NucNews January 11, 2006 -------- NUCLEAR -------- accidents and safety NRC seeks to allay fear of transport Testing shows casks of spent nuclear fuel surviving tunnel fire By Michael Dresser January 11, 2006 Baltimore Sun http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/bal-md.nuclear11jan11,1,3212718,print.story?coll=bal-local-headlines&ctrack=1&cset=true ROCKVILLE -- A new round of testing has found that casks used to transport dangerous nuclear waste are capable of surviving a catastrophe such as Baltimore's Howard Street Tunnel fire with no more than minor releases of radioactivity, according to a report presented to a Nuclear Regulatory Commission panel yesterday. NRC experts found that one of three types of cylinders commonly used to carry spent nuclear fuel would withstand such a fire with no radioactive release whatsoever. They said a fire as hot as the 2001 Howard Street blaze could breach the seals on two other cask models, but concluded that the amount of radioactive material released would be "very small." The hearing by the Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste was part of the NRC's consideration of the best ways to carry out the Bush administration's plan to ship highly radioactive spent fuel from the nation's nuclear power plants to be stored at Nevada's Yucca Mountain starting about 2010. Critics of the Yucca Mountain plan questioned the methodology and scientific validity of the report. "We would expect virtually all NRC casks to fail significantly," said Bob Halted, a consultant who represented the state of Nevada at yesterday's meeting. The Baltimore fire occurred after a CSX train carrying flammable chemicals derailed in the tunnel July 18, 2001. The fire, which lasted more than three days, tied up East Coast rail traffic and forced evacuations of parts of downtown. Craig Stevens, a spokesman for the Department of Energy, said he could not rule out use of the tunnel to transport nuclear waste. But he said the department would work with local officials before selecting a route. NRC officials said the severity of the Baltimore fire raised questions about whether the packages used to transport spent nuclear fuel would withstand such an accident. Under some scenarios, waste from the Calvert Cliffs plant in Southern Maryland could move through Baltimore to Yucca Mountain. A 2002 study by a private consultant, New York-based Radioactive Waste Management Associates, said that more than 300,000 people could have been exposed to radiation from the Howard Street incident had there been containers of spent nuclear fuel on the train. The NRC took issue with that study but launched an investigation by the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory that yielded the report presented yesterday. Under current standards, nuclear fuel packages must be capable of surviving a 30-minute, "fully engulfing" fire with an average temperature of 1,475 degrees. According to the National Institute of Standards, the temperature of the tunnel wall surface exceeded 1,500 degrees, with maximum temperatures in the flames of 1,800 degrees. Earl Easton of the NRC's Spent Fuel Project Office said the report shows there's no need to change current requirements. But Halted urged additional research using a different set of assumptions. Among other things, he said, the testing should look at whether the casks could survive at the hottest temperatures registered in the tunnel fire. "This controversy is not going to be closed quickly," he said. michael.dresser@baltsun.com -------- britain Calder Hall nuclear reactor (in Cumbria) demolition underway Calder Hall in Cumbria was opened by the Queen in 1956 Wednesday, 11 January 2006 (BBC) http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/cumbria/4603938.stm A major phase in the dismantling of the world's first nuclear reactor in Cumbria has been completed. Calder Hall, which was opened by the Queen in 1956, ceased operating in 2003 after almost 50 years in service. Part of the complex has been recommended to be turned into a national heritage site and museum. Officials said more than a mile of asbestos cement pipe, 6,000 cubic metres of plastic packing and 260 tons of timber, have been removed. The dismantling operation is being overseen by the recently-created Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA). A spokesman for British Nuclear Group, which manages the site, said: "The strip out of the internal materials from one of the towers has been successfully completed in preparation for the demolition of the four cooling towers." 'Landmark demolition' He said the packaging had been cleared to be recycled and will be reused as plastic sewage pipe. Dyan Foss, head of demolition delivery, added: "Work continues to progress well on the other three towers, and also on the preparation of the safety case that will be submitted to the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate for approval prior to this landmark demolition." When it began producing electricity, Calder Hall, located on the existing Sellafield site, used what was then cutting-edge magnox technology. But by the end of last century, its 196 megawatt capacity was considered too small to sustain its long-term viability. It eventually closed in March 2003 with the then operator British Nuclear Fuels Limited (BNFL) blaming the move on the depressed electricity prices and high running costs. A study has been commissioned into the costs and feasibility of preserving Calder Hall's number one reactor as a future heritage site and museum. -------- china China's bid to beat nuclear rule By Richard Baker January 11, 2006 The Age (Australian http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/chinas-bid-to-beat-nuclear-rule/2006/01/10/1136863239032.html CHINA wanted to avoid scrutiny of it used Australian-supplied uranium by buying its own uranium mines in this country. The Chinese request about evading Australia's strict export control measures for uranium was made to a Department of Industry, Tourism and Resources delegation in Beijing in August last year. It followed a similar request at another Beijing meeting last February, where China inquired about conducting its own uranium exploration and mining in this country. It was told that there would be no restrictions at a federal level, but that Australia's state and territory governments opposed further uranium mining and exploration. Australia requires international inspections of nuclear plants in China to ensure that uranium supplied by this country is used for peaceful purposes. Australia and China are working on an agreement that would allow uranium to be exported for China's nuclear power industry. Under the deal, the uranium will be covered by International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards - and forbidden from being put to military use. China's request to avoid export controls is revealed in Government answers to parliamentary questions lodged by Greens senator Christine Milne. Prepared by the office of Industry and Resources Minister Ian Macfarlane, they show that officials said the controls would not be relaxed. "Chinese representatives questioned whether they could circumvent export control measures on the use of Australian-supplied uranium if China owned some Australian uranium assets," the answer states. "DITR officials informed China that this was not possible." Senator Milne said yesterday that China's interest in evading controls undermined its pledge to put uranium to peaceful uses. "I have no confidence in the Federal Government's capacity to stop the Chinese from using Australian uranium for non-peaceful purposes," she said. A spokeswoman for Mr Macfarlane said the minister would discuss uranium with his Chinese counterpart at the Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate, which begins today in Sydney, and remind him of Australia's strict export criteria. The documents also show that senior Chinese officials asked how the Federal Government was "addressing the issue of state government reluctance to develop uranium resources". They were told that the Government was working with the states to "highlight the benefits of uranium mining". Federal Labor and the Labor state governments do not support additional uranium mines being developed in Australia. There are already three - two in South Australia and one in the Northern Territory. Some senior Labor Party figures, including energy and resources spokesman Martin Ferguson, have questioned the policy. In August, the Federal Government used its constitutional powers to assume control of mining rights in the NT, which is estimated to have $12 billion worth of uranium deposits. -------- depleted uranium Will USA use DU weapons in fourth attempt to unseat President Hugo Chavez? Wednesday, January 11, 2006 V Headline Bylined to: Stephen Lendman http://www.vheadline.com/readnews.asp?id=47629 VHeadline.com guest commentarist Stephen Lendman writes: This essay is a review and expose of the threat posed by depleted uranium (DU) to all countries as a result of the US use of it since 1991 in four wars and continues using it every day in Iraq. The health affects on the US military now serving in Iraq will likely prove devastating based on the already known severe affects it's had on those forces that served in the Gulf war. That data will be explained later in this essay. How can events in Iraq possibly affect Venezuela? It can do it several ways ... as will later be explained in some detail, thousands of tons of DU weapons have been used over the past 15 years in Iraq, Afghanistan and Yugoslavia/Kosovo. All these weapons are "bombs", including DU bullets, because when they strike a target they penetrate deeply and explode. The explosion causes aerosolization into a fine spray which then contaminates the air and soil around the target area. It's then swept into the air and carried by winds around the earth as a radioactive component of atmospheric dust falling indiscriminately everywhere, affecting every living thing and cannot be remedied. That's already happening from wars fought far from Venezuela ... but the US military now stores millions of DU bombs at an unknown number of bases around the world for possible future use. It's very likely large numbers of them are on bases in Latin America and may be close to the Venezuelan border. Should the US be bold enough to take an aggressive action again Hugo Chavez in a fourth attempt to unseat him, it's almost certain they'll use DU weapons in large numbers on Venezuelan soil and targets causing widespread radiation fallout and the lethal effects from it. Potentially millions of Venezuelans could be affected who would suffer severe future health consequences of virtually every imaginable type. I wrote this essay to sound an alarm and alert the world hoping that if people everywhere know the danger now and demand a halt to the use of these illegal weapons it will give the US military pause. I've written here to the people of Venezuela, and those as supportive of the Bolivarian Revolution as I am, to make them aware that what's now happening in Iraq may also happen on their soil with the potential devastating consequences that may follow that cannot be undone. Each day's mainstream headlines often misinform or divert our attention from real issues of concern. Prominent in them now is the threat of a new pandemic caused by Avian (bird) flu. Ignore them. The threat of so-called bird flu becoming a pandemic is more a political scare tactic and potential bonanza for drug company profits and its major shareholders' net worth (including Gilead Sciences, the developer of the Tamiflu drug and its former chairman and major shareholder Donald Rumsfeld) than a likely public health crisis -- unless you live around infected chickens or take an unproven safe immunization shot. There are much more other likely killer bacterial and viral threats than Avian that get little attention. Don't worry about possible or unlikely threats. Worry about real ones. Bacteria and viruses untreatable by antibiotics are good examples. So is global warming and many others. But, there's possibly one threat that tops all others both in gravity and because it's been deliberately concealed from the public -- never discussed, explained or had any action taken to remedy it. * It's the global threat from the toxic effects of depleted uranium (DU) and, like global warming, DU has the potential to destroy all planetary life. How can something so potentially destructive be hidden and ignored and why? THE ARROGANCE OF DOMINANCE There's little dispute that the US today is the preeminent world power and unlike any that ever preceded it. It now admits to being an empire. In fact, it's the first ever world global empire. To expand its reach and influence, it now spends nearly as much on its military as all other nations combined and has built and maintains a military capacity no other nation dare challenge. It also reserves for itself the sole right to develop and use the most dangerous and destructive weapons, even those banned from use by international law or custom. Some of those now in charge at the highest levels believe they have a divine right to use them, even a duty. George Bush may be one of them ... a self-proclaimed and so-called born-again Christian, he says he gets his direction from the Almighty. That's real arrogance ... the supreme kind only an unchallengeable power and its leaders dare arrogate to itself. Up to now, the US has effectively used its power to dominate other nations either by persuasion, economic isolation or conquest. We claim to be a model democracy, but our policies and actions prove otherwise. At home we're a democracy for the few -- the privileged and powerful. It's they who govern and run our institutions including the most dominant one of all -- the giant transnational corporations whose interests all administrations serve including waging war for their benefit. Wars are good for business -- as long as they're easily winnable, the public supports them, and they don't cause undo economic stresses that may disrupt the economy, in which case they're bad for business. There's a striking term often used in the plural and in a business context that's also appropriate more broadly. The term is "externalities." In business it refers to the unfortunate side effects or consequences of a company's action that may have a detrimental affect on others. A typical example is an industrial plant that produces a dangerous substance as an un-sellable by-product from its production process. To avoid the cost of disposal, storage or treatment, the plant dumps it into waterways, unused land areas or through smokestacks. In so doing it harms the environment. Wars also have "externalities" -- with far greater consequences. Overall, death, disease and destruction are the best examples. But so are the dangerous residues and their side effects from the use of weapons like toxic chemicals, biological agents and all types of nuclear munitions. We're all aware of the danger from the first two categories, although when used they only affect small areas and are not "weapons of mass destruction." We've also seen the destructive capability of a nuclear bomb and have heard of DU ... but, the public has little or no knowledge about the real danger and threat from the use of any nuclear device or substance. That information has been willfully and deliberately suppressed because the potential harm is so great and irreversible. Even when there's clear evidence of widespread problems as there was in the case of the Agent Orange effects on Vietnam veterans and "Gulf war syndrome" on the military from that conflict, our US government has denied any connection and stonewalled efforts to help those in need -- until they no longer could hide the truth and had to act. * Depleted uranium (DU) is a "dense metal" that increases its ability as a weapon to penetrate a target, thus enhancing its destructive capability. Pentagon propaganda and disinformation falsely describe all DU weapons as only being coated. In fact, they are solid missiles, bombs, shells and bullets weighing up to 5,000 pounds in a single "bunker buster" bomb. All these weapons have solid DU projectiles or warheads in them, and their use in combat as the US military has done in four wars and is now doing every day in Iraq is the "de facto" use of nuclear bombs. From Nagasaki in 1945 until the 1991 Gulf War, these weapons were effectively banned by common consent (and common sense) and never used, except for one time in the 1973 Yom Kippur war). No longer. Above, I asked why are these weapons used if they're so deadly and dangerous well beyond the areas they target? The answer's simple -- because they work so well, and the enemy forces attacked don't have them and can't retaliate against us with them. The fact that we understand the danger from their use and the "externalities" left in their wake is someone else's problem to deal with. Just like a public corporation worries only about meeting Wall Street estimates of next quarter's earnings, our government and the military only worry about winning the next battle and next war -- too bad if in the process we irradiate the planet and threaten all future life on it. That's someone else's problem later on. That's how big business thinks and also how our political and military leaders do as well. OUR PRECIOUS PLANET AND HOW BADLY WE TREAT IT Today we're threatened by many natural and "man-made" disasters we could act to prevent but don't. To the ones mentioned above add polluted air, water and soil. * Include the unsafe food we eat from the chemical and other contaminants and unsafe additives in them. Don't ignore ozone layer damage, deforestation, the destruction of precious natural habits and endangered species, the reckless ways we develop and use our natural resources including wasteful overuse of a finite supply of fresh water that could run out and is irreplaceable. And don't forget wars that get more recklessly destructive as new technologies and weapons are developed to fight them and powerful nations having them show no restraint in their use. In November, 2005 the United States lost a great man unfortunately unknown to most of the public. His name was Vine Deloria, Jr, a renowned Native American intellect, historian, author, scholar and activist. With great eloquence Deloria spoke and wrote about how for all its existence the planet was well preserved by those who lived on it -- until about 200 years ago when western technological development began and changed everything. It was then transformed from being pristine to poisoned. He expressed such great wisdom in his writings and talks, it's worth quoting. Below are some examples: "Progress is the absolute destruction of the real world in favor of a technology that creates a comfortable way of life for a few fortunately situated people. Within our lifetime the differences between the Indian use of the land and the white use of the land will become crystal clear. The Indian lived with his land. The white destroyed his land, he destroyed the planet earth." Deloria once said that Christian missionaries had "fallen on their knees and prayed for the Indians" before rising to "fall on the Indians and prey on their land." He also claimed the destruction wrought by corporate values and its technology was so damaging that a return to Native American tribal standards and culture could be viewed as salvation. He viewed a corporate run predatory society, like the U.S., as an "Adolph Eichmann of the plains", whose soldiers were tools "not defending civilization; they were crushing another society." Deloria wrote 20 books, edited others, and published his memoirs and a two-volume set of US-Native American treaties, all of which are devastating accounts of US duplicity. Every treaty made was broken or ignored to this day, and the rights of our Native Indians willfully violated and trampled over through lies, deception and deceit. Just the latest example of this is in one of the accusations in the ongoing Jack Abramoff political and financial corruption scandal now making daily headlines. Abramoff, his partner, and other well-known Republicans are accused of bilking Indian casino gambling interests out of an estimated $85 million. Further, in his now disclosed emails, he referred to Native Americans as "monkeys, troglodites (people with a sub-human like nature), and idiots." * Deloria also wrote that unlike African Americans, Native Indians did not want to be equals in US society ... they wanted no part of it. Vine Victor Deloria, Jr., historian, scholar, activist and much more was born March 26, 1933 and died November 13, 2005. He will be missed. The Industrial Revolution and its single-minded pursuit of profit (what Veblen called "the maximization of pecuniary interests") was Deloria's point. It produced along with it a vast array of toxins that have done untold ecological damage. The alarm was prominently sounded in Rachel Carson's landmark book "Silent Spring" published in 1962 that forced the banning of DDT, influenced US president Jack Kennedy and led to legislation affecting our air, water and soil. It also launched an environmental movement that's grown into many and diverse advocacy groups that lobby and fight for environmental sanity and justice. Since Carson's time we know much more about the dangers we face, and we have many more of them. But despite our knowledge and the influence of many concerned scientists and a public supporting the need for a healthy environment, our political leaders from both parties, in service to the dominant corporate interests they serve, pay little more than lip service to this most important of issues along with war and peace. Although the Congress passed more than a dozen major environmental statutes and laws since the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 including the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts, CERCLA establishing the Superfund to pay for toxic cleanups, the Endangered Species Act and more, those statutes have since been weakened or ignored. As a result, conditions today are much worse than 40 years ago and the dangers from them threaten our survival. In his 2003 published book 'Hegemony or Survival,' Noam Chomsky cited the reflections of eminent biologist Ernst Mayr. Mayr observed that other species were better able to survive than humans and that the average life of a species is about 100,000 years. It's generally believed the human species has now about reached that limit and may be near becoming extinct. If so, and in light of our more recent behavior, we may, as Chomsky notes, turn out to be the only species ever to destroy ourselves and much else along with us. THE NUCLEAR AGE CHANGED EVERYTHING Since the atom was first split in a Berlin laboratory in 1938, the world has never been the same. The great scientist Albert Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity was instrumental in the nuclear development that followed creating the atom bomb. But his greatest influence was the letter he sent to Franklin Roosevelt in 1939 urging him to build it. Einstein feared the Nazis might do it first with disastrous consequences. He later regretted his action and said: "I made one great mistake in my life....when I signed the letter to President Roosevelt recommending that atom bombs be made...." He also said "our world faces a crisis as yet unperceived by those possessing the power to make great decisions for good and evil. The unleashed power of the atom has changed everything save our modes of thinking, and thus we drift toward unparalleled catastrophe." If he were alive today, what might Einstein say about the threat from depleted uranium (DU) which when weaponized is possibly the ultimate weapon of mass destruction. But even if he said it, would the public be allowed to hear him? And most important, would his words change anything? DEPLETED URANIUM (DU) -- WHAT IT IS AND HOW IT'S USED To use uranium as a fuel for commercial reactors or for nuclear weapons it must be enriched. The enrichment process is then followed by gaseous diffusion in two streams - one is enriched and the other depleted. Before a use was found for it, DU was just stored in vast amounts as a byproduct. However, when it was discovered that solid "dense metal" DU projectiles in all forms (missiles, bombs, shells and bullets) greatly increased their ability to penetrate and destroy a target, the Pentagon had a new technology it hoped to use in combat and now has for the past 15 years. The first DU weapon system was developed for the Navy in 1968, and DU weapons were first given to Israel for use in the 1973 Yom Kippur war under US supervision. These weapons were later sold to 29 countries but never used until the 1991 Gulf War when the US broke an international taboo prohibiting them. Since then the US has fought wars in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and again in Iraq. In all these conflicts, thousands of tons of solid DU weapons have been used causing far more devastation thus far from its radiation and chemical toxins than from the targets destroyed and those killed in target areas. Worst of all, the lingering and spreading affects from DU contamination never end, resulting in all those exposed to it and their loved ones with whom they have intimate contact and their offspring the likelihood of having one or more of virtually any illness, disease or disability imaginable often leading to early death or at the least a lifetime of pain, suffering and great expense. In Orwellian language, DU is the (deadly and unwelcome) gift that keeps on giving -- and killing. USING DU AS A WEAPON IS ILLEGAL UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW Poison gas in various forms was first used as a weapon in WW I by both sides. It's effects were deadly causing well over 1million total casualties and nearly 100,000 deaths. After the war, the revulsion over their use led to the 1925 Geneva Protocol and other succeeding Geneva Weapons Conventions that specifically outlawed the use of chemical and biological agents in any form for any reason in war. The 1925, Geneva Convention Gas Protocol specifically prohibits the use of poison gas weapons. Although no Geneva Convention or other treaty bans the use of radioactive uranium weapons, including DU weapons, these weapons are, in fact, illegal de facto and de jure when judged by the standard of the Hague Convention of 1907 which prohibits use of any "poison or poisoned weapons." DU weapons in all their forms and uses are radioactive and chemically toxic, and thus clearly fit the definition of poisonous weapons banned under the Hague Convention. The US is a signatory to the Hague and Geneva Conventions (which are binding treaties under international law). In using DU weapons in combat or for any purpose, the US has violated its sacred treaty obligations and is guilty of a war crime. Further, all DU weapons also meet the US federal code definition of "weapons of mass destruction" (WMD) in 2 out of 3 categories: The US CODE, TITLE 50, CHAPTER 40, SECTION 2302 defines a Weapon of Mass Destruction as follows: "The term 'weapon of mass destruction' means any weapon or device that is intended, or has the capability, to cause death or serious bodily injury to a significant number of people through the release, dissemination, or impact of (A) toxic or poisonous chemicals or their precursors, (B) a disease organism, or (C) radiation or radioactivity." Because the US is a signatory to the Hague and Geneva Conventions, the US military is violating its own military code. By using depleted uranium (which is clearly a WMD and thus illegal) in combat in four wars, the US is clearly guilty of the very crime we claimed our right to go to war against Iraq to prevent. In addition, under various UN Conventions and Covenants that are binding international law for its signatories, the use of any weapons that cause harm after the battle including away from the battlefield, harm the environment, or kill, wound or cause harm inhumanely are illegal and banned. DU weapons are poisonous under international law and violate all the above conditions. Even the seminal Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which is legally non-binding to its signatories, implies a moral duty never to use any weapons as potentially harmful as DU. KNOWN EFFECTS FROM DU USE THUS FAR -- AND THIS IS JUST THE BEGINNING, THE WORST IS YET TO COME I'm very indebted to Leuren Moret for the data discussed throughout this article and below. Leuren is an independent scientist and internationally recognized expert on radiation, DU and public health. She's done extensive research on the environmental and public health effects of low level radiation from atmospheric testing fallout, nuclear power plants and DU weapons radiation in 42 countries, has written detailed reports and articles on her important findings, given testimony on the harmful affects of DU poisoning and is an outspoken critic of DU use. In an article she authored in July, 2004 she wrote: "The use of depleted uranium weaponry by the United States, defying all international treaties, will slowly annihilate all species on earth including the human species, and yet this country continues to do so with full knowledge of its destructive potential." Leuren's work has revealed some shocking facts. Since the US military first used DU weapons in the 1991 Gulf War, it has released the radioactive atomicity equivalent of 400,000 Nagasaki nuclear bombs into the global atmosphere (that's no misprint) causing permanent contamination with a half-life of 4.5 billion years. Furthermore, that DU radiation is 10 times the amount released by all atmospheric testing which in total equaled 40,000 Hiroshima bombs (again, no misprint). * The two atom bombs used against the Japanese killed a likely 300,000 or more people from the initial blasts and subsequent radiation and chemical poisoning deaths. To this day, there are still reported deaths attributed to the bombings. Now imagine the potential threat to all planetary life from all the DU weapons used since 1991 and their continued use in Iraq and Afghanistan -- the equivalent of 400,000 Nagasaki bombings and increasing daily as US forces now are conducting 4 to 6 daily bombings of target sites in Iraq alone using DU bombs. Leuren calls DU "The Trojan Horse of nuclear war -- it keeps giving and keeps killing. There's no way to clean it up, and no way to turn it off because it continues to decay into other radioactive isotopes..." As it decays, it continues to release more radiation. DU when used as a weapon in war, as the US has now done four times and continues to do so in Iraq and Afghanistan and intends to continue using, is Stanley Kubrick's fictional Doomsday Machine for real (from his 1964 film Dr. Strangelove). DU may be the ultimate weapon of mass annihilation. * Unless there's a mass worldwide public awakening to this threat to demand an immediate end to its use for any purpose, we're left with little more than the message from the subtitle of the Kubrick film -- stop worrying and love the bomb -- and likely prepare to die. The greatest damage from DU comes from the radiation residue after its use. When a DU weapon strikes a target, it penetrates deeply and aerosolizes into a fine spray which then contaminates the air and soil around the target area. The residue is permanent, and its microscopic and submicroscopic particles remain suspended in air or are swept into the air from the tainted soil and are carried by winds around the earth as a radioactive component of atmospheric dust. That dust falls to earth indiscriminately everywhere causing radiation contamination that affects every living thing and cannot be remedied. The contamination causes virtually every known illness and disease from severe headaches, muscle pain and general fatigue, to major birth defects, infection, depression, cardiovascular disease, many types of cancer and brain tumors. It also causes permanent disability and death. In June, 2003, the World Health Organization (WHO), without specific reference to DU, announced in a press release that global cancer rates will increase by 50% by 2020. WHO is usually conservative in its estimates.Might they believe things are potentially far worse? And are they closely examining the effects of DU to those in combat areas where these weapons are and have been used? Those individuals (military and civilian) at or near target areas are most immediately affected by DU contamination, especially if they remain there for an extended time. During the 6-week 1991 Gulf war only 467 US personnel were wounded and about 150 killed. Out of the 580,000 military personnel who served in that war, 325,000 were reported to be on permanent medical disability by the year 2000. It was also reported then the number was increasing by 43,000 each year. In fact, the annual increases were even greater, and by 2004 the US Department of Veterans Affairs (the VA) reported over 518,000 Gulf-era veterans to be on medical disability. It also reported over 500,000 veterans were homeless. Studies were also done on veterans whose wives had normal babies before the war. It reported two-thirds of post-war births of those studied had severe birth defects, such as missing brains, eyes, legs and arms and blood diseases. There are already scattered early reports of DU caused health problems from the current Iraq conflict (and probably Afghanistan) as well as an above normal rate of still active duty military and veteran suicide and family violence. As deployments in the current conflict are much longer than the short Gulf war and most serving go back for a second or even third tour of duty, it's easy to imagine a literal holocaust that will eventually devastate all military and other personnel who have or are now serving or will serve in Iraq and the region. And it likely will have a similar effect on the wives and husbands of veterans and their post-service offspring. Once again it must be emphasized ... the US government prior to 1991 had full knowledge of the devastating effects DU would cause and still used it, still does and still intends to keep using it. Beyond belief? You bet. If someone wrote this as a work of fiction or science fiction, no one would believe it, and probably no one would publish it. DU USED AS WEAPONS -- A WILLFUL ACT OF GENOCIDE From its use already in four wars, the use of DU weapons is an act of insanity as well as possibly the greatest ever crime against humanity (and all other living species) and a war crime. Those responsible include three presidents, scores of high government officials and the Pentagon high command to include a lot of generals and admirals. These people are criminals. They're guilty of mass murder without end. They all should be made to answer for their crimes through indictment and trials both in our federal courts and at the International Criminal Court (ICC) at the Hague which was established in 2002 to try individuals for war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. These people, or at least most of them, are guilty of all three crimes and should pay the highest price for them with no leniency. Their convictions should once and for all serve as a reminder to all future leaders that this type reckless behavior will never again be tolerated. Nobel laureate Harold Pinter, a distinguished author and man of great honor, passion and eloquence, in his 2005 acceptance speech made these comments about the current Iraq war. Too ill with cancer, he was unable to travel to Oslo for the award ceremony and instead read his comments on videotape. Pinter is a sharp critic of the Iraq war and the US and his UK government's role in it. In his Nobel award address he called the invasion of Iraq a "bandit act, an act of blatant state terrorism, demonstrating absolute contempt for the concept of international law." He stressed "the United States no longer bothers about low intensity conflict. It no longer sees any point in being reticent or even devious... It quite simply doesn't give a damn about the United Nations, international law or critical dissent, which it regards as impotent and irrelevant." Pinter is right, and he said much more in his 46 minute acceptance speech. He also could have added the Bush administration since 9/11/01 has governed recklessly and arrogantly. With obsessive secrecy and contempt for the Constitution, the Congress, the courts and the US public, George Bush has governed by Executive Order or Decree, a tool of tyrants when used to excess as this president has. He's done it to pursue a policy of permanent imperial war for US global domination. The tragedy of 9/11 aside, the Bush administration created a fear-induced sham world terrorist threat to fight a so-called "global war on terrorism" for decades to come. It also created a near police state at home with baseless mass roundups, illegal detentions and deportations as part of a racist war against dark-skinned immigrants, illegal warrantless domestic spying and systemic use of torture of those detained and those held in offshore prisons and "renditioned" to mostly unnamed countries tolerating this practice. The Bush administration did all this based on a foundation of willful deception, deceit, and endless web of lies, and an utter contempt for political, economic and social justice at home and abroad and the rule of law. Until recent months, Bush has gotten away with it all. Now with his poll numbers plummeting, the Iraq war a hopeless quagmire (despite the disinformation to the contrary), the possibility of further high level administration officials being indicted beside Lewis Libby along with the potentially huge political and financial Jack Abramoff corruption scandal, and the Democrats and some Republicans finally stirring and expressing their ire, the administration may be nearing its Waterloo. * Like many other regimes in the past guilty of imperial arrogance and overreach (like the last one that tried -- the Nazis -- and thought they'd rule for 1,000 years but only lasted 12) this administration and its reckless and heartless agenda may meet a similar fate. Great thinkers and perceptive observers have ventured to guess what our fate may be as a result of our actions. Without predicting it, Noam Chomsky in a recent talk cited the worst of all possible outcomes -- a nuclear holocaust, environmental destruction or the end of even nominal democracy. Yale Senior Research Scholar Immanuel Wallerstein in his important 2003 book, 'The Decline of American Power,' believes the US "has been a fading global power since the 1970s, and the US response to the (9/11) terrorist attacks has merely accelerated this decline." He goes on to say "the economic, political and military factors that contributed to US hegemony are the same factors that will inexorably produce the coming US decline." He later wrote he can't predict the outcome of "this chaotic crisis of our capitalist world system", but the US attempt to stop it will fail. At best, they'll only delay it as they've been trying to do. Wallerstein sees a future that will go one of two ways (if we survive) -- either one based on progressive values or something that's quite the opposite. Retired professor Chalmers Johnson, in his important 2004 book, 'The Sorrows of Empire,' also predicts the dissolution of the US empire if its present path continues. Unlike imperial Rome that took hundreds of years before it fell, he sees US sorrows arriving "with the speed of FedEx." He predicts four sorrows if the present trend continues that will create an ugly alternative to our present constitutional form of government: imperial overreach with a "state of perpetual war" leading to more terrorist retaliation against us; a loss of democracy and our constitutional rights; the end of truthfulness "replaced by a system of propaganda, disinformation, and glorification of war, power, and the military legions"; finally, he sees the nation going bankrupt from its inability to maintain ever more "grandiose military projects." The US national debt now exceeds $8.2 trillion. It's growing unsustainably by over $400 billion annually as is the current account deficit that in 2006 may reach $1 trillion. Both deficits rely "on the kindness of strangers" (foreign governments and investors willing to keep buying our treasury securities and invest in our equity and fixed income markets) to sustain us. They'll do it only as long as they believe they're making sound investments. Johnson doesn't believe the present trend is irreversible. There's still time to change it, but so far he says we're not even trying. He thus believes the only hope for us and the planet is for the world community of nations to act together to "checkmate" us. If they don't or won't or can't, nuclear war may eventually ensue and "civilization will disappear." To prevent the above scenarios from happening, the world community of nations must coalesce soon and go for "checkmate." And united they should demand that this kind of behavior will never again be tolerated by any nation. They should strengthen the international laws now in place enough to insure it, require every nation to be a signatory and force all nations to abide by these binding laws with the severest consequences for those who don't. But even if all this were to happen, the damage already done is overwhelming and spreading. It may already be too late. In the US alone, 42 states are now contaminated with DU from its manufacture, testing and deployment. Also, the manufacture of millions of DU bombs and their deployment to US military bases around the world continues. Leuren Moret just learned from a declassified document a Hawaii-based Quaker group obtained through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request that the US military has 2.7 million DU bombs in US still occupied South Korea (over 50 years after the end of the Korean War). She says it's little wonder North Korea wants nuclear weapons. She believes these bombs were moved there in the 1990s from US still-occupied (Japanese) Okinawa (60 years after WW2) because the Japanese (who abhor nuclear weapons) refused to domicile them any longer. And she speculates further that we very likely have many millions more DU bombs deployed in other countries where we have bases. That could include a great many more according to Chalmers Johnson. In 'The Sorrows of Empire,' Johnson mentioned the existence of at least 725 known US bases in 153 countries, besides hundreds more in this country. He also believes we have secret bases so the real total could be much higher and now likely is with all the new bases we're building in Iraq, Central Asia, Eastern Europe, Latin America and plans for Africa. Even without these weapons being used, imagine the potential danger we're placing the people of these countries in (and our own citizens as well) just because the weapons are there (and here). There could be accidents, the military engages in exercises where they likely test and use these weapons, and, of course, they could be stolen or even sold by rogue military or other personnel looking for a quick buck. Imagine for a moment a reverse scenario. What if the UK, France, Russia or China had bases in this country (bad enough) and additionally stored millions of DU bombs or other nuclear weapons on our soil. Would we citizens tolerate just the bases, let alone with DU bombs? Unlikely. Also imagine if the public here knew thousands or millions of these weapons were being stored on US bases here, near where they lived. They might also consider the 104 current operating commercial nuclear power plants in the US. They're all dangerous, but especially the aging ones. Every one is a potential unstable nuclear bomb and possible disaster waiting to happen, either from an inevitable accident or from sabotage. Responsible experts believe it's just a matter of time before a major nuclear disaster occurs somewhere in the world, possibly or even likely a full nuclear core meltdown -- the worst possible kind of nuclear catastrophe other than a nuclear or thermonuclear explosion or widespread use of DU weapons. If a core meltdown happened (or more likely when one happens), a vast area would be contaminated and made uninhabitable forever. Where I live in Chicago I'm surrounded by 11 nuclear power plants, many of them aging and all of them with histories of safety violations caused by aging and shoddy maintenance. Even without an accident, these facilities (and all others everywhere) discharge enough radiation daily in their normal operations to contaminate the food we eat (even organic food), the water we drink and the air we breathe into our lungs. If one of these plants had a core meltdown and metropolitan Chicago was downwind from the fallout, the city and suburbs alone would become uninhabitable forever and would have to be evacuated quickly with all possessions left behind and lost (including our homes) except for what we could carry in suitcases or in the trunks of our cars. Everyone should thus ask the obvious question -- is this kind of insane "nuclear Russian roulette" risk worth taking? There are much cleaner, safer alternatives available or that can be developed, if we'd just be willing to invest heavily in alternative energy sources other than the nuclear option and fossil fuels. There are also common sense ways to practice conservation, without significantly impeding our western lifestyle. Up to now, our leaders have been irresponsible and derelict in their duty to inform us of the risk and act responsibly to remove it to protect us from potential harm. They've also shown no restraint in their actions or respect for the people in countries we seek to dominate. Those countries are never the developed ones in the Global North with the power to respond. They're always weak, less developed and overexploited ones, usually with darker skinned people and a non Judeo-Christian faith. In this country, especially without a draft and with few good career opportunities for the poor and underprivileged, military service with the promise of education and other benefits (that most inductees never get) becomes the temporary career choice of expedience. The rich and well-off only wage the wars but don't fight in them. Instead they send the poor to fight and die for them to make them richer. When our Vietnam era military came home sick and dying from the toxic effects of Agent Orange (highly toxic dioxin), Henry Kissinger, a Nobel Peace prize recipient and accused war criminal, arrogantly insulted them all when he called them "just dumb stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy." Used, abused and discarded like worn out shoes. Kissinger's past has come back to haunt him. Before traveling abroad now, he must check with the US State Department to be sure there are no warrants out for his arrest. The world today is closer to the tipping point than ever before. We may, in fact, have passed it and it's already too late. The price we've paid for our technological advances has been an equal growth in the threat to our survival. Up to now we've found no way to end this destructive path. We're fast running out of time, and unless we do it and soon, we may not get another chance. The US today is like a giant Gulliver Agonistes and the rest of the world like the Lilliputians -- in Jonathan Swift's classic satire. Despite the mismatch, the Lilliputans (who stood 6 inches high) were able to tie down this giant and prevent him from wrecking their homes. In the end, they got Gulliver to leave and were able to go on with their lives. * The lesson is clear ... people everywhere need to understand the great peril we all face ... our survival. Then, like the Lilliputians, we need to hog-tie this out-of-control predatory Gulliver to save ourselves. Two final thoughts to consider -- the first one from Dr. Helen Caldicott, president of the Nuclear Policy Research Institute, an expert on the medical hazards of nuclear energy, author, activist and Nobel Peace Prize nominee from her 1978 book 'Nuclear Madness' (updated in 1994): "As a physician, I contend nuclear technology (military and commercial) threatens life on our planet with extinction." "If present trends continue (and they have and have gotten worse), the air we breathe, the food we eat, and the water we drink will soon be contaminated with enough radioactive pollutants to pose a potential health hazard far greater than any plague humanity has ever experienced." The second is from the great British journalist, Robert Fisk from his year-end London Independent column entitled War Without End: "Only justice, not bombs, can make our dangerous world a safer place." Stephen Lendman lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net lives in Chicago -------- iran Iran reopens nuclear research plant Iran says its nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes Wednesday 11 January 2006 Aljazeera http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/B2FBB0F1-208B-4547-87BC-F53EEAF44109.htm In defiance of protests from the West, Iran says it has removed UN seals at its nuclear facilities and resumed controversial research work. Mohammad Saeedi, the deputy head of the Atomic Energy Organisation of Iran, said on Tuesday that officials of the UN nuclear watchdog body had authorised the seals' removal on Monday night. "Today, with the powers delegated to IAEA inspectors in Iran, some of the seals that are in the field of only research were removed, and research facilities resume their work," Saeedi said. Inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) arrived in Tehran on Saturday to remove the seals put on the nuclear research sites more than two years ago. The IAEA confirmed that Iran has broken UN seals at the Natanz uranium enrichment plant, a move likely to add to tensions between Tehran and the West. "I can confirm that the Iranians have begun removing (UN) seals at Natanz in the presence of IAEA inspectors," IAEA spokeswoman Melissa Fleming said. Programme scope The move is likely to increase pressure on Iran from Western nations which have called for it to cease nuclear activities until an agreement has been reached on the scope of its nuclear programme. The latest Iranian move will add to tensions with the West Many Western nations, led by the US, say Tehran is using the Natanz facility and other plants as a cover for developing atomic weapons. Russia's parliament also expressed concern over the latest development. Constantine Kovatchev, chairman of the International Relations Committee, told Aljazeera that Moscow could reconsider its nuclear cooperation with Tehran. Iran, however, insists its nuclear programme is meant only for civilian purposes. Crucial difference Saeedi stressed that Iran was not resuming the production of nuclear fuel, a process that would involve uranium enrichment. "What we resume is merely in the field of research, not more than that," he said. "We make a difference between research on nuclear fuel technology and production of nuclear fuel. Production of nuclear fuel remains suspended." Tehran's drastic measure to resume nuclear fuel research drew instant reactions from across the world. Russian urged Iran to stick to its nuclear commitments and said it was concerned about Tehran's latest moves, Russian news agencies quoted Sergei Lavrov, the foreign minister, as saying. "The latest information that Iran has announced its intention in the near future to restart work connected with the enrichment of uranium provokes concern," Lavrov said. Britain condemned Iran and said the move put further negotiations with Britain, France and Germany at risk. Negative development "This is a very negative development and seriously jeopardises the negotiating process," said a spokesman for Britain's foreign office. "Britain, France, Germany and (EU foreign policy chief Javier) Solana's office are in close touch and we expect ministers to discuss next steps soon." France also took a dim view and said both Iran and North Korea would be making a serious error if they refused to engage with the West over the nuclear programme. "These countries would be committing a serious mistake if they did not take the hand that we are holding out to them," Jacques Chirac, the French president, said. Agencies ---- Iran risking nuclear escalation: US By Peter Mackler in Washington 11 jan 06 Australia Herald Sun http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,17789597%5E1702,00.html THE US overnight warned Iran against a "serious escalation" in their nuclear row and brandished the threat of UN action after Tehran said it had resumed sensitive atomic research. A senior US official said Washington was consulting with its allies and he raised the possibility of calling an emergency meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the UN nuclear watchdog. But there was no immediate sign of any further concrete response to Iran's move to remove IAEA seals from at least one research centre and resume work that US officials fear could lead to a nuclear bomb. The Islamic republic had agreed to suspend uranium enrichment more than two years ago pending negotiations with Britain, France and Germany on economic and other incentives to renounce any nuclear weapons ambitions. The White House reacted strongly to the IAEA report that Iran had lifted the seals on its Natanz research facility and was planning to do so at two other connected sites. "Any resumption of enrichment and reprocessing activities would be a further violation of Iran's agreements with the Europeans," spokesman Scott McClellan said. "Such steps would be a serious escalation of the nuclear issue." McClellan said the US administration was pursuing talks with Britain, France and Germany, the so-called EU-3. But he added that if Iran breaches its international obligations, "there's no other choice but to refer the matter" to the UN Security Council for possible sanctions. IAEA Director Mohamed ElBaradei said Iran, which insists its nuclear program is for electricity only, had told his agency it wants to restart centrifuges at Natanz to enrich uranium on a "small scale." Western countries reacted furiously. British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw called for a meeting with his French and German counterparts tomorrow and said referral of Iran to the UN Security Council would top the agenda. A senior US State Department official also said "there is a prospect" of an emergency meeting of the Vienna-based IAEA, whose board of governors is not normally due to meet again until March 6. "It's a bad move on their (the Iranians') part. It's a matter of serious concern," the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity. Gregory Schulte, the US ambassador to the IAEA, said earlier that Iran was "taking another deliberate step towards uranium enrichment, the process for creating nuclear bomb material." "By cutting the seals, the Iranian leadership shows its disdain for international concern and its rejection of international diplomacy," Schulte said. "The (Iranian) regime continues to choose confrontation over co-operation, a choice that deepens isolation of Iran and harms the interests of the Iranian people." The US has long pushed for UN action against Iran, but last March came out in support of the EU-3 efforts to negotiate a solution to the nuclear standoff. But Washington has stepped up its rhetoric against Iran in recent months and claims it has the votes within the IAEA to haul Tehran before the UN Security Council whenever it wants to. While the Americans had initially drawn a line at Iranian production of enriched uranium, they have said that a history of deceit and dissembling by Tehran made research activities unacceptable as well. "They shouldn't do it because it would really be a sign that they are not prepared to actually make diplomacy work," Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said last week. Russia has offered to conduct Iran's enrichment work on its own soil as a confidence-building measure, but Tehran has yet to take up the offer. It was an open question whether Russia and China, two permanent members of the UN Security Council with veto power, would support punitive action against Tehran. ---- News Analysis: West finds its options on Iran are limited International Herald Tribune By Steven R. Weisman The New York Times WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 11, 2006 http://iht.com/articles/2006/01/11/news/assess.php WASHINGTON - In ignoring international protests and pressing ahead with nuclear enrichment activities, Iran has ended hopes, at least for now, of resolving the crisis over its alleged nuclear arms ambitions and has also set in motion a confrontation with the West, diplomats involved in the process agree. But based on what European and American officials were saying and doing Wednesday, one day after Iran moved to break the internationally monitored seals on its nuclear facilities, it was unclear whether a consensus for sanctions could be formed, or that Iranian behavior would be changed even if new pressure were applied. A year ago, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice declared that "the time for diplomacy is now" when she encouraged European allies to negotiate with Iran. But now the Bush administration is in an awkward position of having few results from its negotiating gambit and few alternatives to change Iranian behavior. "I believe the West has played this game too late and played into Iranian hands," said Abbas Milani, director of Iranian studies at Stanford University. "At this stage, they are convinced that the more hard ball they play, the more the West will collapse." Milani said that reports of statements by Iranian officials suggest that Iran has not only been using the last few years to sign up oil deals with countries around the world to shield themselves against sanctions, they also have been stockpiling food, medicine and other materials to be able to survive at least three years of sanctions. Nevertheless, American and European officials say that two years of trying to negotiate with Iran, and offering incentives for Tehran to abandon its nuclear programs, may not have changed Iranian behavior - but at least these efforts have brought a measure of unanimity in the West for applying new pressure now that talks have failed. Bush administration officials indicate that they plan to take the next phase of pressure step by step, perhaps starting with a referral of Iran's case by the International Atomic Energy Agency to the United Nations Security Council, and then discussing passage of some sort of condemnation of Iran before the imposition of sanctions. Vice President Dick Cheney, in an interview with Fox News, said Wednesday that the United States would seek adoption of "a resolution that could be enforced by sanctions were they to fail to comply with it." Among the possibilities being discussed, officials said, were a ban on travel by Iranian diplomats, restrictions on commercial contracts or sports contests and other small steps falling short of what would be the toughest sanction of all - either a ban on oil purchases or on the export of refined gasoline to Iran. One school of thought holds that symbolic steps might have an impact. "A lot of what can be done is simply related to Iran's status in the world," said Mitchell Reiss, a policy planning director at the State Department in the first Bush term. "The Iranians are very sensitive to challenges to their own legitimacy, and there are a lot of things you can do before bringing down the hammer big time." But others are less sure of such a course of action, even within the Bush administration. "I've been surprised that so many people are acting like referral to the Security Council is some important event that will bring about change in government of Iran," said an administration official, asking not to be identified. "I don't buy it." For the time being, there is no talk of military action, except hypothetically, in part because any kind of air strike or covert attempt to destroy Iran's nuclear facilities by the United States, Israel or anyone else would still provoke a counter-reaction, Western diplomats agree. The key to what the United States does next is still Russia and China. Russia has been surprisingly tough on Iran in the last 24 hours, in part because it was embarrassed that its own offer of a joint effort to enrich uranium on Russian soil, as an alternative to Iran's activities, was treated dismissively by Iran. China is considered likely to go along with sanctions if Russia does. But Iran has not been complacent in the last two years while conducting negotiations with the West. It has signed oil contracts with Russia, China and other countries to try to head off the possibility of the West playing the energy card. Various diplomats said that while Russia has sounded supportive of some action against Iran, they expect Moscow to try to delay any quick action. European and American officials are hoping to agree on Thursday to a meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency by the end of January. "What we try to do is not the same as what will happen," said the administration official. "We can try to get a condemnation with preliminary sanctions, but the Russians and the Chinese are a problem." If the Iranians were fearful of economic threats, some Europeans suggested, they might have been better persuaded than they have been with some of the economic threats that were made over the last six months. For example, Britain, France and Germany persuaded the Bush administration to let them offer discussions on trade preferences, and aircraft spare parts, if Iran agreed to suspend its nuclear enrichment activities and agreed in principle to ending such activities outright over the long term. Iran is believed to need the spare parts desperately. There have been at least two military plane crashes in the last month, one of them earlier this week, in which a large number of top Revolutionary Guard figures were reported killed. Last month, more than 100 people died in a crash and Mohammad Khatami, Iran's former president, accused the United States of criminal conduct in not selling new planes and parts to Iran. "They need us - after all they're planes are dropping out of the skies," said a European diplomat. But he added that it was too soon to say if Iran would act on those needs as opposed to its determination that for status and security, it needs a nuclear weapons program. ---- World powers threaten defiant Iran over nuclear crisis VIENNA, (AFP) Jan 11, 2006 http://www.spacewar.com/2006/060111183359.30ygf81j.html World powers threatened Iran with UN Security Council sanctions Wednesday after it resumed sensitive nuclear activities as a defiant Tehran vowed to press ahead with its disputed atomic programme. British Prime Minister Tony Blair said an emergency meeting Thursday of an EU troika in Berlin would weigh up its response to the crisis but that it was "likely" to end in Iran's referral to the UN body. It followed the Islamic republic's declaration Tuesday that it was ending a two-year suspension of nuclear fuel research, sparking a furious reaction from the United States, the European Union and a host of other countries. Russia, which has been a frequent ally of Iran over its nuclear programme, hardened its rhetoric, saying the resumption was "cause for alarm." Central to the concerns of the international community is that Tehran could be trying to develop atomic weapons, a charge Iran strongly denies, insisting the programme is for entirely civilian purposes. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad vowed not to be intimidated by the "fuss" and said he hoped atomic energy would soon "serve the progress" of the country. "I am telling all the powers that the Iranian nation and government, with firmness and wisdom, will continue its path in seeking and utilizing peaceful nuclear energy," he told supporters in the southern city of Bandar Abbas. "In the path of nuclear energy, we have started (nuclear fuel) research and God willing, in the near future this energy in its entirety will serve the Iranian nation." Iran's influential former president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani was even more forthright. "With wisdom we will get our rights, and if they create any trouble for us, they will regret it in the end and Iran will emerge triumphant," said the head of the Expediency Council, Iran's top political arbitration body. The meeting in Berlin will gather the foreign ministers of Britain, France and Germany, which have been negotiating with Iran over its programme. "The first thing to do is to secure agreement for a reference to theSecurity Council, if that is indeed what the allies jointly decide, as I think seems likely," Blair told the British parliament. German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier said the participants would consult afterward with US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice by telephone. He said the purpose was to decide whether there was still "political room to maneuver" between the European troika and Tehran. "If the regime in Iran continues on the current course ... there is no other choice but to refer the matter to the (UN) Security Council," said White House spokesman Scott McClellan. Referral to the UN Security Council normally pass through the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). US officials had privately made no secret of their skepticism over the EU's negotiating efforts, but now appear convinced that Washington's tactic of letting the talks run their course has borne fruit in highlighting Tehran's intransigence. A Western diplomat in Vienna said there was talk of a special board meeting of IAEA governors in about two weeks. Tehran upped the stakes in its lengthy confrontation with the international community Tuesday when it broke the seals at its Natanz nuclear plant in order to resume research into uranium enrichment. Seals there and at two other plants were being broken, the IAEA confirmed, with IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei saying Iran had explained that it planned to start "small-scale" uranium enrichment at Natanz. Enriched uranium can be used to power nuclear power stations but, in highly enriched form, can be used also for atomic weapons. Russian Defence Minister Sergei Ivanov declined to speculate on whether the growing confrontation would lead to action by the Security Council, but said things were not moving in a positive direction for anyone. Acting Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert argued Iran should be referred to the UN body "as soon as possible." Olmert said that the Jewish state was "concerned about developments in Iran including statements by its leaders regarding Israel," his office reported him as saying in reference to recent remarks by Ahmadinejad questioning its right to exist. -------- iraq / inspections Spurious attempt to tie Iran, Iraq to nuclear arms plot bypassed U.S. intelligence channels Larisa Alexandrovna Published: January 11, 2006 Raw Story http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Backchannels_used_to_bypass_U.S._government_0111.html Update: Retired Paris CIA station chief Bill Murray confirms and corrects. Several U.S. and foreign intelligence sources, along with investigators, say an Iranian exile with ties to Iran-Contra peddled a bizarre tale of stolen uranium to governments on both sides of the Atlantic in the spring and summer of 2003. The story that was peddled -- which detailed how an Iranian intelligence team infiltrated Iraq prior to the start of the war in March of 2003, and stole enriched uranium to use in their own nuclear weapons program -- was part of an attempt to implicate both countries in a WMD plot. It later emerged that the Iranian exile was trying to collect money for his tales, sources say. By all credible accounts, the source of this dubious tale was Manucher Ghorbanifar, an Iranian arms dealer who used middle-men and cut-outs to create the appearance of several sources. Ghorbanifar played a key role in the Iran-Contra scandal that threatened to take down the Reagan administration, in which the U.S. sold arms to Iran and diverted the proceeds to Nicaraguan militants. While the various threads of the larger story of Ghorbanifar and his intelligence peddling began in December of 2001, meetings in Paris in 2003 are far more important in illustrating -- as a microcosm -- the larger difficulties faced in untangling the facts relating to global intelligence trafficking. Tall Tale of Uranium During the spring and summer of 2003, Congressman Curt Weldon (R-PA) made several visits to Paris to meet with a source believed to have important military intelligence information. Unbeknownst to Weldon, the informant, who he would dub simply "Ali," was already peddling a tale of stolen uranium traveling between Iraq and Iran that had been deemed false by most intelligence agencies. As reported by American Prospect and confirmed by intelligence sources, Ali is a pseudonym used to identify a former minister in the Shah's Iran, Fereidoun Mahdavi. Mahdavi himself is a secretary to Ghorbanifar, the originating source of the uranium fable. The American Prospect's reporters wrote, "'Ali' is actually a cipher for Manucher Ghorbanifar, the notorious Iranian arms dealer and accused intelligence fabricator -- and the potential instrument of another potentially dangerous manipulation of American policy in the Persian Gulf region." The Washington Post discusses Ali as follows: "'These secrets,' he says, come from 'an impeccable clandestine source,' whom Weldon code-names 'Ali,' an Iranian exile living in Paris who is a close associate of Manucher Gorbanifar. Gorbanifar is a well-known Iranian exile whom the CIA branded as a fabricator during the 1980s but who was used by the Reagan White House as a middleman for the arms-for-hostages deal with Iran." According to several intelligence sources on both sides of the Atlantic, the tale that "Ali" tells Weldon and others was as intricate as it was false. "Ali provided information that indicated Iranian intelligence had sent a team to Baghdad to extract highly enriched uranium (weapons grade) from a stockpile hidden by Saddam Hussein," one intelligence source said. Ali asserted that an Iranian intelligence team had infiltrated Iraq prior to the start of the war and stole enriched uranium to use in their own nuclear weapons program, sources say. Ghorbanifar said "the team successfully extracted the stockpile but on the way back to Iran contracted radiation poisoning," one source remarked. Upon learning this information Weldon says that he immediately notified then-CIA director George Tenet. "Tenet appeared interested, even enthusiastic about evaluating Ali and establishing a working relationship with him," Weldon wrote in his book, Countdown to Terror. "He agreed to send his top spy, Stephen Kappes, the deputy director of operations, along with me to Paris for another debriefing of Ali. "On the day of our scheduled second meeting with Ali in Paris, Kappes bowed out, claiming that "other commitments" compelled him to cancel," Weldon continued. "Later, the CIA claimed to have met with Ali independently. But I discovered this to be untrue... Incredibly, I learned that the CIA had apparently asked French intelligence to silence Ali." But according to the Prospect and several sources in intelligence abroad, the CIA did investigate, as did the Department of Defense. According to the Post, the agency tasked then-Paris station chief Bill Murray with investigating the claim, who ultimately found Ali to be a "fabricator." The CIA, understanding Ali to be Ghorbanifar, did not think him a credible source. Intelligence sources and a source close to the UN Security Council tell RAW STORY Murray took Ali (either Ghorbanifar or his agent) to Iraq in order to retrace the footsteps of the alleged mission in which the uranium was stolen from Saddam's own stockpile and taken back to Iran. In the end, sources say, the entire event proved a wild goose chase because Ali's earlier clarity all but evaporated. "Soon it became apparent that Ali and his sources were fabricators and were trying to extract large sums of money," one intelligence source said. Murray says he did meet with the source, but was not part of a trip to Iraq. "I did not make any such trip," Murray said. "I met with the source, found that he was not credible, forwarded the information he gave us to Washington, where it was thoroughly analyzed by many people and found not to add anything new to what we knew about Iran. The sensational charges that the source made could not be substantiated." Weldon's office declined to comment for the record after several extended conversations. RAW STORY delayed the article for a day to give Weldon's office a chance to comment. The neoconservative movement has long expressed an inherent distrust of the CIA. Many neoconservatives note that the agency undercounted Russia's nuclear stockpile in the waning days of the Soviet Union, and believe that it routinely underestimates foreign threats. Weldon, who had been led to believe the CIA never opened an investigation into the information he provided, took his case directly to Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. Rumsfeld then pressured the CIA to investigate further. "CIA reluctantly, after pressure from Rumsfeld, followed up by detaching one of their weapons experts from the team that was hunting WMD in Iraq," one former CIA officer who asked to remain anonymous said. Sources say that this second investigation resulted in another wild goose chase. The question of motive, however, seems to either have been entirely missed or simply glossed over. Weldon seen caught in web By all accounts, Weldon seems to be more of an innocent bystander taken in by an internationally known con-man and the lure of spook-like activities than an inside player with an agenda or material participant in these events. The Ali composite seems to have used Weldon as a conduit by which to provide the CIA with information. There was good reason to be cautious of Manucher Ghorbanifahr, who, along with his secretary, made up the "cipher" of Ali. The CIA had already had issued two burn notices against Ghorbanifahr as early as 1984 and his role in Iran-Contra as a middleman between the hardline neoconservative and another Iran-Contra figure, Michael Ledeen. In his book, Weldon said he met Ghorbanifahr after being approached by a Democratic congressman. "On March 7, 2003, a former Democratic member of Congress and my good friend Ron Klink called and asked to meet with me. . . . The source was Ali. My contacts with him were at first by telephone. Subsequently, Ali sent faxes to my home on a regular basis from different hotels in Paris, where he lives in exile. Eventually, as the information became more detailed and critical, I decided on a face-to-face meeting." (Countdown to Terror, p. 4). Why such highly important information would be provided to Klink and then Weldon as opposed to the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee remains unclear. Neoconservative Leeden explains meetings Ghorbanifahr has strong ties to Michael Ledeen, and both of them were involved in a controversial meeting in Rome of 2001. That meeting, whose purpose is unknown, included high level officials in Italian intelligence, Iranian nationals and Larry Franklin, a former Defense Department analyst who current pled guilty to charges of passing classified information to Israel and Iran. Also in attendance was Middle East expert Harold Rhode, also under investigation for charges of passing classified information to Israel and Iran. Both Rhode and Franklin worked for Feith in the Office of Special plans. Ledeen was consulting for OSP when all three were dispatched to Rome in 2001. He says the meetings had nothing to do with Iraq. "The Rome meetings had nothing whatsoever to do with Iraq, but with Iran and Afghanistan," Ledeen wrote in an email. "I don't think a single word was pronounced, by anyone, on Iraq." Later, in a phone conversation, Ledeen explained that the Rome meeting had to do with what his sources told him was going on on the ground in Afghanistan, namely that Iran was allegedly fueling the Afghan insurgency. "I reported this back," Ledeen said. "This information saved American lives." According to James Risen's New York Times article dated December of 2003, Ledeen was a paid consultant to the National Security Council at the time of the meeting. Risen reports that National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley was informed of the plans for the meeting and that Hadley expressed reservations given Ledeen and Ghorbanifahr's background. The Office of Special Plans, however, authorized the meeting without notifying any other agency, violating protocol. They did not notify the Rome CIA station chief or the U.S. Ambassador to Italy, Mel Sembler. Ledeen, however, says that Hadley had authorized the trip. This would also implicate Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, then-National Security Advisor. "Hadley authorized it and he could not have done so without reporting it to his direct superior," said Ledeen. Ledeen also denies that he had anything to do beyond that first meeting in December of 2001. "I was involved in one meeting, in Rome, in December 2001," Leeden said. "Period." Paris, Again The uranium story peddled to Weldon is strikingly similar to the story told to Ledeen. "I approached a variety of government officials, lots of them, and told them that I had a reliable source that told me about how and where the Iranians stole enriched uranium from Iraq," Ledeen said. Ledeen says his source then went on to explain that the "stash" was buried in an underground facility and recounted, much like Weldon did, that neither the CIA, the Defense Department or the State Department would listen to his concerns. Asked if his source was Ghorbanifahr, Ledeen said "No," but was unable to tell the identity of his source for fear said source might be "put in danger." Who arranged the meetings and their ultimate purpose remains unclear. One intelligence official, however, described the series of events and the market of intelligence trafficking as follows: "If you were going to launder intel to make up a war, you could easily send some fool on an errand." -------- japan Japan to buy 36 missiles by 2010 The Japan Times: Jan. 11, 2006 http://www.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/getarticle.pl5?nn20060111a8.htm SASEBO, Nagasaki Pref. (Kyodo) Japan plans to purchase 36 missiles from the United States between 2007 and 2010 for deployment on Aegis-equipped destroyers under the missile defense program, government sources said Tuesday. The Defense Agency plans to conduct a joint test with the U.S. around 2008 in Hawaii for one of the Standard Missile 3 interceptors by deploying it on the destroyer Kongo, which is equipped with the advanced Aegis air-defense system, the sources said. The agency hopes to complete SM-3 deployment on the Kongo by the end of 2007. Following the Kongo, the agency plans to install them on the Chokai, the Myoko and the Kirishima, the sources said. Japan plans to purchase around nine SM-3s a year during the period, but the details have yet to be decided, the sources said. The Defense Agency will also consider installing the missile defense system on two destroyers now being built in Nagasaki. The Cabinet gave the green light late last month to proceed with joint development of a next-generation missile interceptor with the United States. The development is the followup of a six-year joint-research phase of a project to produce an advanced model of the SM-3 interceptor. The agency will initially establish a missile defense shield with conventional SM-3s, the agency sources said. Tokyo and Washington launched the joint missile defense research in 1999 after North Korea test-fired a long-range missile in 1998, part of which flew over the Japanese archipelago and into the Pacific. Japan also plans to begin deploying the surface-to-air Patriot Advanced Capability 3 component of the missile defense system by March 2007. -------- russia Nuclear capability crucial to Russia - defense minister 17:52 11/ 01/ 2006 (RIA Novosti) http://en.rian.ru/onlinenews/20060111/42950900.html MOSCOW, January 11 - Russia does not intend to give up its nuclear capability, which still has a key role in defending its national interests, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov said Wednesday in an article published by the Wall Street Journal. "We have always honored our commitments and will do so in the future, including those made in line with treaties and agreements with the U.S. on reductions and limitations of strategic offensive weapons, which stipulate a reduction of our nuclear capability to 1,700-2,200 warheads," Sergei Ivanov said in the article. "At the same time, Russia does not intend to give up its nuclear capability, as it is still a key deterrent and a crucial instrument in protecting its national interests and achieving certain political goals." Russia always sought to avoid conflict through non-military means, Ivanov said. But he added that more challenges were emerging to Russia's national security, and that the potential for instability in some countries of the former Soviet Union, together with the attempts of some countries and organizations to obtain weapons of mass destruction, could pose further threats in the future. Russia has to "maintain and develop a strategic deterrent capability minimally sufficient for the guaranteed repulsion of contemporary and future military threats," Ivanov said. Ivanov listed a series of new missiles that Russia has recently deployed or that it plans to deploy in the near future, but added, "Needless to say, these are not aimed at any particular target." On the subject of a modern fighting force for the country, Ivanov said the best option was "a mobile force in which the air, and probably space component will be a decisive factor in success." "In short, Russia needs a military ready to deal with an armed conflict of any conceivable kind and prevent any aggression or power play against us and our allies," he said. -------- security Nuclear detection office starts new round of domestic tests By Joe Fiorill, Global Security Newswire, January 11, 2006 http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?articleid=33158&dcn=todaysnews The Domestic Nuclear Detection Office this month is conducting its second major series of equipment tests, examining the performance of portable devices in detecting radiation sources ranging from common industrial materials to plutonium. After testing fixed portal-type monitors in October, the Homeland Security Department office this week began a monthlong series of tests on existing and "next-generation" portable detectors. In particular, the office is trying to learn about the devices' range and their ability to identify various threats. "A critical component of the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office's program is high-fidelity testing and evaluation using test objects and configurations representative of actual threats," office Director Vayl Oxford said in a release. "Characterization of detection systems will provide for more-educated acquisition and deployment decisions." Nuclear materials used in the tests will include plutonium and highly enriched uranium, office spokeswoman Tracy Tiell said in an interview this week. The office is testing hand-held, backpack and vehicle-mounted detectors, Tiell said. "The hand-held and the backpacks will ... have a conveyance of material that will go by on the test track in front of these detectors. There are also the mobile units - the vehicles, vans in this case, will drive by a source, whether it's special nuclear material or just a common industrial product," she said. All detectors being tested this month are of the passive variety, Tiell said. Passive detectors work by sensing radiation emitted naturally by sources, while active detectors externally stimulate radiation. The tests are being conducted at the office's testing ground within the Energy Department's remote Nevada Test Site. -------- space Green light for plutonium Pluto probe By Jim Erickson, Rocky Mountain News January 11, 2006 http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_4378752,00.html The White House has granted approval to launch NASA's plutonium-powered Pluto probe Jan. 17. The go-ahead clears one of the last hurdles facing the New Horizons spacecraft, which will launch from Florida on a Colorado-built Lockheed Martin Atlas V rocket. New Horizons' electrical power comes from a single radioisotope thermoelectric generator. Because the RTG contains 24 pounds of plutonium dioxide, the launch required "nuclear safety launch approval" from John Marburger, director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. Marburger signed the approval Jan. 3, then forwarded it to NASA headquarters, spokesman Donald Tighe said Tuesday. An RTG is not a nuclear reactor and does not rely on nuclear fission or fusion. Instead, it provides power through the natural radioactive decay of plutonium - mainly plutonium-238, a non-weapons-grade form. NASA says the probability of a New Horizons launch-area accident that would release plutonium is about 1 in 350. RTGs have been used on 24 U.S. missions over the past 40 years. The public is invited to see the Pluto launch and the return of NASA's Stardust capsule at the Denver Museum of Nature & Science. Stardust, built in Colorado by Lockheed Martin Space Systems, traveled seven years and nearly 3 billion miles to bring back thousands of dust grains from a comet. It is set to parachute to the Utah salt flats at 3:12 a.m. MST on Sunday, Jan. 15. -------- ukraine Russian nuclear power agency head to visit Ukraine soon - source 15:59 11/ 01/ 2006 (RIA Novosti) http://en.rian.ru/articles/20060111/42946939.html MOSCOW, January 11 - The head of the Russian Federal Agency for Nuclear Power, Sergei Kiriyenko, will soon pay a visit to Ukraine, a source in the Russian government said Wednesday. The source added that acting Ukrainian Prime Minister Yuriy Yekhanurov would visit Moscow in the near future on a presidential invitation. Russian President Vladimir Putin said that during a meeting held with Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko in Kazakhstan on Wednesday, Russian-Ukrainian cooperation in the peaceful use of nuclear energy was discussed. "This cooperation has strong potential since Russia and Ukraine have huge capabilities in science and production," Putin said. Putin also said that he expected the acting Ukrainian prime minister, Yuriy Yekhanurov, in Moscow soon. The Ukrainian parliament dismissed Yekhanurov's government Tuesday. -------- u.s. nuc facilities -------- california Supervisors will send letter urging state to study nuclear waste They say a study is necessary because long-term storage for high-level radioactive waste is unresolved By David Sneed The San Luis Obispo Tribune Wed, Jan. 11, 2006 http://www.sanluisobispo.com/mld/sanluisobispo/13599704.htm County supervisors Tuesday unanimously approved sending a letter encouraging the state Energy Commission to study the implications for California of the federal government's failure so far to open a central storage facility for high-level radioactive waste. The letter tells state energy regulators that the county is ready to work with state and federal agencies and Pacific Gas and Electric Co. "to plan for our state's energy needs and decreas(e) our county's risks from a radioactive release due to an act of terrorism, malice or insanity or to earthquake or age-related accidents." Supervisor Shirley Bianchi proposed sending the letter at the behest of San Luis Obispo-based Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility. It's also an offshoot of a two-day Energy Commission workshop held last summer in Sacramento to study the future of nuclear power in the state. Rochelle Becker, executive director of the alliance group, said the state will need about $400,000 to complete the study. She is working to line up funding for the study among legislators statewide. The state needs to do the study, the supervisors concluded, because a proposed federal underground storage facility at Yucca Mountain in the Nevada desert will not open in the foreseeable future, if ever. As a result, PG&E is building a dry cask storage facility behind Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant that has the capacity to hold all of the used fuel the plant will generate through 2025. "Clearly, our problem is not going away anytime soon; our options are few," said David Weisman, president of the alliance group. Eight public speakers endorsed sending the letter, and the topic generated scant discussion among the supervisors. The only area of disagreement was whether the letter should contain four quotes from U.S. senators and Yucca Mountain consultants intended to demonstrate that the future of the Yucca Mountain is questionable. PG&E asked that the quotes be taken out because two of them were from opponents of Yucca Mountain, including Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and served to politicize the letter. Bianchi agreed to have the quotes removed, and the letter will be sent without them. David Sneed covers environmental issues for The Tribune. E-mail story ideas and comments to him at dsneed@the tribunenews.com -------- illinois The competitive edge Published January 11, 2006 Chicago Tribune http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-0601110140jan11,1,4398752.story?ctrack=1&cset=true For 60 years, some of the country's most specialized and important science has gone on quietly on 1,500 wooded acres in DuPage County. Established after World War II to develop nuclear energy as a civilian power source, Argonne National Laboratory has been run by the University of Chicago for the federal government ever since. When the contract expires in September, though, the university will have to compete for it for the first time. Disgusted over management and security problems at Los Alamos National Laboratory, the nuclear weapons facility where the atomic bomb was created in 1945, Congress has ordered contracts on five of the nation's energy labs opened to bidding as they expire. This is a good idea. The labs have been run by various universities under no-bid contracts since they were founded, all more than a half-century ago. Lack of competition can lead to complacency and mismanagement, a particularly unsettling environment in which to make nuclear weapons. For decades, concerns about safety, security and financial problems at Los Alamos were trumped by its long history of scientific excellence. Run by the University of California since 1943, the lab had been cited repeatedly for problems, including missing documents, multimillion-dollar cost overruns and the unexplained loss of millions of dollars in equipment. Then in 2004, the reported disappearance of two computer disks containing classified information caused a public uproar. It took weeks to determine that the disks never existed. The five-month stand-down that followed cost taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars and prompted Congress, finally, to put its foot down. Early last year, the Department of Energy set out to find a better manager for Los Alamos. That better manager turned out to be ... the University of California. Its scientific track record--and its new alliance with Bechtel National and other corporate partners--overcame a strong challenge from a Lockheed Martin-University of Texas team. The university kept its contract, but only after raising its game. From the beginning, the DOE said the lab contracts would be awarded based on good science and sound financial management, in that order. It said nothing about politics. But inevitably politics will play a role with millions of dollars in government contracts at stake. Already the University of Chicago has hired Washington lobbyists to defend its contract to run Argonne. Some members of the Illinois congressional delegation have been enlisted to lean on the DOE. The U. of C. has also partnered with Northwestern University and the University of Illinois to strengthen its bid. Potential competitors, especially those for whom this would be a money-making venture, are likely to hire lobbyists of their own. As things heat up, the DOE should remember its priorities: Science first. Under the stewardship of the University of Chicago, the work done at Argonne has made Illinois a world leader in nuclear research and a magnet for some of the finest scientific minds on the planet, with no hint of the mismanagement and scandal that have plagued Los Alamos. As long as this decision is based on merit, not politics, the University of Chicago should have no trouble making its case. -------- missouri Environmental groups seek disclosure of AmerenUE plans for Callaway Nuclear Plant By ALAN SCHER ZAGIER Associated Press Writer Wednesday, Jan 11, 2006 http://www.newstribune.com/articles/2006/01/11/business/0011105030.txt A coalition of environmental groups is challenging the confidentiality of a 20-year-plan filed by utility company AmerenUE with Missouri regulators. In an appeal filed Jan. 3 with the state Public Service Commission, the St. Louis-based Great Rivers Environmental Law Center argues that AmerenUE's customers have a right to know about possible expansion plans, including a potential second reactor at the utility's Callaway Nuclear Plant. "This is in the public interest. The public pays their rates," said Henry Robertson, an attorney with the environmental law center. "They have an interest in knowing how (the utility) is going to meet its demand." AmerenUE filed its 3,700-page Integrated Resource Plan with the state in December, classifying the entire document as "highly confidential." That designation allows the company to limit who sees the report - and for good reason, an AmerenUE official said Tuesday. "There's proprietary information that relates to market conditions," said company spokesman Mike Cleary. "From a competitive standpoint, it's appropriate for it not to be in the public domain." As a legal intervener in the case, Robertson is entitled to review the utility plan. So are attorneys for the state Department of Natural Resources and Noranda Aluminum Inc., which also intervened. But those attorneys must sign nondisclosure agreements, noted Robertson. His law firm represents the Sierra Club, Missouri Coalition for the Environment, Mid-Missouri Peaceworks and the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN. Robertson acknowledged the utility has a legitimate interest in protecting its trade secrets but said AmerenUE should be required to specify what parts of the massive document are private rather than receive a blanket exemption from disclosure. In its application for confidentiality, the utility said its reasons for seeking the designation are "too numerous to list here." "Coal, nuclear energy, energy efficiency programs, pollution control technology - these are all public matters," Robertson said. Speaking to Columbia business leaders last month, Ameren CEO Gary Rainwater said the company was "seriously considering" a second reactor unit at its Callaway County plant near Fulton. St. Louis-based Ameren Corp., the parent company, serves about 2.3 million electric customers and 925,000 natural gas customers in Missouri and Illinois. Its AmerenUE subsidiary operates the Callaway plant, which generates about 12 percent of the company's electricity power. -------- new jersey Feds Scrutinize Nuclear Plant over Alert Failure Jan 11, 2006 7:48 am US/Eastern (1010 WINS) http://1010wins.com/topstories/local_story_011074857.html (LACEY TOWNSHIP, N.J.) Federal regulators say they'll keep closer tabs on the Oyster Creek nuclear plant in Ocean County. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission says the plant never declared an unusual event alert in August when sea grass built up, leading to a lower flow of water used to cool the plant. The NRC says the plant's failure to issue an alert could have slowed an emergency response had the situation worsened. An unusual event is the lowest of four emergency levels. Typically, an emergency response team is mobilized to assist plant operators when an alert is issued. Oyster Creek's owner has asked the NRC to renew its license, which is due to expire in 2009. -------- new mexico Nuke plant worker faces hacking charges Second hacker encounter for Los Alamos By John Leyden UK Register Published Thursday 11th January 2001 15:07 GMT http://www.theregister.co.uk/2001/01/11/nuke_plant_worker_faces_hacking/ A worker at a top secret US nuclear weapons research facility has been arrested on charges of computer hacking and witness interference. According to a report by Reuters, all the charges against Jerome Heckenkamp relate to offences committed before the suspect started working at the sensitive facility in Los Alamos, New Mexico, in June last year. The news agency quotes unnamed sources at Los Alamos who state there is no evidence that "any sensitive nuclear secrets had been compromised". After a tip off from the FBI that charges were in the pipeline the source said that the Lab made sure Heckenkamp had no access, either electronically or otherwise, to sensitive material. The 21 year-old was arrested on an indictment that charges he was involved in a spate of hacking attacks between February and November 1999 whilst a student at the University of Wisconsin. He is charged with computer intrusions and the interception of electronic communications, as well as offences relating to alleged attempts to persuade a witness to withhold testimony about his alleged offences. Operating under the name "MagicFX" and "Magic", Heckenkamp is suspected of defacing eBay.com and breaking into the computer systems of Exodus Communications, Juniper Networks and Lycos. Heckenkamp, who faces a 16-count charge, has been detained in federal custody pending further hearings. Earlier this week leaked documents revealed that a security patrolman is believed to have hacked his way into computer networks at the Bradwell nuclear reactor in Essex, raising the chilling spectre of nuclear related cyber-terrorism. Both BNFL in the UK and Los Alamos have pledged to tighten security procedures, particularly related to the vetting of employees. Tighter procedures are certainly needed, particularly in at Los Alamos, which has previous cause to regret its hiring policies. In December 1999 Los Alamos lab physicist Wen Ho Lee was arrested on charges of downloading nuclear weapons designs and the temporary disappearance of two computer hard drives containing nuclear secrets. Originally suspected at being a spy, Lee eventually pleaded guilty to a felony charge relating to the downloading of nuclear weapons secrets. -------- ohio FirstEnergy lists upgrades to nuclear unit By TOM HENRY TOLEDO BLADE STAFF WRITER Wednesday, January 11, 2006 http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060111/NEWS17/601110393/-1/NEWS SHIPPINGPORT, Pa. - As anticipation builds over the outcome of a two-year criminal probe into the near-rupture of Davis-Besse's old reactor head, FirstEnergy Corp. yesterday spent three hours here updating the Nuclear Regulatory Commission on systemwide improvements being made throughout the utility's nuclear division. NRC officials said they generally were satisfied by what they heard, though they still have reservations about FirstEnergy's ability to diagnose its own problems. But unlike the recent past, the driving force for the agency's concerns isn't Davis-Besse. It is a series of performance issues that have led to increased oversight at the utility's Perry nuclear plant east of Cleveland. FirstEnergy also operates the two-unit Beaver Valley nuclear complex in western Pennsylvania, near the Ohio line. Yesterday's meeting, held at a nuclear training facility outside of the Beaver Valley complex, was the second presentation FirstEnergy has made to the NRC about a fleet approach the company began using in 2004 to consolidate operations and manage all three of its operating sites with more consistency. A systemwide, streamlined approach was enacted largely in response to staffing cuts FirstEnergy has been coping with in light of competition from electricity deregulation and other economic pressures. The NRC has jurisdiction only over the performance of individual plants, not a company's fleet performance. About 65 people attended, including Ottawa County Administrator Jerry Witt and one of that county's commissioners, Steve Arndt. "It's very clear to us this is not the FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Co. [FirstEnergy's nuclear subsidiary] of 2001 or 2002," Gary Leidich, president of the operating company, told a five-member panel of NRC officials from the agency's Midwest and Northeast regions. "We're not looking back at our past. We're looking forward." It was an obvious reference to problems of national significance that were associated with Davis-Besse's old reactor head as well as the plant's design flaws and performance issues. All had to be corrected before the utility gained the NRC's trust to restart the plant in March, 2004, after a record two-year outage. Nuclear plants throughout the country have been replacing their old reactor heads at a cost of millions to avoid running into the same kind of corrosion problem that plagued Davis-Besse. The NRC has said Davis-Besse's old reactor head was so thinned out from rust it could have burst open with radioactive steam, resulting in the nation's most dangerous situation with a commercial nuclear plant since the partial meltdown of the Three Mile Island nuclear plant near Harrisburg, Pa., in 1979. But NRC officials yesterday confirmed that Davis-Besse's turnaround continues. No major safety issues have arisen since the plant went back online in 2004. None is expected to be identified when it is shut down for its normal two-year refueling in March, officials said. Mark Satorius, director of reactor projects for the NRC's Midwest region, and Christine Lipa, who supervises NRC resident inspectors in that region, told The Blade after the meeting that four independent evaluations performed by outside experts in 2005 showed clear, tangible progress at Davis-Besse. Nothing was said during the meeting about the possibility of an indictment either against FirstEnergy or some of its past or current employees for events that led up to the discovery of the dangerously thin reactor head. But in a U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filing a little more than a year ago, the utility acknowledged being notified that criminal charges of some kind were likely to be filed. Contact Tom Henry at: thenry@theblade.com or 419-724-6079. -------- texas Support for Andrews reactor comes from Midland, Odessa Ruth Campbell Staff Writer Midland Reporter-Telegram 01/11/2006 http://www.mywesttexas.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=15906870&BRD=2288&PAG=461&dept_id=475626&rfi=6 As the site of Waste Control Specialists, a low-level radioactive storage site, Andrews County has a history in dealing with issues nuclear. This makes it the right place for a proposed high-temperature teaching and test reactor, Midland Chamber of Commerce President John Breier said. Breier was one of many officials and residents attending Tuesday's forum on the reactor at the Center for Energy and Economic Diversification (CEED) Building. The gathering, which featured presentations from General Atomics, University of Texas of the Permian Basin and Kirk Edwards, was hosted by the Midland and Odessa chambers of commerce. Edwards and Grant Billingsley, manager of public affairs for Wagner & Brown Ltd., are raising funds for a preconceptual design for the reactor project, which will include a business plan and other details. "The whole reason this became possible for this area is all Andrews has been doing to go through the process to become familiar with the nuclear industry," Breier said. Andrews first started doing community due diligence on Waste Control more than 10 years ago so the community understands nuclear energy, he said. Waste Control sits next to Louisiana Energy Services' proposed uranium enrichment facility in Lea County, N.M. "It's not at all about not wanting it in our backyard," he said. Odessa Chamber President and Chief Executive Officer Mike George said this is an Andrews project. "We support Andrews as a regional project. This wasn't our project to start with," he said. George said the reactor could bring the region many benefits. It would have an operating budget of more than $60 million annually and "the ongoing long-term economic benefit would continue to grow and grow." "The spin-off businesses that could develop from this could make that growth multiply by many times," George said. Midland Mayor Mike Canon said he was in "listening mode" Tuesday, but found the presentation "interesting" and "intriguing." "It seems to offer a potential alternative to energy production that West Texas could be involved in. That merits consideration by our communities," Canon said. "I think the fact that we've already got some nuclear projects under way along the Texas-New Mexico border makes it a natural location for something like this." "In that context, it makes more sense to me to locate it there rather than Midland County, or certainly within the city itself," he added. U.S. Rep. Mike Conaway, R-Midland, attended the forum on the spur of the moment. He said he may be able to help once Andrews decides it wants the project. "They're a lot further along than last time I had a briefing with them," Conaway said. He said he has encouraged the fundraisers to keep pushing. In this second of two forums, there has been little opposition but there were questions Tuesday about waste from the reactor. Ector County Commissioner Barbara Graff asked where the waste would be stored and what would happen to it. General Atomics Vice President Mike Campbell of San Diego, Calif., said the amount of waste would depend on the size of the reactor and how long it runs, items that would be part of the preconceptual design. For example, if you ran it for a year on 100 pounds of uranium, it would produce 100 pounds of waste. Campbell said the half-life of the waste would range from fractions of a year to "many, many years." Mark Haynes, vice president for energy development from the Washington office, said the waste would be stored on-site initially then shipped to a federal storage location, which could be Yucca Mountain, Nev. The proposal will be taken to the UT Board of Regents in February or March, UT general counsel Barry Burgdorf said. -------- MILITARY -------- britain British officer lambasts US Army's performance in Iraq WASHINGTON, Jan 11 (AFP) Jan 11, 2006 http://www.spacewar.com/2006/060111195016.7e1vtpq8.html A senior British officer has lambasted the US Army's performance in Iraq as marred by cultural insensitivity, self righteousness and a bias for "kinetic" military operations that have cost popular support. Brigadier Nigel Aylwin-Foster, who served in Iraq as deputy commander of program to train Iraqis, said the army's failures let opportunities slip away after the 2003 US invasion and compounded the difficulty of putting down the insurgency. The critique, which was published this week in Military Review, a journal of the US Army, offered a rare look at the sharp differences in perspective between the American military and its allies in Iraq. Aylwin-Foster said "universally those consulted for this paper who were not from the US considered that the army as too 'kinetic.'" "This is shorthand for saying US Army personnel were too inclined to consider offensive operations and destruction of the insurgent as the key to a given situation, and conversely failed to understand its downside," he wrote. Many US military officers on the other hand felt that their coalition allies were too reluctant to use lethal force, he said. "It was apparent that many considered that the only effective, and morally acceptable, COIN (counter-insurgency) strategy was to kill or capture all terrorists and insurgents; they saw military destruction of the enemy as a strategic goal in its own right." He cites an unnamed US general as saying it was unreasonable and impractical to expect front-line soldiers to develop the subtlety and mastery of skills required for a hearts-and-minds campaign. An internal Pentagon study of 127 US pacification operations between May 2003 and May 2005 found that most were aimed at hunting down insurgents, according to the article. Only six percent were specifically to create a secure environment for the population, it said. A variation of the complaint that the army was "too kinetic" was the widely held view among non-US officers that the Americans were "too often insensitive to the cultural nuances of the situation," Aylwin-Foster said. He said army officers often erroneously assumed that the population would understand the justness of their cause, even if mistakes were made and civilians were killed. "This sense of moral righteousness combined with an emotivity that was rarely far from the surface, and in extremis manifested as deep indignation or outrage that could serve to distort collective military judgement," the article said. The US response to the capture and mutilation of four US contractors in Fallujah, which set off a long and bloody struggle for the city in 2004, was a case in point, according to Aylwin-Foster. "In classic insurgency doctrine, this act was almost certainly a come-on, designed to invoke a disproportionate response, thereby further polarising the situation and driving a wedge between the domestic population and the coalition forces," he wrote. "It succeeded." "Under emotional duress even the most broad-minded and pragmatic reverted to type: kinetic," he wrote. The army further alienated itself from the local populace by relying on technology rather than foot patrols and human spying to gather intelligence, he said. In Aylwin-Foster's view, many of the problems arose from an institutional culture that emphasized conventional warfare and paid scant attention to counter-insurgency warfare. The army's "can-do" ethos and rigid hierarchy encouraged micro-management by commanders and over-optimism. While all professional militaries strive for a can-do ethos, he wrote, "it is unhelpful if it discourages junior commanders from reporting unwelcome news up the chain of command." In an editor's note accompanying the article, Military Review said its publication did not imply any endorsement of Aylwin-Foster's views. "Nonetheless, this article does provide Military Review readers the thought-provoking assessments of a senior officer with significant experience in counterterrorism operations. And it is offered in that vein -- to stimulate discussion." -------- prisoners of war US rejects German call to close its Guantanamo Bay, Cuba Jan. 11, 2006 India Daily http://www.indiadaily.com/breaking_news/55386.asp U.S. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack on Jan. 10 rejected German Chancellor Angela Merkel's call for the United States to close its Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, detention center. Merkel arrives in Washington for talks with U.S. President George W. Bush on Jan. 12. ---- CIA's prison allegations dismissed Wednesday January 11, 2006 News International, Pakistan http://www.jang.com.pk/thenews/jan2006-daily/11-01-2006/world/w3.htm BUCHAREST: Former Romanian President Ion Iliescu denied any knowledge of the US detaining 23 terror suspects in an airport near the Black Sea, calling Swiss newspaper reports containing the allegations "inventions". "I don't know about such a thing, about detention sites. The place has been checked," Iliescu said at a meeting of the opposition Social Democracy Party late Monday. Iliescu, who left office in 2004, dismissed the allegations in the Zurich-based Sonntagsblick as "inventions." At the same meeting, former Prime Minister Adrian Nastase called the report "speculation," adding that journalists had visited the Mihail Kogalniceanu airport near the Black Sea port of Constanta where the paper alleged that 23 Iraqi and Afghan suspects had been held. The government has not responded to the latest allegations published Monday, but President Traian Basescu and Romania's Defence Ministry have firmly denied previous reports that Romania hosted such sites. However, Ioan Mircea Pascu, Romania's defense minister in 2001-2004, told the AP that parts of Mihail Kogalniceanu were off-limits to Romanian authorities. Pascu said he could not determine whether prisoners were ever held at the installation, but he conceded that planes flying captives to the US naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, may have made stopovers in Romania. Allegations that the CIA hid and interrogated key al-Qaedasuspects at Soviet-era compounds in Eastern Europe were first reported Nov. 2 in The Washington Post. After the report appeared, Human Rights Watch said it had circumstantial evidence indicating the CIA transported suspected terrorists captured in Afghanistan to Poland and Romania. Poland said last week it had closed its investigation into allegations that the country may have hosted secret CIA prisons, but did not release any findings. US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has refused to address questions about clandestine CIA detention centers, but says the United States acts within the law. ---- Military tribunal resumes at Guantanamo Wednesday January 11, 2006 News International, Pakistan http://www.jang.com.pk/thenews/jan2006-daily/11-01-2006/world/w9.htm GUANTANAMO BAY, Cuba: Two detainees held at the US naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, are scheduled to appear before a military tribunal here on Wednesday, even though the US Supreme Court has not yet issued its opinion on the legality of such courts. Young Canadian Omar Khadr, who was detained in Afghanistan when he was only 15 for allegedly killing a US soldier in July 2002, and Yemeni national Ali Hamza Ahmad al-Bahlul, a suspected al-Qaeda propaganda specialist, are expected to face this week preliminary hearings of their cases. Many court procedures have been frozen over the past several months by federal judges who deemed it neccessary to wait for a Supreme Court ruling early this year on the validity of special tribunals created specifically to try terrorist suspects held at Guantanamo. However, lawyers representing the detainees, who will appear before the military commissions, did not expect any last minute delay. The tribunal will first hear the case of al-Bahlul who was indicted in February 2004 of being an accessory to terrorist activities. According to the charge, al-Qaeda founder Osama bin Laden had placed him in charge of producing videos used to recruit and train new members of the organisation. During his first hearing in August 2004, al-Bahlul created confusion in the tribunal by refusing to accept the help of a lawyer and insisting on defending himself. Since then, US military officials have modified the rules governing the tribunals, and the hearings should start anew. The Canadian, who is 19 and who was charged with murder in November after spending three years at Guantanamo, will appear before a different military commission. He will be tried under the same rules as other suspects, even though he was a minor when his alleged crime was committed. According to US authorities, Omar Khadr has admitted killing a US military medic and wounding another by throwing a hand grenade in the course of a battle. His lawyers insist the young man was put through particularly rough interrogations, as well as suffering humiliation and threats of sexual assault. "Through torture, abuse, and three years of illegal detention, this government has robbed Omar of his youth," said civilian attorney Muneer Ahmad. "Now, they are demanding his appearance before a kangaroo court, wholly lacking in fundamental principles of due process." Khadr, who was born in Toronto, was raised in Pakistan. His whole family appears to have ties to al-Qaeda. His father, who was killed by the Pakistani army in 2003, was considered one of the key financiers of bin Laden's network. -------- un Details of UN Security Council referral procedure UNITED NATIONS, Jan 11 (AFP) Jan 11, 2006 http://www.spacewar.com/2006/060111191539.vjuxm01x.html Referral to the UN Security Council, which Western powers have threatened to use to thwart Iran's nuclear ambitions, is a procedure available to any country, but approval by the 15-member body is not automatic. A UN official said referral could be requested by any country or group of UN member states or by the UN secretary general. But in order to approve the request, council members must be persuaded that the issue is a threat to international peace and security and that the council is the appropriate venue for tackling it. For the moment, the Iranian nuclear issue is being handled by the Vienna-based UN nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and its board has to decide whether to refer Iran to the Security Council. British Prime Minister Tony Blair said an emergency meeting Thursday of an EU troika in Berlin would weigh up its response to the crisis but it was "likely" to end in Iran's referral to the Security Council, as a prelude to possible UN sanctions. His comments followed Tehran's announcement Tuesday that it was ending a two-year suspension of nuclear fuel research, a decision which triggered a furious reaction from the United States, the European Union and a host of other countries. Europe and the United States fear that Iran's nuclear program could be a cover for developing atomic weapons, a charge Tehran strongly refutes, saying it is for civilian purposes only. Any referral would take the form of a letter from IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei to UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, who would then relay it to the current Security Council president, Tanzania's UN envoy Augustine Mahiga. The council president would then have to consult his 14 colleagues before putting the issue on the agenda. A UN source said the preference is for consensus, but a member -- even one of the five veto-wielding permanent members (Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States) -- would find it hard to block putting the issue on the agenda if the other 14 chose to do so, as there is no veto on procedural matters. Tasked with maintaining international peace and security in accordance with the UN charter, the council is the only UN organ with the power to make decisions that all member states are required under the charter to accept and uphold. -------- war crimes Public Tribunal Delivers War Crimes Indictments to White House Wednesday, January 11th, 2006 Democracy Now! Headlines http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/01/11/1436222 And in Washington Tuesday, the public action group the Bush Crimes Commission delivered a set of 5 indictments to the White House. The indictments allege the Bush administration has committed war crimes and crimes against humanity. The indictments were drafted at the first International Commission of Inquiry on Crimes Against Humanity Committed by the Bush Administration, held in New York City in October. The second commission of inquiry will be held at Columbia University beginning on January 20th. -------- POLICE / PRISONERS / COURTS / JUSTICE -------- torture More claims of US detainee torture By Phil Hazlewood in London 11 jan 06 Australia Herald Sun http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,17790128%255E1702,00.html AMNESTY International released fresh claims today of the alleged torture and ill-treatment of terrorist suspects on the fourth anniversary of detainees being taken to Guantanamo Bay in Cuba. The testimonies from three men echo similar claims made by released prisoners and include allegations from one of the men that he was abducted by the US Criminal Intelligence Agency (CIA) as part of its "extraordinary rendition" policy. Abdulsalam al-Hela, a 34-year-old businessman from Sanaa, Yemen, allegedly "disappeared" after travelling to Egypt for a meeting with a construction firm in September 2002. The father-of-two was shackled, blindfolded and gagged, put on a small, private plane and taken, possibly via Azerbaijan, to Afghanistan, where he was held "in secret, illegally and incommunicado" for two years, Amnesty said. Amnesty said Mr al-Hela suffered psychological torture at five prisons in or around Kabul, a number of them underground, before being transferred to Guantanamo Bay in September 2004. The human rights group, with headquarters in London, said he wrote in a letter smuggled out of jail in Afghanistan: "The CIA conspired with the Egyptian Mukhabarrat (intelligence service), making false allegations and threats against me, so as to justify their crime of kidnapping me." A number of countries have expressed concerns about the policy of extraordinary rendition to countries outside the legal process and the alleged existence of secret prisons in eastern Europe to interrogate suspects. Washington has denied using or condoning torture but defended rendition as a "vital tool" in combating international terrorism. Amnesty called for increased pressure to be put on the US Government for the prisoners to be either released or given a fair trial and repeated its view that Guantanamo should be shut and an inquiry launched into the torture claims. "In Guantanamo, around 500 men have been treated with complete and utter disdain of the type that nobody should be forced to endure," it said. "It isn't surprising that after years of uncertainty about their fate, some of these men have expressed their intention to die rather than remain in Guantanamo indefinitely." The most detailed testimony came from Jumah al-Dossari, a 32-year-old Bahraini national who was captured in Afghanistan in late 2001 and taken to Guantanamo in January 2002. In a graphic account of his detention, given to Amnesty through his lawyer, he repeated claims made by a former detainee last year that US soldiers regularly desecrated copies of the Koran. He also spoke of beatings, sexual assaults, threats to his family and having to endure lengthy periods in solitary confinement, plus disease, illness and infection being rife among those held at the camp. Journalist Sami al Hajj, a 35-year-old Sudanese national working for Arabic satellite news channel Al-Jazeera, made similar allegations after being detained following an assignment covering the 2002 conflict in Afghanistan. Amnesty said he has been interrogated constantly about possible links between his Qatar-based employers -- which has angered Washington because of its reporting of the war in Iraq -- and the al-Qaeda network. -------- ENERGY -------- alternative energy Auto Show Features New Hybrids, Flex-Fuels, Concept Cars DETROIT, Michigan, January 11, 2006 (ENS) http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jan2006/2006-01-11-07.asp Fuel efficient gas-electric hybrids, solar powered air conditioning, and the world's first tri-fuel flex vehicle - automobile manufacturers are displaying the latest environmentally friendly features in vehicles slated for production at the North American International Auto Show (NAIAS) at Cobo Center in Detroit. On Monday, Toyota unveiled its 2007 Camry Hybrid, which combines a 45 horsepower motor and a 147 horsepower, 4 cylinder, Atkinson-cycle engine. Equipped with a continuously variable transmission, the Camry Hybrid achieves an estimated 43 miles per gallon (mpg) in the city and 37 mpg on the highway while it reduces emissions from the conventional Camry. "With the new 2007 Camry, Toyota once again raised the bar with the family sedan," said Don Esmond, senior vice president, automotive operations, Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc. "Camry's reputation as the gold standard was developed over more than 20 years of refining this excellent package and this new Camry continues that reputation." On Sunday, GM debuted two upcoming hybrid sport utility vehicles: the 2007 Saturn VUE Green Line and the 2008 Chevrolet Tahoe Two-mode Hybrid. The Saturn VUE Green Line is expected to achieve 27 mpg in the city and 32 mpg on the highway, a 20 percent improvement over the Saturn VUE. When it goes on sale this summer, the Saturn VUE Green Line will sell for less than $23,000, including a markup of less than $2,000 for the hybrid system. The Tahoe Hybrid is optimized to perform efficiently in city driving and on the highway. The vehicle will operate on electric power only when it can, which will help it to achieve an estimated 25 percent gain in fuel economy over the base Tahoe. The two-mode is patented hybrid technology with two modes optimized for city and highway driving. In the first mode, at low speed and light loads, the vehicle can operate in three ways - electric power only, engine power only or in any combination of engine and electric power. When operating with electric power only, it provides all the fuel savings benefits of a full hybrid system. Leaving the engine shut off for extended periods of time and moving under electric power at low speed is key to reducing fuel consumption in heavy stop and go traffic, designers said. "The Chevrolet Tahoe Two-mode Hybrid combines the functionality and comfort of a full-size SUV with a two-mode full hybrid system that optimizes fuel efficiency in city and highway driving, the way most Americans use their vehicles," said Tom Stephens, group vice president, GM Powertrain. The Hybrid Tahoe will go on sale next year as a 2008 model, along with the GMC Yukon Two-mode Hybrid. Pricing and production volumes have not been announced. A Cadillac Escalade hybrid is planned for the future. GM, BMW and DaimlerChrysler are co-developing the two-mode full hybrid system that will leverage automatic transmission technology and electronic controls in an integrated, powerful and compact system that can be used with both gas and diesel engines. This year's show also features many concept vehicles. Volkswagen is offering an innovative three-wheel concept vehicle. The company says its GX3, a two-seat crossover between a motorcycle and a sports car, can achieve 46 mpg in the city powered by a VW 1.6 liter engine. The GX3 was designed in collaboration between VW's Design Center California and Moonraker, an international, cross-functional group of young engineers, designers, manufacturing and marketing experts, also based in California. Light, fast, and environmentally friendly, the GX3 is a motorcycle with two seats positioned side-by-side. Ford Motor Company is displaying the Reflex Hybrid Coupe, a sporty sub-compact car that achieves 65 mpg with a hybrid-electric diesel engine. The Reflex has an electric motor on the rear axle as well as the hybrid propulsion system on the front axle. The rear motor provides all-wheel-drive capability, improved driving dynamics and the fuel economy of a full hybrid vehicle. Solar cells in the headlights and taillights help recharge the lithium-ion battery, while a roof-mounted solar panel powers fans to keep the interior cool. A unique baby-cam helps caregivers in the front seats monitor baby in the back. "Ford Reflex is a small car that doesn't feel small," says Freeman Thomas, director, North American Strategic Design. "It is a gorgeous sporty car that delivers guilt free performance with a hybrid engine. And thanks to its innovative approach to the interior, it has space for growing families." The Reflex has a flexible interior made from synthetic and regenerated materials, and such advanced safety features as inflatable safety belts in the rear. Reflex also uses ground rubber from scrap athletic shoes, called Nike Grind, as insulation to reduce noise and vibration in the car's interior. Ford also brought the F-250 Super Chief concept, a flex-fuel pickup that runs on three fuels - gasoline, ethanol E-85, or hydrogen. Billed as the world's first Tri-Flex fuel engine this truck gets 12 percent better fuel economy and 500 miles between fill-ups, Ford says. When operating on hydrogen, the Tri-Flex V-10 generates 99 percent less CO2 emissions than when running on gasoline. "The Tri-Flex fuel engine encourages the development of the hydrogen fuel infrastructure for the best future mobility solution," says Dr. Gerhard Schmidt, vice president, research and advanced engineering. "It also drives the expansion of the domestic ethanol E85 fuel production and availability and, of course, provides our customers the convenience of gasoline until these other fuels become more readily available." A Ford Motor Company product, the Mercury Mariner Hybrid - the first full-hybrid premium compact SUV - is the first vehicle to be honored by "Green Car Journal" as "Green Car of the Year," an honor presented last week at the Los Angeles Auto Show. The award winner is determined by an 11-member panel of international jurors comprised of automotive and environmental experts, including Carroll Shelby, Jean-Michel Cousteau and Mario Andretti. The 2006 Mercury Mariner Hybrid debuted in September at the first-ever Sierra Club National Environmental Convention and Expo in California, where Sierra Summit attendees were among the first consumers to test drive vehicle. Configured as a full hybrid, the Mercury Mariner Hybrid's powertrain system is able to propel the vehicle to 25 miles per hour solely with clean electric power. When not required during coasting, at stoplights or crawling at low speeds through traffic, the gasoline engine automatically shuts down to conserve fuel and curb emissions. With fuel economy estimated at 33 mpg in the city and 29 mpg on the highway, it will meet the cleanest emission achievable by a fossil-fuel vehicle, California's Advanced Technology Partial Zero Emissions Standard. It has extended range well over 400 miles per tank and V-6-like acceleration performance. "Demand for our first hybrid - the Ford Escape Hybrid - was so strong that we pushed very hard to pull production of the Mercury Mariner Hybrid up by a full year," said Nancy Gioia, director, Ford Sustainable Mobility Technologies and Hybrid Programs. "Ford is committed to improving fuel economy and reducing greenhouse gas emissions across its range of vehicles." By 2008, Ford will have five hybrids on the road, including the Ford Escape, Mercury Mariner, Ford Fusion, Mercury Milan and Mazda Tribute Hybrids. By 2010, Ford plans to increase its global hybrid production to approximately 250,000 hybrid units annually. At the North American International Auto Show here in Detroit, Mitsubishi Motors is displaying the Concept-CT MIEV hybrid, a sport hatchback that combines a lithium-ion battery with in-wheel motors, while Toyota's F3R concept is a hybrid minivan with modern styling. Fuel-efficient subcompacts are also coming on strong, as Honda unveiled the 2007 Honda Fit at the NAIAS. The five-door subcompact achieves 33 mpg in the city and 38 mpg on the highway with its four-cylinder engine. Already one of Honda's hottest selling models in Asia and Europe, the Honda Fit is set to go on-sale in the United States in April. Official pricing has not yet been determined. Honda also introduced its 2006 Civic GX, which runs on compressed natural gas, at the Los Angeles Auto Show. Toyota is introducing its Yaris subcompact to the U.S. market for the 2007 model year. Already popular in Europe, the Yaris sedan and hatchback models achieve 34 mpg in the city and 40 mpg on the highway. The Yaris sedan with a manual transmission will be priced at $11,825. The NAIAS opens to the public on Saturday. Press Preview Days were held Sunday through Tuesday. Industry Preview Days open today and continue Thursday. The Charity Preview will be held Friday evening. Public Days are Saturday, January 14, through Sunday, January 22. -------- OTHER -------- environment "Doomsday vault" to house world's seeds PARIS, Jan 11 (AFP) Jan 11, 2006 http://www.spacewar.com/2006/060111190022.phx6jlgz.html Norway is to build a "doomsday vault" in a mountain close to the North Pole that will house a vast seed bank to ensure food supplies in the event of catastrophic climate change, nuclear war or rising sea levels, New Scientist says. Built with Fort Knox-type security, the three-million-dollar vault will be designed to hold around two million seeds representing all known varieties of the world's crops. They are the precious food plants that have emerged from 10,000 years of selection by farmers. The facility "would essentially be built to last forever," according to a feasibility study. It will be built deep in permafrost in the side of a sandstone mountain on the Norwegian island of Spitsbergen, 1,000 kilometers (625 miles) from the North Pole, the British weekly says in its next issue, out on Saturday. With walls of one-metre- (3.25-feet-) thick concrete, the seed bank will be protected behind two airlocks and high-security blast-proof doors. The facility will not be permanently manned but "the mountains are patrolled by polar bears," the report quotes Cary Fowler, director of the Global Crop Diversity Trust, an organisation that is promoting the project, as saying. To be preserved, the seeds must be kept below freezing point. Operators plan to replace the air inside the vault once a year at winter-time, but even if for some reason this becomes impossible, the permafrost will still keep the seeds viable. The thick walls, airlocks and doors mean that even if global warming accelerates badly, it would take many decades for hotter air to reach the seeds. "This will be the world's most secure gene bank by some orders of magnitude," said Fowler. "But its seeds will only be used when all other samples have gone for some reason. It is a fail-safe depository, rather than a conventional seed bank." The proposal is backed by Norway, which sketched a similar project back in the 1980s that was thwarted at the time by the Soviet Union's access to Spitsbergen. The seed bank is expected to be created next year, New Scientist says. -------- ACTIVISTS Judge Demands Police Video of Grandmothers' Protest January 11, 2006 New York Times By ANEMONA HARTOCOLLIS http://fairuse.1accesshost.com/news2/nyt216.html A judge ordered the Manhattan district attorney yesterday to turn over a videotape of 18 women accused of blocking the doorway of the armed forces recruiting station in Times Square. Their lawyer, Norman Siegel, told the judge that the videotape was made by the police Oct. 17, while the women were sitting on the sidewalk in front of the building to protest the war in Iraq. The women at the time handed out fliers calling themselves Antiwar Grandmothers. The grandmothers - 16 of them, anyway, plus a doctor's note from a 17th asking that she be excused because of a hip replacement - appeared yesterday in State Supreme Court in Lower Manhattan armed with symbolic silver handcuffs. Their toy cuffs, however, were confiscated by court officers as they passed through metal detectors. "You're not supposed to have handcuffs," a court officer patiently explained to Vinie Harrison, one of the women. "That shakes me," Ms. Harrison said. "It's such a small thing, but it's symptomatic of what's happening in this country and that madman in the White House, and Halliburton, and the deficit and Abramoff and DeLay." In the fourth-floor courtroom, the clerk called the women to the railing one by one. Courtroom regulars marveled at the sight of 16 women, some carrying canes and pushing walkers, stretching across the room. Many wore photos of their grandchildren on chains around their necks. Some lawyers complained that the group had taken along about 50 supporters, making it hard to get a seat. Addressing Justice Alexander Jeong, Mr. Siegel said he had been told that the videotape showed that at least one person had been able to walk past the women into the recruitment center. This was proof, he said, that they were not blocking the doorway, and that disorderly conduct charges against them should be dismissed. At first the prosecutor, Karen Corrie, said there was no videotape. When Mr. Siegel pressed, Ms. Corrie corrected herself, saying she had misread her notes. But, she said, her office was having trouble "accessing" the videotape. Justice Jeong asked her to make the videotape available as soon as possible and set a court date of March 2. Mr. Siegel said the videotape might have been made by plainclothes or undercover officers, because he did not recall seeing any uniformed officers videotaping at the scene. Police surveillance of political demonstrations has become a controversial topic recently. The Police Department has been criticized for using officers disguised as protesters to infiltrate demonstrations. Just last month, a group of civil rights lawyers sent a letter to the police commissioner, Raymond W. Kelly, demanding an end to what they said was illegal surveillance of protesters. The letter cited undercover videotapes of bicycle rallies, antiwar protests and demonstrations during the 2004 Republican National Convention. There was some dispute over the tape after the hearing. Barbara Thompson, a spokeswoman for the district attorney, said that she could not confirm that the police had videotaped the group, but that there may have been news tapes available. Paul J. Browne, a spokesman for the Police Department, did not return a phone call seeking comment. Mr. Siegel said that an assistant district attorney had left a message on his answering machine saying that the local precinct had told her that the Police Department's technical assistance response unit had videotaped the demonstration. Prosecutors are required to make such evidence available to the defense. Prosecutors declined to drop the charges yesterday, instead offering the women "adjournment in contemplation of dismissal," meaning the charges would be dropped if they were not arrested again for six months. The women turned down that offer because it would hobble their protesting. Calling themselves Grandmothers Against the War, they demonstrate outside Rockefeller Center every Wednesday afternoon. Mr. Siegel told his clients that he would go to trial if necessary, and, after insisting that that was not his first choice, added, "Make my day." ---- NSA Extensively Spied on Baltimore Peace Group Wednesday, January 11th, 2006 Democracy Now! Headlines http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/01/11/1436222 This news on the Bush administration's domestic spy program - the website RawStory.com has obtained government documents showing the National Security Agency spied on the Pledge of Resistance-Baltimore, a Quaker-linked peace group. The documents indicate the group was extensively monitored, with detailed records of their travel movements, driving routes -- and even the helium balloons they used in a protest. On one day, the group's movements were reported every 15 minutes. And at a protest during "Keep Space for Peace Week", the NSA planned to conduct ariel surveillance and have a Weapons of Mass Destruction Rapid Response Team nearby. NSA Denies Whistleblower's Demand To Testify Before Congress Meanwhile, ABC News is reporting the National Security Agency has denied the request of whistleblower Russell Tice to testify before Congress. Tice, a former intelligence agent at the NSA and Defense Intelligence Agency who has spoken out against the domestic spy program, was told he is not free to testify because staff members on Capitol Hill do not have high enough security clearance to hear the secrets he has to tell. Tice first spoke out on record on Democracy Now last week. House Democrats To Hold Informal Hearing on Spy Program And House Democrats have scheduled an informal hearing on the NSA spy program. Michigan Congressmember John Conyers announced Tuesday the hearing will be held on January 20th. Conyers, ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, said House Republicans had ignored calls for a formal hearing.