Daschle wrote. "This last-minute change would have given the president broad authority to exercise expansive powers not just overseas -- where we all understood he wanted authority to act -- but right here in the United States, potentially against American citizens. I could see no justification for Congress to accede to this extraordinary request for additional authority. I refused." Daschle wrote that Congress also rejected draft language from the White House that would have authorized the use of force to "deter and pre-empt any future acts of terrorism or aggression against the United States," not only against those responsible for the Sept. 11 attacks. Republican legislators involved in the negotiations could not be reached for comment last night. -------- ACTIVISTS Japan Whalers, Greenpeace in Remote Ocean Battle Story by Michelle Nichols REUTERS AUSTRALIA: December 23, 2005 http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/34193/newsDate/23-Dec-2005/story.htm CANBERRA - A Japanese whaling fleet and Greenpeace environmental activists are involved in a stand-off in the remote Southern Ocean near the coast of Antarctica with the two sides accusing each other of ramming their vessels. Greenpeace said that after a month-long search it had tracked down six Japanese ships - which set out on Nov. 8 to conduct what Tokyo says is a scientific whaling programme - several thousand kilometres (miles) south of Perth. Two Greenpeace ships Esperanza and Arctic Sunrise launched inflatable boats on Wednesday to harass Japanese "catcher boats", positioning them between the whale and harpoon gun. Then several more "catcher boats", which had been whaling further away, returned with their load to the mother ship where the whales are cut up. "So the Esperanza positioned itself immediately behind the mother ship so the catcher boats couldn't offload their whale carcasses. Some of the catcher boats tried to push the Esperanza out of the way by colliding with it," Greenpeace Australia Pacific Chief Executive Steve Shallhorn told Reuters on Thursday. Japan abandoned commercial whaling in 1986 in line with an international moratorium and began what it calls a research programme the following year. Critics said the programme was a disguised commercial hunt for meat for upscale restaurants. Despite international disapproval, Japan announced in June plans to nearly double its annual catch of minke whales to 850 and add fin whales and eventually humpbacks - two types of whales conservationists say whose survival is threatened. "GET IN THE WAY" Australia is a staunch critic of Japan's whaling programme and Prime Minister John Howard reiterated his opposition in a meeting with Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi on the margins of a regional summit in Malaysia last week. Howard warned both Greenpeace and the Japanese whalers on Thursday against any dangerous behaviour. "I do not support action which endangers lives or breaks the law," he told reporters in Sydney. The Japanese Fisheries Agency said it was the Greenpeace ship that had rammed the Japanese vessel and that it was considering filing criminal charges against some Greenpeace members who tried to make their way onto the Japanese ships. "Our research whaling is in line with an international treaty and is perfectly legitimate," said Hideki Moronuki, head of the whaling section at the agency. "We repeatedly announced this to the Greenpeace boats and sprayed water from our water cannons as a warning, but they ignored it all and rammed into our ship," he told Reuters. Greenpeace said it planned to continue its action against the Japanese fleet for at least another month. "As long we can maintain fuel supply in our vessels we think we can be down here for many, many weeks yet. The season goes right through until March and we are hoping to get in the way as much as we can," Greenpeace activist Shane Rattenbury told Australian radio via satellite phone from the Arctic Sunrise. (Additional reporting by George Nishiyama in TOKYO)