NucNews July 21, 2006 -------- NUCLEAR -------- britain MPs to get nuclear option By George Jones (Filed: 21/07/2006) UK Telegraph http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=3JMTYCP1F3LKXQFIQMGCFF4AVCBQUIV0?xml=/news/2006/07/21/nuke21.xml Parliament will get the chance to veto plans to replace the Trident nuclear weapons system, Jack Straw said yesterday. The Leader of the Commons said it was inconceivable that ministers would renew the deterrent if there was a No vote, but stopped short of promising a free vote. A minority of Labour MPs oppose replacement of Trident, although the Tories would be likely to back the scheme. ---- Aid call over island nuclear jobs Friday, 21 July 2006 (BBC) http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/wales/north_west/5202124.stm Calls are being made for economic aid for Anglesey after the decision to shut Wylfa nuclear power station in 2010. About 800 people work at Wylfa, but a further 700 jobs may be at risk at nearby Anglesey Aluminium which relies on cheap electricity supplied by Wylfa. Conservatives and Liberal Democrats have called for Anglesey to be made a "special economic zone". Welsh Enterprise Minister Andrew Davies said work was under way to help the island's economy. The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) announced on Thursday that Wylfa will not have its operating life extended beyond 2010. One thing that needs to be done is to declare Anglesey a special economic zone Mike German, Liberal Democrats MPs on the Welsh affairs select committee have concluded that Wylfa would provide an appropriate setting should the UK government approve the building of new nuclear plants, while Anglesey council and local MP Albert Owen have backed calls for another nuclear plant. Mr Owen said he was looking in the long term at the "possibility of further nuclear generation on Anglesey". He added: "It has kept Anglesey prosperous for many years. I think that's the way forward." 'Task force' Enterprise Minister Andrew Davies said plans were in place to replace the jobs lost with Wylfa's closure. He said: "We haven't been waiting for this announcement to be made. "We have been working with a range of bodies including the council. My officials are heading up a task force. "It isn't just about the island, we need to include the whole of north west Wales. "Bangor University for example is going to be a very key player in the development of the economy of Anglesey and Gwynedd and the whole of north west Wales. "Its about bringing all the players together, having a common vision and then funding it and taking that forward." 'Exciting prospect' Opposition politicians said special measures should be taken to lesson the blow to Anglesey's economy. Conservative economic development spokesman in the assembly Alun Cairns said: "I would hope it would become a special economic zone and structural funds provide the option for operating aid which effectively is tax relief to companies that operate within that area. "That's an exciting prospect but until now the Welsh assembly government has been cool to say the least on it." Mike German, leader of the Liberal Democrats in the assembly, added: "One thing that needs to be done is to declare Anglesey a special economic zone with two ambitions. "One to bring together all the economic regenerators, all the people who can help to ensure that jobs are found for people and secondly to investigate the possibility for other sources of energy." -------- korea North Korea 'completely irresponsible', 'dangerous': Rice by Staff Writers Washington (AFP) Jul 21, 2006 http://www.spacewar.com/reports/a060722032704.nd158lgk.html US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice called North Korea Friday "a completely irresponsible state and dangerous" for its July 5 missile tests. "When you look at them testing missiles, not telling anybody they're firing them in all different directions, and they're saying that they have a nuclear weapons capability ... that they could make those together is very dangerous," Rice told a group of Asian journalists. Rice stressed that last week's UN Security Council resolution criticizing Pyongyang's test launches shows "that this is a problem that North Korea has with the entire international community." She added that she would be happy to attend a meeting of the six parties trying to resolve the North Korean nuclear problem if it is organized during the Association of South East Asia Nations Regional Forum next week in Kuala Lumpur. Rice confirmed she would attend the meeting following her trip to the Middle East to try to help find a framework for peace in the embattled region. Host Malaysia had earlier warned that Rice, who skipped the meeting last year, would send a negative message with another no-show. She told the Asian reporters the United States had three aims for the ASEAN meeting: to deepen relations between the United States and the 10-member group; to talk about cooperation on terrorism and weapons proliferation, and especially North Korea; and to discuss the Middle East conflict, particularly with countries that are taking a strong interest in it like Malaysia and Indonesia. Rice also said the she and US President George W. Bush were looking forward to visiting Vietnam later this year on the back of rapidly improving bilateral relations. "It's in many ways a quite remarkable story how our relations are evolving," she said. "The Vietnamese people are known for their tremendous industry ... they're very hardworking and entrepreneurial." -------- mideast US-Turkey Nuclear Cooperation: What Does It Mean for Turkey? 7/21/2006 (Balkanalysis.com) By Mehmet Kalyoncu http://www.balkanalysis.com/2006/07/21/us-turkey-nuclear-cooperation-what-does-it-mean-for-turkey/ The Civil Nuclear Cooperation Agreement between the United States and Turkey, signed by the two sides on July 26, 2000, has recently been ratified by the Turkish government. The agreement rightly and by definition prohibits Turkey from exploiting the cooperation for any purposes which would directly or indirectly help her develop military nuclear capabilities, which is something that both parties would seemingly agree upon. However, beyond limiting Turkey’s prospective nuclear capabilities to civilian purposes, the agreement seems to aim at bringing even Turkey’s civilian nuclear projects under US control. As such, for the United States, the US-Turkish Civil Nuclear Cooperation Agreement is a diplomatic triumph whereas, for Turkey, it seems to be nothing more than self-shackling, and a voided attempt at developing even civilian nuclear capabilities. A Critical Analysis of the Agreement: What it means for Turkey The US-Turkey Civil Nuclear Cooperation Agreement is essentially an affirmation of both countries’ support for the objectives of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and for the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). As such, the agreement prohibits Turkey from using any nuclear capability it might develop for military purposes and directly or indirectly assisting any other country to develop military nuclear capabilities. However, while it should be equally binding on the United States too, apparently it will not be so. The Bush Administration has recently passed a resolution in Congress which will enable it to sell nuclear technology, material and equipment to India for the construction of 22 new nuclear reactors, eight of which will be exempt from the IAEA inspection and are likely to be used for military purposes. Therefore, the nuclear civilian cooperation agreement and the so-called affirmation of support for the IAEA objectives constitute simply a pretext to enable the US to increase its influence on Turkey’s prospective nuclear projects and to grant itself the legitimacy to interfere. Moreover, the benefits of the agreement seem to be rather rhetorical than substantial. The agreement suggests that the parties can collaborate in research and development toward civilian purposes, design educational and staff exchange programs, and co-organize workshops and conferences. Yet, it prohibits the transfer of critical nuclear technology between the parties, or in more practical terms, prohibits the transfer of the critical nuclear technology from the United States to Turkey. Similarly, the agreement imposes a limit to the amount of nuclear material that Turkey can obtain from the US. That is, Turkey cannot obtain the necessary quantity of nuclear material to run its nuclear reactors efficiently, but rather only as much as the amount determined in the agreement. In addition, the agreement consists of conditions regarding the storage, re-transfer, re-processing and enrichment of the nuclear materials that are likely to complicate or even stall future nuclear cooperation between the US and Turkey. First, the plutonium, uranium 233 and/or enriched uranium produced from the nuclear materials transferred or to be transferred, or through the use of these nuclear materials can be stored in only where both parties agree upon. The biggest challenge to satisfying this condition would be to bring not only the US and Turkish government, but also the Turkish public opinion into equilibrium. Second, Turkey will not be able to sell third parties any material and/or equipment which it produces by using the nuclear material and/or equipment transferred via this agreement, without American approval. Third, the nuclear materials produced through either direct or indirect use of the nuclear material transferred via this agreement will not be re-processed unless the both parties agree. Finally, the uranium transferred or produced via the material or equipment that has been transferred will not be enriched unless both the US and Turkey agree. Even though the statements in the agreement frequently repeat the phrase “unless both parties agree,” since there are only two involved parties, it practically means “unless the United States agrees or allows Turkey to…” That is, Turkey may follow any policy regarding the storage, re-transfer, re-processing and enrichment of the transferred nuclear material only if the United States allows her to do so. The wording of the agreement is particularly important given past experience of US-Turkish relations. The agreement states that the United States will try to provide the nuclear fuel on time, which is necessary for Turkey’s prospective nuclear reactors to run efficiently, economically, securely, and continuously. In other words, the failure to provide the necessary fuel to the reactors on time or the possible disruptions in its supply will cause the very nuclear reactors to run inefficiently, uneconomically, insecurely, and disruptively. No need to mention that the discontinuity of the nuclear fuel supply will simply turn the nuclear reactors into useless constructions dangerous for both human health and the natural environment. The critical word in this section of the agreement is that the US will try to deliver on this promise of nuclear fuel supply. Interestingly enough, the former-Chief of General Staff I. Hakki Karadayi opposed the AKP government’s envisioned support to the United States by reminding that Dick Cheney, when US Secretary of Defense, promised that the United States would try to compensate for Turkey’s economic losses because of the First Gulf War, during the Ozal government. Karadayi noted that the promised compensation never came through. For the Turks, One Thing to Cheer About At the least, there is still one thing for Turkey to cheer about with this agreement. As far as the information revealed to the media suggests, the agreement does not prohibit Turkey from developing similar civilian nuclear partnerships with other countries, and does not confine Turkey to purchasing the necessary nuclear technology, fuel, material and equipment only from the United States. Therefore, Turkey may still seek other suppliers who are willing to be more accommodating in their interactions with Turkey. Such suppliers could possibly be France, Canada, or closer to home, Russia and Israel. Developing such diversified supply channels would also comply with the United States’ practice, in that it has already cemented civilian nuclear cooperation agreements with 47 countries, and is now about to sign one with Russia. Indeed, the Bush Administration has recently embarked on negotiations with Russia, which could eventually lead to a nuclear civilian cooperation agreement between the two countries. The idea of the US-Russian nuclear cooperation initiative has received harsh criticism from both Republican and Democratic congressmen, most notably from Arizona’s Republican Senator John McCain (R-AZ), who views the initiative as a reward for bad behavior on the part of Moscow and as assisting the restoration of autocracy in Russia. However, administration officials have stressed the beneficial aspects of the deal. Nicholas Burns, the Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs, suggests that working with Russia on a civilian nuclear cooperation is in the American national interest since Russia has proven itself a key player in negotiations with Iran. Similarly, with the recently renewed US-Indian nuclear partnership, the Bush administration claims to have aimed at preventing the spread of nuclear weapons. The only problem with the initiative seems to be that it is likely to help India develop nuclear weapons instead. Actual practice has shown that the so-called ‘civil nuclear cooperation agreements’ do not necessarily curb the proliferation of nuclear weapons, despite their stated intent to do so. Rather, the parties to such agreement view them simply as a means for pursuing their national interests. Depending on how you define them, civil nuclear agreements may well yield to developing military nuclear capabilities as well. The only thing that involved parties must be careful about is how the other side perceives the agreement and accordingly words its conditions. -------- missile defense U.S., Japan to Start Deploying Missile Interceptors By Anthony Faiola Washington Post Foreign Service Friday, July 21, 2006; A14 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/20/AR2006072000252_pf.html TOKYO, July 20 -- The United States and Japan will begin deploying American-made anti-missile systems on Japanese soil next month amid growing concern about North Korean arms, officials announced Thursday. In addition to the deployment of the Patriot Advanced Capability-3 system -- the ballistic missile interceptors known as PAC-3 -- the Pentagon will dispatch 600 specially trained troops from Fort Bliss, Tex., to a U.S. base in southern Japan. The PAC-3 will initially be deployed on American military sites; Japanese officials said they would deploy it on their own Self-Defense Forces bases for the first time by March. A Defense Ministry official said the rollout would begin at Iruma Air Base just west of Tokyo, spreading to three other nearby bases by 2007. Japan intends to keep deploying the system at several more military installations throughout the country through 2010. North Korea's most sophisticated missile -- a Taepodong-2 with an estimated range as far as the continental United States-- failed moments after liftoff during a test this month. The North Koreans successfully test-fired six short- and medium-range missiles, all of them capable of reaching any part of Japan, including U.S. bases here. "In view of the development, deployment and proliferation of ballistic missiles in the region, and the clear and present threats such as the recent missile launches by North Korea in particular, the Government of Japan will continue to do its utmost to build up its ballistic missile defense capabilities in close cooperation with the United States," the Japanese Foreign Ministry said in a statement. U.S. military officials said the Pentagon planned to relocate the Patriot-equipped Air Defense Artillery Battalion from Fort Bliss to the U.S. Kadena Air Base and the nearby munitions storage area on Okinawa island. Japanese officials said the system is scheduled to be at least partially operational by year's end. Japanese officials said they were consulting with local authorities in Okinawa -- who have been highly critical of the U.S. military presence there -- about the additional U.S. troops required to operate the system. But the officials also said the plan would move ahead with or without local blessings. The PAC-3 system is designed to intercept incoming ballistic missiles in their final phase and will form a key part of the broader missile defense shield being co-developed by the United States and Japan. Some experts have questioned the success rate of the PAC-3 system in testing, saying it still requires fine-tuning. Additionally, the Japanese are to deploy the Standard Missile 3 interceptor missile, which will be based aboard Japanese Aegis-class destroyers. -------- russia Russia to allocate up to 674.8Bln rubles for nuclear industry Jul 21 2006 (Interfax) http://www.interfax.ru/e/B/0/28.html?id_issue=11558495 MOSCOW. July 21- The Russian government has adopted a federal target program on the nuclear power industry's development in 2007-2010 and beyond to 2015, setting the maximum volume of its budget financing at 674.8 billion rubles. Russian Prime Minister Mikhail Fradkov signed a corresponding decree on Friday, the cabinet of ministers' press service reports. ---- Russia ex-nuclear minister facing fraud charges leaves jail 21/ 07/ 2006 (RIA Novosti) http://en.rian.ru/russia/20060721/51672692.html MOSCOW, July 21 - Russia's former nuclear power minister accused of embezzlement and abuse of power left jail Friday where he had spent six months. Yevgeny Adamov, 67, has been in custody for 15 months after being arrested in Switzerland at the request of the United States and has been in a Russian prison for the past six months after being extradited at the start of the year. The Supreme Court ruled earlier on Friday to release Adamov from custody, overturning a decision of the Moscow City Court to extend the ex-minister's custody until August 8. Adamov was met by his wife, daughter and grandson and also lawyer Timofei Gridnev at the exit from the jail. "I must stay with my family, my grandson now," he said. "I have two granddaughters and two grandsons, and tomorrow I will have to go back to work." Gridnev said in early June that Adamov had suffered three heart attacks during his custody. "If you think that this institution can improve one's health, you are mistaken," Adamov said but added that the Moscow prison was no worse than the pre-trial detention center in Bern, Switzerland, where he had spent nine months. Adamov said he was bound over to remain in the country. "I have already signed the paper to stay within Moscow and the Moscow Region," Adamov said, adding that he would need special permission to travel further within Russia. He also said that he planned to visit the United States to attend trial but did not specify when. The U.S. accused Adamov of misappropriating $9 million given to Russia for nuclear safety projects. He would have faced 60 years in prison if convicted in the U.S. Prosecutors have said the former minister, who served from 1998 to 2001, was a leader of an organized criminal group whose members were on an international wanted list and that he should be remanded in custody to prevent him from influencing witnesses. -------- security UK Fake Bomb Prank Points To Nuclear Threat By Hannah K. Strange UPI U.K. Correspondent London (UPI) Jul 21, 2006 http://www.spacewar.com/reports/UK_Fake_Bomb_Prank_Points_To_Nuclear_Threat_999.html The British government's controversial plan to build a new generation of nuclear power stations suffered a setback Friday when a reporter planted a fake bomb on a train carrying radioactive waste to illustrate the risk of terrorist attacks. The journalist, from the Mirror newspaper, was able to wander freely into a north-west London depot and approach unattended wagons carrying radioactive flasks of spent uranium fuel rods. A terrorist with a real bomb could have blown up the waste, unleashing a giant toxic cloud which would have killed hundreds, the newspaper said. Reporter Tom Parry said that the train goes largely unnoticed as it makes its weekly journey from Kent in south-east England hundreds of miles north to Cumbria. As it sat in sidings at the London depot, he was able to place a device that could have been a bomb on the deadly 12-ton cargo, he reported. He approached the train in daylight after it was left apparently unattended for nearly 10 minutes. The depot is just a short walk from a sports stadium, a large hospital, one of the capital's major roads and a number of housing estates, the newspaper says. Parry said his only identification as a legitimate rail worker was a fluorescent orange jacket and hard hat, available for purchase at any hardware store. "And this was not a one-off. It was the tenth time I had wandered freely into the depot." A spokeswoman for Direct Rail Services initially denied the reporter would have been able to approach the train. However after being presented with photographs she said: "The entire journey is protected by very stringent security. However, having seen these pictures we will speak with our security people. A full investigation will be carried out." The affair will damage the government's bid to build a new generation of nuclear power stations, which ministers say is necessary to plug Britain's looming energy gap. All but three of the country's existing nuclear power plants are due to come offline by 2023, leaving an energy shortfall of around 20 percent of current consumption. The government says nuclear new build will play a key role in meeting future energy needs, while also helping Britain meet its target of cutting carbon emissions, blamed for global warming, by 60 percent by 2050. Security of supply is also cited as a key advantage of nuclear power, as concerns mount over Britain's increasing dependence on imported oil and gas. But opponents of atomic energy note that no safe way to dispose of nuclear waste has yet been devised, and argue that plants, waste facilities and carriers would be prime targets for terrorists. The lack of security surrounding radioactive materials was demonstrated by the publication Friday of timetables for trains carrying nuclear waste. The environmental group Greenpeace said they posted the timetables on their U.K. website to highlight the 'frightening ease' with which a terrorist could target the trains. 'Every week, trains carrying nuclear waste trundle along the U.K.`s outdated rail network through our villages, towns and cities -- often at peak times and only meters away from ordinary passenger trains,' Greenpeace said. '(Prime Minister Tony) Blair has given the green light to a new generation of nuclear power stations, which means more nuclear waste, more nuclear transports -- and more terrorist targets.' The transport of nuclear material was recognized by United Nations nuclear watchdog the International Atomic Energy Agency to be the nuclear operation most vulnerable to terrorist attack or sabotage, the group noted. Tests had shown the flasks of spent uranium fuel rods to be highly vulnerable to attack from armor piercing rounds. The trains were unescorted other than by a driver and a guardsman, while the timetables could be easily worked out by anyone. They traveled on the same lines and at the same times as regular passenger or freight trains and stopped in normal stations. Members of the public or someone planting a bomb, fake or otherwise, could access them without difficulty, the group claimed. 'By taking the U.K. into a new nuclear age, Blair is putting us all at risk,' Greenpeace added. Responding to the publication of the timetables, Liberal Democrat Shadow Environment Secretary Chris Huhne said: 'This is a shocking revelation is a dream come true for terrorists.' He called on the government to undertake an urgent assessment of security measures, but added: 'The Liberal Democrats reject the need for new generation of nuclear power stations, which would create more waste. In a non-nuclear future, there will be no dangerous waste to transport in the first place.' According to a report published in March, a terrorist attack on a train carrying waste nuclear materials across Britain could spread lethal radioactivity across an area of 100 sq km, and result in the deaths of up to 8,000 people. The study, by nuclear consultants Large and Associates, noted that one terrorist cell whose plot was foiled by the security services had acquired plans of the nuclear power station Sizewell B and the locations of waste storage facilities across Britain. 'These terrorists had no reservations about the use of radioactivity to cause the mayhem and health consequences that would surely follow a successful attack on a strong source of radioactivity such as a spent fuel flask,' it said. 'If such an incident occurred in a densely populated environment, say in London, the radiation dose received by many individuals could be very significant indeed.' In an age of international terrorism, the transportation of spent nuclear fuel could not be adequately defended against this threat, it concluded. ---- 'Terror risk' over nuclear cargo The newspaper said the train set off from Dungeness Power Station Friday, 21 July 2006 BBC http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/5202024.stm A newspaper reporter walked up to an unattended train carrying nuclear waste and planted a fake bomb on it, the Daily Mirror has said. Reporter Tom Parry said he placed the fake device on the train, travelling from Kent to Cumbria, at a north-west London depot in a built-up area. The paper said many trains carry waste between nuclear power stations each week and could be a terror target. Train operator Direct Rail Services (DRS) said it was investigating. A statement issued on Friday said: "Discussions with the Office for Civil Nuclear Security (OCNS) have taken place over the event that happened on 19 July at Brent Yard depot. "Direct Rail Services Limited and the OCNS are aware of the circumstances outlined and clearly there are matters that require full investigation before any conclusions can be drawn." Friday's edition of the Daily Mirror claimed: "A terrorist could have blown up the waste - sparking a vast toxic cloud that would have killed hundreds." Mr Parry said he placed a device that could have been a bomb on the train's 12-ton cargo as it sat in sidings at the depot. He said he carried out the act in daylight, while the wagons were left unsupervised for nearly 10 minutes. The train, which looked like "an ordinary freight train", had left Dungeness three hours earlier, passing slowly through Ashford, Sevenoaks, Tonbridge and south London. It would have continued through Milton Keynes, Rugby, Crewe and Warrington, before arriving at Sellafield. The newspaper claimed the train was carrying radioactive flasks of spent uranium fuel rods. 'Stringent security' It said the depot was "a short walk" from a sports stadium, a large hospital, one of London's major roads, and was surrounded by housing estates. Mr Parry said his only identification as a legitimate rail worker was a fluorescent orange jacket and hard hat, which could be bought at any builders' merchants. He said: "This was not a one-off. It was the 10th time I had wandered freely into the depot." DRS issued a further statement which said nuclear fuel had been transported by rail since 1962 without any incidents of radioactive material being released, and that the nuclear industry continued to use rail as the primary mode of transport. The statement said there were "extremely stringent safety, security and driver performance standards" and systems were audited and approved by Her Majesty's Rail Inspectorate (HMRI) and the Office for Civil Nuclear Security (OCNS). All movements of nuclear material were conducted in accordance with the Nuclear Industries Security Regulations 2003, the statement added. -------- u.s. nuc facilities -------- new york Indian Point 3 shut down after electricity-sparking incident July 21, 2006 By GREG CLARY gclary@lohud.com NY JOURNAL NEWS http://www.nyjournalnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060721/UPDATE/607210438 BUCHANAN — Indian Point 3 was shut down without incident at 10:30 this morning after workers there saw electricity sparking on pipes that carry wiring underneath the power plant's main generator, federal regulators and company officials said. The electrical arcing stopped after the generator was shut down, officials said and there was no radiological release or harm to workers or the general public. Nuclear Regulatory Commission spokesman Neil Sheehan said proper procedures were followed by officials of Entergy Nuclear Northeast, which owns the 1,000-megawatt nuclear plant, and agency inspectors on site were monitoring the shutdown as well as efforts to get back online. Jim Steets, Entergy's chief spokesman, said the shut down was done manually and the company was hopeful to be able to re-start by the end of the weekend. It is the second shutdown of the plant in two weeks. On July 6, Indian Point 3 was shut down automatically and without incident when some older wires malfunctioned. NRC officials said the two incidents were not linked. -------- MILITARY -------- arms India, Russia to make 1,000 BrahMos missiles Press Trust of India Bangalore, July 21, 2006 http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_1749477,0008.htm India and Russia intend to make 1,000 BrahMos supersonic cruise missiles over the next 10 years through their joint venture company, with nearly 50 per cent of them expected to be sold in third countries, defence sources said on Friday. "We already have a capacity to produce 100 missiles a year. One thousand missiles in 10 years is a reasonable target. Nearly 50 per cent will go to exports," a source said. India and Russia have so far invested $300 million in BrahMos Aerospace, which was established to design, develop, produce and market the missile by using the technological skills and capabilities of both countries. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had earlier announced that BrahMos (named after the Brahmaputra and Moskva rivers) had been inducted into the Indian Navy. BrahMos Aerospace CEO A Sivathanu Pillai said that the missile's land-based version is expected to be inducted into the Army in 2007. Pillai, who is also the chief controller of research and development in the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), said that the company was undertaking a project to install BrahMos missiles on the Sukhoi-30MKI combat jets of the Indian Air Force. "Now, we are fitting one BrahMos in the belly (of the Su-30) to start with. With certain reinforcement of the wings, we can fit up to three," he said. ---- Beijing urges Washington not to sell F-16s to Taiwan July 21, 2006 Pakistan News International http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=16616 BEIJING: China has protested to the United States for the reported planned sale of 66 F-16 fighter jets to Taiwan, the Foreign Ministry said on Friday. Beijing had made a solemn representation to Washington after taking note of media reports that the United States had agreed to sell the jets to Taiwan, ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao said in comments posted on its Web site. “We urge the United States ... not to sell the above-mentioned fighter jets to the Taiwan authorities in order to avoid seriously damaging peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait and Sino-US relations,” Liu said. He did not say where the media reports originated. The Taiwan Strait is one of Asia’s main flashpoints. China regards the self-ruled island as part of its territory and has threatened to attack if it declares formal independence. The two sides have been bitter ideological and military foes since they split at the end of the Chinese civil war in 1949. Washington switched diplomatic recognition to Beijing in 1979, but is obliged by the Taiwan Relations Act to defend the island. -------- business Ex-Pentagon officials accused of fraud By DEBORAH HASTINGS AP NATIONAL WRITER Friday, July 21, 2006 http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/1110AP_Contractor_Fraud.html Two former Pentagon officials, including an acting secretary of the Navy, have been accused of scheming with a banned American contractor to get lucrative rebuilding contracts in Iraq, The Associated Press has learned. The contracting firm, Custer Battles LLC, was suspended two years ago by the military for submitting millions of dollars in fake invoices. The charges come in a sealed federal lawsuit, a copy of which was obtained by The AP. It was filed by two whistleblowers - one of whom won a $10 million judgment in another suit when a federal jury agreed that Custer Battles had swindled the government. The current suit names former acting Navy Secretary Hansford T. Johnson, former acting Navy Undersecretary Douglas Combs, and Custer Battles LLC officials including founders Scott Custer and Mike Battles, who were barred in 2004 after billing the government for work that was never done and for padding invoices by much as 100 percent. Also named were six companies connected to the contracting firm, including Windmill International Ltd., a worldwide contractor run by Combs and Johnson, and a Romanian company, Danubia Global, which purchased Custer Battles in 2005. The new lawsuit contends Custer and Battles, both Army veterans with Washington political connections, tried to get around the suspension order by plotting with Johnson and Combs "to set up sham companies (thereby) concealing their ownership and control of those entities." According to the suit filed in Virginia, the shell companies committed other illegal acts, including selling weapons on the Iraqi black market, creating a dangerous possibility that "insurgents could buy them and use them to attack U.S. soldiers." In both lawsuits, a plaintiff is former Custer Battles associate Robert Isakson. He is also a former FBI agent. His $10 million judgment, won in March, is the first civil fraud verdict arising from the Iraq war. Isakson and a former associate contended Custer Battles created imaginary offshore companies that overcharged the Coalition Provisional Authority, which ran Iraq after the 2003 invasion, by as much as $50 million. Isakson is joined in the current action by Rory Mayberry, a medic who said he was fired last year from a Custer Battles shell company after pointing out fraud. Under the federal False Claims Act, whistleblowers may file suits on behalf of the government and collect a portion of awarded damages. Phone messages left for Isakson were not returned. His attorney declined comment. Windmill attorney Chris Johnson said Johnson and Combs had never engaged in any conspiracy, but acknowledged Combs had a business meeting with Custer in 2004. Phones at Custer Battles offices in Rhode Island and Virginia have been disconnected. Custer Battles also is under federal criminal investigation for accusations of fraud and two alleged incidents in which its security guards opened fire on Iraqi civilians and soldiers. The AP reported in June 2005 that former officials of Custer Battles continued to do contracting work in Iraq, despite the U.S. military suspension. Its officials formed new companies to bid on fortune-making contracts. Two of those companies, according to property records, were located in Custer Battles' Rhode Island office. The head of those two firms - Emergent Business Services and Tar Heel Training - is Rob Roy Trumble, former operating officer for Custer Battles. He is also named as a defendant in the current lawsuit. The new federal lawsuit also names Emergent, Tar Heel and others as coconspirators in a scheme "to circumvent the suspension order and to defraud the government by getting false or fraudulent claims allowed or paid." It seeks an unspecified amount in damages. According to the suit, Custer Battles sought to flout the suspension order in two ways: -It transferred Iraq operations to Danubia Global. "This would be a change in name only, since all Custer Battles Iraq operations managers ... would retain the same responsibilities and perform the same functions," the suit says. -In the United States, Custer Battles continued recruitment, benefits administration and travel arrangements through Emergent and Tar Heel - the new companies formed at Custer Battles' office. "Again, this would be change in name only since Custer Battles managers performing these functions, including defendant Trumble, would retain the same responsibilities and perform the same functions," the suit said. Trumble's office phone has been disconnected. A Custer Battles e-mail, obtained by the AP in 2005, instructs employees to send all further correspondence to Emergent Business Services. State records show Windmill International is located at 53 Weathersfield Lane in Amissville, Va., the home of company president Combs. Windmill director Michael Ussery, a former State Department official and former U.S. ambassador to Morocco, listed the same address as Combs, the records show. Combs served as acting undersecretary in the Navy from 1999 to 2003, and made frequent trips to Iraq during that period and worked with contractors and military advisers there. He also was a special assistant to Johnson, who was acting secretary of the Navy, the service's top civilian position, in 2003. -------- israel / palestine Israel Warns 300,000 Lebanese To Flee Homes as Ground Invasion Nears Friday, July 21st, 2006 Democracy Now! http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/07/21/1431251 Israel is warning hundreds of thousands of residents to flee from southern Lebanon as it edges toward a full ground invasion. The number of Lebanese killed from the assaults now tops 330 - nearly all of them civilians. About half a million people have been displaced. Thirty-four Israelis have been killed, including 15 civilians. We speak with Rami Khouri, editor of the Lebanese newspaper, the Daily Star. [includes rush transcript] Israel is warning hundreds of thousands of residents to flee from southern Lebanon as it edges toward a full ground invasion. Thousands of Israeli troops are reportedly already operating inside the Lebanese border. Israeli planes dropped leaflets and broadcast warnings telling people they would be in danger if they remained in the region. Meanwhile, Israel's bombardment of Lebanon is continuing for a tenth day. Warplanes targeted more that 40 sites on Friday, mainly in southern Lebanon. The number of Lebanese killed now tops 330 - nearly all of them civilians. About half a million people have been displaced - or one in eight residents. Bombed-out roads and bridges are hampering aid efforts. The UN has warned the humanitarian crisis is worsening by the hour. Thirty-four Israelis have been killed, including 15 civilians killed by rockets fired by Hezbollah into Israel. * Rami Khouri, editor-at-large of the Beirut-based Daily Star newspaper and an internationally syndicated political columnist and author. He is Palestinian-Jordanian and a U.S. citizen. - Website: RamiKhouri.com RUSH TRANSCRIPT AMY GOODMAN: We’re joined on the phone now by Rami Khouri, editor-at-large of the Beirut-based Daily Star newspaper, an internationally syndicated political columnist and author. He is Palestinian Jordanian and a U.S. citizen. He joins us on the phone from Amman, Jordan. Rami Khouri, welcome to Democracy Now! I understand you’re one of the few people trying to get into Lebanon. RAMI KHOURI: Well, yes. I mean, figuratively there’s some other people trying to get back in. Everybody there is trying to flee. I mean, certainly all the foreigners -- most of the foreigners, not all of them. But I want to get back because our home is there, and my wife and I were in Europe on a personal visit. We couldn't get back to Beirut Airport, because the Israelis had bombed it, so we came to Amman. And we’re going back to Beirut tonight by car via a circuitous route, which we hope will be safe. But it’s very important for us to go back to stand, first of all, in solidarity with the Lebanese; second of all, in defiance of the Israeli military machine -- I mean, we're going to be safe in our home, we’re not on the frontline -- and third of all, to send a message, I think, to George Bush that this kind of insanity that he is officially sanctioning is one that ordinary people reject and that there is a defiance now of the U.S. and Israel that permeates this entire region. And I think our job as individuals and my job as a journalist is to be there and to cover the story and just to stand our ground. JUAN GONZALEZ: And the images that we’ve been seeing for the last week of the enormous damage and the killing of innocent civilians, the incredible damage to the infrastructure of Lebanon; your thoughts? RAMI KHOURI: Well, my thoughts are this is doubly tragic, because it’s the third or fourth time that Israel does this. I mean, it’s just extraordinary that a people as enlightened and with such a difficult history as the Jewish and Israeli people would actually now be the perpetrators of this kind of savagery over and over again, and each time they do it they reap a much worse counter-reaction. You know, they started this in the late ’60s, when there was a couple Fatah guerrillas in South Lebanon. They bombed Beirut Airport in 1968 for the first time. Then what they got back was a much bigger Lebanese resistance, a leftist nationalist resistance, with the PLO. Then they went into Lebanon in the ’70s, and then in ’80 they occupied South Lebanon, and they reaped in return for that Hezbollah. And they went into Hezbollah in 1996. They tried to wipe them out from the south, and what they have now is a much stronger Hezbollah, supported by Syria and Iran, with missiles that are hitting Haifa and Safed and other Israeli towns. So I think there’s a kind of an irrationality to Zionism that we’re seeing today, or at least to the Israeli political leadership, that just don't seem to get it, that when you repress somebody and you brutalize them, what you get is not acquiescence and subservience. What you get is defiance and resistance. And I think this is a lesson that most military powers have learned. Certainly the Americans learned it in Vietnam. They’re learning in Iraq. The Russians learned it in Afghanistan. And the Israelis seem unable or unwilling to learn these lessons in Lebanon. AMY GOODMAN: Well, what Israel says is what they get is they break Hezbollah, and they stop the rockets from flying in. They punish them for taking the soldiers, and they are trying to get them back. Can you talk about the beginning of Hezbollah, and can you talk about Israel's rationale? RAMI KHOURI: Yeah. I mean, Israel's rationale certainly sounds logical from an Israeli point of view. Anybody -- one of the few things I agree with George Bush on on the world is that, yes, everybody has a right and a duty to defend themselves -- there’s no question about that -- which is precisely what Hezbollah is trying to do. They're trying to get back their prisoners in Israel and the bits of land that are still occupied by Israel. But the way that the Israelis are trying to defend themselves is actually making themselves more vulnerable. It’s enhancing the political resistance to Israel. It is enhancing the political movements all around the Middle East that are the Islamist movements mostly, like Muslim Brothers, Hezbollah, Hamas. These guys are winning elections all over the place. They’re critical of the U.S. They’re critical of Israel. They’re critical of moderate Arab regimes. They’re close to Iran. What Israel is doing is counterproductive to such an extreme degree that it’s really perplexing how such an enlightened people as the Israelis, who have achieved so much in so many other fields, can be so blind to this issue. This is a political problem that needs a political solution. There is no military solution to a political problem. And this is a war. Hezbollah and Israel have been doing this for many years. Israel has tried this before, has done it. They’ve occupied. They’ve had free-fire zones, blue lines, red lines, green lines, surrogate armies, no-fly zones, occupation zones. They have tried every trick in the book two or three times. They bombed Beirut Airport now three times in the last 25 years. What more do they have in their arsenal that they haven't used? And what is fascinating, what they should learn as quickly as possible, is that every time they try to generate security through either punitive military attacks or controlling other peoples' lands in South Lebanon, this only inspires Hezbollah and Hamas now to get missiles and rockets that can have longer range. So all Hezbollah does now is fire these over the Israelis. And you’ve had three groups now in the Arab world in the last 15-20 years who have developed rockets to fire over any kind of zones to hit Israel: Iraq, Hezbollah and Hamas. At some point, you’d think the Israeli leaders or people would wake up and see what is the reality and find an alternative political, diplomatic, peaceful, negotiated and legitimate resolution to this conflict, which I think is the only way out now. JUAN GONZALEZ: And your sense as a journalist of the impact of the fighting, which is now really on three fronts -- the West Bank, Lebanon and Gaza -- on the other Arab governments in the region, particularly those who have come out critical of Hezbollah and these latest armed actions? RAMI KHOURI: One of the important dimensions of the phenomenon that we’re witnessing, which is the rise of these Islamist political, social and military groups and resistance groups, like Hamas and Hezbollah, is that they are increasing in their credibility and popularity all over the region, mainly because of what they do, but also because they are a strong antidote to the lack of effectiveness and the declining legitimacy of many of the existing Arab regimes and governments and political elites. So what you’re seeing very clearly all over the region is Arab governments who are criticizing Hezbollah, but Arab societies and political culture, mainstream political culture, and certainly the man and woman on the street, who are increasingly supporting Hezbollah and Hamas. A lot of people are critical of Hezbollah, to be fair, because they’re saying, well, look, you know, Hezbollah brought about this massive Israeli overreaction and has destroyed Lebanon and is really causing incredible pain to people. So there are criticisms of Hezbollah that are strong and sincere, but the support of Hezbollah, I think, is much, much more significant, and it’s not only about this particular incident in the south. I think Hezbollah, Hamas and these groups represent an organic natural reaction that has brewed and percolated and now is materializing after 15-20 years, a reaction of societies in the Arab world that has been extremely disappointed by the autocracy and corruption and ineffectiveness of their own Arab regimes, by the brutality and occupation of Israel, and by the rather racist and then now neocolonial and imperial in the military policies -- whatever you want to call them -- of the United States. They’re the reliance on using military force, giving Israel the green light to do whatever it wants; that those three issues -- the Israeli policies, the American policies and Arab governments -- all three have really weighed heavily on Arab societies and normal average decent people, and this is the reaction that we’re seeing. People are not going to live in a vacuum, and they’re not going to be humiliated and degraded. And they’re going to look for alternatives. And the alternative now that seems to be sweeping this region is the Islamist movements, including the ones doing serious military resistance to Israel. And if you look at Hezbollah, Hezbollah is doing something now which no Arab government in the last 50 years has been able to do, which is to fight a war against Israel, be heavily attacked and keep fighting back, hit Israeli cities with rockets, send one-third of the Israeli populations into shelters for two or three days in a row, and traumatize an entire Israeli population, just as Israel has traumatized Palestinian and Lebanese populations for many, many years. So there is something very significant here politically in terms of what’s going on. And again, I say this with great sort of sorrow, because it’s not something that we should be proud of or happy about. But it does represent a political shift in the balance of power and the balance of terror, and hopefully it will cause both sides, including when they wake up in the White House, to recognize that only a diplomatic negotiated solution is going to resolve these issues. AMY GOODMAN: Rami Khouri, we want to thank you very much for being with us, editor-at-large of the Beirut-based Daily Star newspaper, a Palestinian Jordanian, a U.S. citizen now in Amman trying to make his way into Beirut. -------- mideast Lebanon victims buried in mass grave By NASSER NASSER AND HAMZA HENDAWI ASSOCIATED PRESS WRITERS Friday, July 21, 2006 http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/1107AP_Mideast_Fighting_Devastated_South.html A relative from the border village of Marwaheen, Muhammed Abdullah, 53, prays by coffins containing the bodies of Lebanese victims prior to their burial in a mass grave at the southern Lebanon city of Tyre, Friday, July 21, 2006. With a few mourners at hand, 72 victims of Israel's 10-day-old bombardment are buried in a mass grave in this southern Lebanese city. Lebanese have streamed out of the south, leaving some villages ghost towns, but with roads destroyed many are trapped in their homesin the face of a possible Israeli invasion. (AP Photo/Nasser Nasser) TYRE, Lebanon -- Soldiers laid 72 coffins in two trenches, a mass grave for victims of the Israeli bombardment. Elsewhere, mounds of rubble sat undisturbed; rescue workers were too fearful of missiles to search for bodies. Lebanese have streamed out of south Lebanon since fighting erupted between Israel and Hezbollah last week, leaving some villages almost deserted. But many people are believed trapped in their homes - too poor to live anywhere else, too afraid to travel or unable to go because bridges and roads have been destroyed. An estimated 400,000 Lebanese make their home south of the Litani River, 20 miles from the Israeli border, and it's not known how many remain - but those that do risk being caught up in an Israeli ground offensive against Hezbollah. "It is not looking good and it's going to last for some time," Ali Sayegh, a 39-year-old furniture salesman from Tyre, said of the Israeli offensive. "There are not many people left in Tyre, very few walk the streets and there is a shortage of fresh produce," said Sayegh, who moved to a seaside hotel after sending his wife and two daughters abroad last week. Israel has been broadcasting radio messages into southern Lebanon and dropping leaflets, urging all residents south of the Litani to flee. Sometimes the warnings name specific villages and say residents should clear out. "There is a desire to leave, but they are afraid to. They're afraid of being hit by Israeli missiles and most of the roads are out anyway," said Timur Goksel, a former senior U.N. adviser in the region who now lectures on political science at the American University of Beirut. In the border village of Naqoura, home to the headquarters of U.N. peacekeepers, only 100 people are left of a population of some 3,000. Most of those who stayed have jobs at the local U.N. mission. Hundreds of thousands of southern Lebanese have been on the move since the fighting began July 12, mostly heading toward Beirut. They left in thousands of cars, with white sheets fluttering from their antennas or windows and their roofs packed with luggage. There has also been movement within the south. Thousands of people along the border moved to Marjayoun and Qlaia - two mainly Christian cities widely thought to be safer because Israel is hitting Shiite areas. Residents there opened schools and homes to refugees. A thousand people went to Marjayoun, a town of 2,000, said council head Fuad Hamra. Marjayoun has so far been spared bombardment, but Hamra said artillery and warplanes were hitting targets in orchards and fields 500 yards away. Hezbollah is the dominant force in the mainly Shiite south, running clinics, schools and offering a network of social and economic services as well as an army of some 5,000-6,000 fighters. Over the past 30 years, the region has borne the brunt of Israeli incursions, first against Palestinian guerrillas in 1978 and later against Hezbollah. Israel occupied a large chunk of the south between 1978 and 2000, when it was forced to pull out its troops in the face of mounting casualties from Hezbollah attacks. Despite the hardships created by decades of intermittent fighting, Hezbollah and its leader, Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, remain popular in southern Lebanon. "Oh God, oh God, please protect Nasrallah," is a popular slogan among the area's Shiites. In Tyre on Friday, volunteers placed the bodies of 72 victims - many of them children - in hurriedly made wooden coffins, their lids spray-painted with the names of the dead and an identifying number. Army troops loaded the coffins three or four high onto trucks and took them to an empty lot outside their barracks, where two trenches had been dug. The soldiers lowered the coffins into the grave as Israeli warplanes flew overhead, diving to fire missiles on targets in the nearby countryside. Only 20 mourners looked on, a sign of the mass flight of Tyre's residents. In Srifa, outside Tyre, bodies still had not been removed from a neighborhood leveled in Israeli airstrikes three days earlier. The mayor, Hussein Kamaledine, said up to 30 people may have been in 15 demolished houses, but no one knows for sure because workers can't bring equipment to clear the rubble. The situation was similar in the border village of Aytaroun, where a Friday morning strike reduced a building to rubble, with up to 10 people believed inside - but again rescue teams could not approach amid continued artillery barrages. Much of the downtown area of Nabatiyeh, a market town of 40,000, was devastated by two missile strikes last week. Most of the stores that escaped destruction remain closed. Homes have electricity for an average of two hours a day and long lines form outside bakeries, according to residents. Mustapha Badreddine, who heads Nabatiyeh's local council, told the AP by telephone that Israeli warplanes attacked downtown again Friday night, killing at least one person and wounding five. "It is another inhumane message from an evil enemy," said Badreddine, a U.S.- and French-educated cardiologist. Hamza Hendawi reported from Beirut, Lebanon. -------- nato NATO to double military strength to Afghanistan July 21, 2006 Xinhua http://english.people.com.cn/200607/21/eng20060721_285211.html The visiting secretary general of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), Jaap De Hoop Scheffer, on Thursday said that the western military alliance would double its troops to Afghanistan. "Let me stress again that NATO will double the number of its military, the number of its soldiers," he told journalists at a joint press conference with Afghan President Hamid Karzai. He gave this assurance amid an increasing Taliban-linked insurgency in the southern Afghan provinces, where more than 800 people have been killed over the past two months. More than 9,000-storng NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) is presently serving in Afghanistan to assist Afghan government in ensuring stability in the post-Taliban nation. He made these remarks in the backdrop that NATO is going to formally take the command of the U.S.-led coalition forces in the country on July 31 while more than 1,100 people including some 50 foreign soldiers have been killed in the violence in the war-torn country. The NATO secretary general was optimistic that the alliance mission will succeed in the post-Taliban central Asian state. "We really come in a very serious way. The NATO's young men and women will do every thing they can and they will succeed," he stressed. Linking development to durable security, the NATO leader said that NATO will create a climate of stability which is a pre- condition for development. Though he expressed satisfaction over the progress such as having elected government and elected parliament in Afghanistan over the past nearly five years, he called for more international support to the war-shattered Afghanistan. "My message is today let us lift the game and lifting the game means lifting the game of international community, lifting the game of the Afghan government in the fight against narcotics, in the fight against corruption, and in having the competent and decent people where they should be," he added. The increasing poppy cultivation and reported corruption in the government departments have caused concern among Afghans and the international community. "We will not fail because we cannot afford that and every party which tries to spoil this process in the south will fail, I can assure you," the NATO top leader said. -------- spies Negroponte Blocks CIA Analysis of Iraq “Civil War” Friday, July 21, 2006 Harpers By Ken Silverstein. http://www.harpers.org/sb-sources-negroponte-nei-cia-1153433546.html I reported in May that despite the deteriorating situation in Iraq, no National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) has been produced on that country since the summer of 2004. The last NIE, a classified document that the CIA describes as “the most authoritative written judgment concerning a national security issue,” was rejected by the Bush Administration (after being leaked to the New York Times) as being too negative, though its grim assessment subsequently proved to be highly accurate. The situation has gotten even darker since my initial story—a United Nations report cited in Wednesday's New York Times found that an average of more than 100 Iraqi civilians were killed each day in June—and I've learned from two sources that some senior figures at the CIA, along with a number of Iraq analysts, have been pushing to produce a new NIE. They've been stonewalled, however, by John Negroponte, the administration's Director of National Intelligence, who knows that any honest take on the situation would produce an NIE even more pessimistic than the 2004 version. That could create problems on the Hill and, if it is leaked as the last one was, with the public as well. “What do you call the situation in Iraq right now?” asked one person familiar with the situation. “The analysts know that it's a civil war, but there's a feeling at the top that [using that term] will complicate matters.” Negroponte, said another source regarding the potential impact of a pessimistic assessment, “doesn't want the president to have to deal with that.” The sources said that forces at the CIA have been lobbying for the new NIE for about six months. Not only is one overdue, but there's also a fear that if the Democrats win control of at least one chamber of Congress this November, the agency is going to get hammered for not having produced an NIE for so long. When the topic of a new NIE was first raised, the Directorate of National Intelligence agreed to consider the matter, but advocates heard nothing back. They raised the topic again several months ago and were told that Negroponte was still mulling over the matter. Since then, there's been no indication that the DNI intends to authorize a new NIE. “He's not going to allow [analysts] to call the situation warts and all,” said one source. “There's real angst about it inside.” A third source, a former CIA officer who served in Iraq, said he had no direct knowledge of Negroponte blocking the NIE but that it jibed with past practice. “The NIE is a crucial document . . . that tells you how to tweak your policy,” he said. “That's hard to do if you don't want to look at it.” He said he had two recent conversations with people in Iraq, one an official at the Ministry of Interior who told him that as of two days ago there were 1,600 bodies piled up at the central morgue in Baghdad. The second conversation, he said, was with an Iraqi general officer who told him, “I never thought I would see my capital like this. It's on fire.” “[The administration] can call it whatever they want,” said the former CIA officer. “There's a civil war going on in Iraq.” -------- us Accused troops: We were under orders to kill Soldiers say officers commanded them to ‘kill all military age males’ in Iraq The Associated Press July 21, 2006 http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13974639/ EL PASO, Texas - Four U.S. soldiers accused of murdering suspected insurgents during a raid in Iraq said they were under orders to “kill all military age males,” according to sworn statements obtained by The Associated Press. The soldiers first took some of the men into custody because they were using two women and a toddler as human shields. They shot three of the men after the women and child were safe and say the men attacked them. “The ROE (rule of engagement) was to kill all military age males on Objective Murray,” Staff Sgt. Raymond L. Girouard told investigators, referring to the target by its code name. That target, an island on a canal in the northern Salhuddin province, was believed to be an al-Qaida training camp. The soldiers said officers in their chain of command gave them the order and explained that special forces had tried before to target the island and had come under fire from insurgents. Girouard, Spc. William B. Hunsaker, Pfc. Corey R. Clagett, and Spc. Juston R. Graber are charged with murder and other offenses in the shooting deaths of three of the men during the May 9 raid. Girouard, Hunsaker and Clagett are also charged with obstruction of justice for allegedly threatening to kill another soldier if he told authorities what happened. ‘They did it admirably’ In sworn statements obtained this week by the AP, Girouard, Hunsaker, Clagett, and a witness, Sgt. Leonel Lemus, told Army investigators they were ordered to attack an island in northern Salahuddin province on May 9 and kill anti-Iraqi fighters with ties to al-Qaida. All four soldiers charged are members of the Fort Campbell, Ky.-based 3rd Battalion, 187th Infantry Regiment, 101st Airborne Division. They have been jailed in Kuwait since their June arrests. Their first hearing is Aug. 1 near Tikrit, Iraq. Michael Waddington, Hunsaker’s civilian lawyer, said his client followed orders and killed the detainees in self-defense after he and Clagett were attacked. “They did (their job) honorably, they did it admirably,” said Paul Bergrin, Clagett’s civilian attorney. “If they did want to kill these men, they could have and been within the rules of engagement.” Officers from their unit initially cleared the soldiers of wrongdoing. Charges were filed when witnesses changed their testimony after repeated interviews with Army investigators, Bergrin said. Military declines to comment Reached by e-mail in Iraq, Girouard’s Army lawyer, Capt. Theodore Miller, declined to comment because the investigation was continuing. An Army prosecutor, also deployed to Iraq, did not respond to an e-mail request for comment. Army spokesman Sheldon Smith asked that a request for comment be e-mailed to him in Virginia. He did not immediately respond. Military officials have released few details of the case. But statements from Girouard, Hunsaker and Clagett describe a tense early morning scene, with soldiers immediately opening fire on buildings. Girouard told investigators he expected he and his comrades would immediately be attacked when they landed on the island. Intelligence officials had warned that at least 20 al-Qaida operatives were hiding there. But it was only once the men moved to the northern half of the island that they found anyone, Girouard said. He said he and others shot and killed a man they spied in a window in one building and then rushed into a house where they found three other men hiding behind two women. A fifth man, holding a 2-year-old girl in front of him, later came out of another building, Girouard and Hunsaker told investigators. ‘Struck on the face’ Girouard said the four surviving men were not immediately killed because of the human shields. Once the women and child were moved to safety, he told investigators, the men did not appear to pose a threat and the soldiers took them into custody. But Hunsaker said three of the men then attacked him and Clagett as the soldiers were trying to bind the men’s hands with heavy-duty plastic ties. “I had felt this action necessary for they had tried to use deadly force on me and my comrade,” Hunsaker wrote about the shooting. Hunsaker told investigators he was stabbed. Clagett said he was “struck on the face with a fist or something.” Lemus, who only saw the men fall to the ground, told investigators he thought the killings were justified. “Proper escalation of force was used when the detainee became hostile and armed himself with a weapon and wounded one soldier and struck another,” Lemus said. “Our actions ... were in accordance to the ROE (rule of engagement) briefed to us prior to our mission and moments before our air assault was conducted.” ‘Telling the truth’ Girouard said he did not see the shooting either but was immediately told what happened. “I think they are telling the truth,” Girouard’s statement said. “If it would have happened another way they would have told me and the story has been the same the whole time.” Clagett and Hunsaker also told investigators they found AK-47 assault rifles, ammunition and gun parts after the men were killed. Bergrin said the weapons and other evidence not mentioned in the statements were proof that the Iraqi men were a threat. Several other service members face similar charges in unrelated cases involving the deaths of civilians in Iraq. According to the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the maximum penalty for murder is death, but it was unclear if the government will seek the death penalty in any of the pending cases. -------- POLICE / PRISONERS / COURTS / JUSTICE -------- human rights Las Vegas Outlaws Feeding Homeless in Public Parks Friday, July 21st, 2006 Headlines Democracy Now! http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/07/21/1431242 And in Las Vegas, city council members have established a new punishable offense --- feeding the homeless. On Wednesday, the Las Vegas City Council voted to outlaw the presence of mobile soup kitchens in public parks. Anyone caught serving food to the homeless will be subject to a misdemeanor charge. City officials say they’ve enacted the law because soup kitchens have kept people away from visiting public spaces. The American Civil Liberties Union has harshly criticized the measure, calling it both unconstitutional and unenforceable. But Las Vegas Mayor Oscar Goodman said the law will be enforceable because: “Certain truths are self-evident. You know who’s homeless.” -------- OTHER -------- environment Former Soviet Leader Gorbachev Urges Australia, U.S. to Sign Kyoto Protocol July 21, 2006 — By Associated Press http://www.enn.com/today.html?id=10909 BRISBANE, Australia — Former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev on Friday urged the United States and Australia to sign the Kyoto Protocol on global warming, saying the world's "reservoir of life" was rapidly shrinking. Australia and the United States are the only major industrialized countries that have not signed the Kyoto treaty, which mandates specific cutbacks in emissions of carbon dioxide and five other gases by 2012 in 35 countries. "Our reservoir of life is shrinking," Gorbachev said from the eastern Australian city of Brisbane, where he is heading an international environmental conference. "Before it is too late I think we need to put our environmental house in order." Gorbachev said the United States had behaved like a "stubborn animal" over the Kyoto agreement, and urged Australia to show leadership by joining the pact. Australia's conservative Prime Minister John Howard is a staunch supporter of U.S. President George W. Bush, and has thrown his country's weight behind several U.S. foreign policy decisions. "That's even more reason for Australia to sign the protocol," the former Soviet leader said. "Then that closeness will play a positive role. If that closeness is used only for aggravating mistakes such as the war in Iraq that's not positive, that's not useful." The 2006 Earth Dialogues conference runs until Monday, and includes presentations by environmental activists from around the world. Gorbachev said he believed the forum was important to mobilize public support for dealing with global warming. "World public opinion is now considered a superpower in its own right, and we have a responsibility to make use of this power to drive positive action for a sustainable future," he said. -------- ACTIVISTS U.S. Arming of Israel: How U.S. Weapons Manufacturers Profit From Middle East Conflict Friday, July 21st, 2006 Democracy Now! http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/07/21/1432202 Much has been made of the Syrian and Iranian origin of weaponry used by Hezbollah but there has been little discussion of where Israel's weapons come from. A new report by the World Policy Institute examines how the United States provides billions of dollars of military aid to Israel each year and how their current arsenal is composed of U.S made equipment. [includes rush transcript] Much has been made of the Syrian and Iranian origin of weaponry used by Hezbollah but there has been little discussion of where Israel's weapons come from. A new report by the World Policy Institute examines how the United States provides billions of dollars of military aid to Israel each year and how their current arsenal is composed of U.S made equipment. The report is titled "U.S Military Assistance and Arms Transfers to Israel". * Frida Berrigan is a Senior Research Associate with the Arms Trade Resource Center at the World Policy Institute. She is co-author of the report. RUSH TRANSCRIPT AMY GOODMAN: One of the authors of the report joins us now, Frida Berrigan. She’s Senior Research Associate with the Arms Trade Resource Center at the World Policy Institute. Welcome to Democracy Now! FRIDA BERRIGAN: Thank you. AMY GOODMAN: Well, tell us what are the weapons being used? Did you also look at where the weapons that Hezbollah is using comes from? FRIDA BERRIGAN: Sure. Almost all of the weapons used by Israel are from the United States. There might be a couple French fighter planes that they’re using, but its F-16s made in Fort Worth, Texas; its Apache helicopters; its Sparrow and Sidewinder missiles; it’s all from the United States. So you have this real disconnect between an overemphasis on the supply by Iran and Syria of Hezbollah's weapons and no discussion of the fact that all of the Israeli arsenal is from the United States, and that that is in contravention to U.S. law. to the Arms Export Control Act, which says that U.S.-origin weapons are only to be used for self-defense and for internal security. JUAN GONZALEZ: And your report indicates that Israel has always been the largest recipient of military aid from the United States, but that that’s actually increased since 2001? FRIDA BERRIGAN: We’re looking at incredible increases in U.S. military aid and weapons sales to Israel. Military aid stands at about $3 billion a year. That’s about $500 for every Israeli citizen that the United States provides on an annual basis. And then, weapons sales, most recently, since the Bush administration came into power, we’re looking at $6.3 billion worth of weaponry sold to Israel. Israel's relationship with the United States is unique in a number of ways. And one of those ways is that essentially the United States provides 20% of the Israeli military budget on an annual basis, and then about 70% of that money that is given from the United States, from U.S. taxpayers, to Israel is then spent on weapons from Lockheed Martin and Boeing and Raytheon. Most other countries don't have that sort of cash relationship, where they go straight to U.S. corporations with U.S. money to buy weapons that are then used in the Occupied Territories and against Lebanon. AMY GOODMAN: What kind of leverage does the U.S. money, the U.S. aid for Israel provide? FRIDA BERRIGAN: Well, when you’re talking about 20% of the Israeli military budget, you’re talking about a huge fulcrum of leverage, right? The United States could today say, you know, “This incursion into Lebanon, the killing of civilians, the bombing in Gaza, all of this is not internal security, all of this is not self-defense, and we’re cutting it off.” And they could cut it off tomorrow. And that would essentially not only send an incredibly strong message to the Israeli military, but it would remove the tools of the occupation, the tools of the bloodshed and the suffering that’s happening in Lebanon and in Gaza. It was interesting to sort of place the very weak statements that have come from the administration -- “Oh, there should be” -- you know, they have said things, like “They should practice restraint,” and stuff like that. Meanwhile, just on the 14th, the United States decided to sell $120 million worth of jet fuel to the Israeli military. The little notice that announced the sale from the Defense Security Cooperation Agency said, “This fuel will be used to promote peace and security in the region.” And then, meanwhile, you have jets strafing villages, bombing civilians, taking out bridges, destroying water treatment plants. So the United States could decide and would have a very strong case and a historic precedent for deciding to cut military aid. AMY GOODMAN: What’s the precedent? FRIDA BERRIGAN: In 1981, the last time there was a full-on invasion by the Israeli government into Lebanon, the Reagan administration cut military aid and froze weapons sales to Israel, while it did an investigation of whether or not the weapons were being used for self-defensive and internal security purposes. So for ten weeks in 1981, nothing went into Israel. Now, at the end of that ten weeks, they said, “Oh, well, you could argue ’til eternity about what constitutes defensive use of weapons.” But under the Reagan administration, while Alexander Hague was the Secretary of State, we did cut off weapons sales and military aid. And we certainly haven't done that since. And when we look at how the conflict and the war continues to unfold with so many civilians being killed and this bare use of force and power by the Israeli military, it seems like it’s time to explore that option again. JUAN GONZALEZ: Well, one of the things that’s gotten a lot of attention in recent days have been the missiles fired by Hezbollah into Israel. But I see by your report that to some degree the Hezbollah missiles might also almost be seen as a self-defense measure, because you have here a thousand Redeye missiles that Israel has, surface-to-air missiles, 400 Stinger man-portable air defense missiles, 444 Harpoon missiles. So Israel has quite an extensive missile arsenal of its own. FRIDA BERRIGAN: Right, we’re talking about one of the strongest militaries in the world going up against basically the defenseless Lebanese, and then a, you know, not very well armed Hezbollah. There was an article in the newspaper yesterday that quoted Israeli defense officials, who said, “Maybe 900 Hezbollah missiles have hit Israeli territory.” That’s 900 missiles, and probably 30 Israeli civilians have been killed. So they’re obviously not very effective weapons. They do get weapons from Syria, from Iran. They manufacture their own weapons. But -- AMY GOODMAN: You’re talking about the New York Times quoting the Fajr-3 from Syria? FRIDA BERRIGAN: Right, yeah. There was an article in the Times, I think on Monday, about Iranian missiles being used by Hezbollah, and they pulled Syria in, too, because Syria was producing an Iranian model missile and then had transferred it to Hezbollah. So, but the missiles haven't been very effective, and they can’t -- the range is between 30 and 45 miles. AMY GOODMAN: You talk about, Frida Berrigan, the U.S. government supporting the Israeli government and military. But this kind of weapons relationship also is a great boon to the U.S. weapons manufacturers. Can you talk about the relationship the U.S. has with these weapons manufacturers and name them? FRIDA BERRIGAN: Sure. Well, the largest weapons manufacturer in this country is Lockheed Martin. It’s based in Texas. And it manufactures the F-16 fighter plane, all manner of missiles. It manufactures the C-130, which is a huge transport plane. It’s the biggest weapons manufacturer in the world. Lockheed Martin and the Israeli military recently went into business together, co-producing a version of the F-16 fighter plane called the Sufa, which means “storm” in Hebrew. It’s built partially outside of Tel Aviv, and then the final work is done in Ft. Worth, Texas. It’s a $4 billion deal with the Israeli military. For the first time, an Israeli military company is contributing in its manufacturing the avionics of the plane. So there’s this -- it’s almost this supranational relationship between Lockheed Martin and the Israeli defense industry. It’s a kind of relationship that weapons corporations in this country would like to see with other countries, where they work directly with -- they sort of transcend government and work directly with the manufacturers of weapons in other countries. Another major corporation -- you mentioned the missiles -- is Raytheon, which is based in Massachusetts. They manufacture the Tomahawk missile, the Sidewinder, a number of other high-tech missiles that Israel has in its arsenal. These missiles have very sophisticated targeting components -- heat-seeking, they’re interfaced with GPS for very targeted attacks. Boeing is another major corporation. They manufacture all sorts of planes: the F-18 fighter plane, the F-14. So you have maybe ten weapons corporations in this country that have a stake in -- essentially in Israel using its military arsenal so that it can be replenished again. And the great thing about this relationship with Israel is, Israel doesn’t have to pay for it itself. It comes directly from U.S. taxpayers in the form of foreign military financing, which is transferred to Israel, and then turns right back around and goes to Lockheed Martin or Raytheon. JUAN GONZALEZ: And as we can see by the votes in Congress this week, both in the House and Senate, supporting the current military actions of Israel, there doesn't seem to be much opposition in Congress to this kind of a continued arms support from the United States for Israel. FRIDA BERRIGAN: Right, yeah. You have complete silence, and worse than silence from the U.S. Congress. So there's got to be some way to go around Congress and hold the defense corporations, these military corporations, directly responsible for what their hardware and software is doing in Lebanon and Gaza. AMY GOODMAN: Frida Berrigan, I want to thank you for being with us, of the World Policy Institute, just out with its report. ---- Israeli Refusenik vs. Israeli Peace Party Member: A Debate on Israel's Assault on Lebanon Friday, July 21st, 2006 Democracy Now! http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/07/21/1432212 While a large part of the international community opposes Israel's offensive on Lebanon, polls conducted over the past week have shown that between 90% and 95% of Israeli Jews remain in support of Israel's actions. We host a debate with a former Captain in the Israeli Air Force Reserves and a member of Israeli peace party, Meretz. [includes rush transcript] While a large part of the international community opposes Israel's offensive on Lebanon, polls conducted over the past week have shown that between 90 and 95 percent of Israeli Jews remain in support of Israel's actions, including members of the major Israeli peace parties. Yet as the assault continues into its tenth day, there are also many Israelis who have begun to speak out against their country's policies. This week Staff Seargent Itzik Shabbat became the first Israeli soldier to refuse to participate in the attacks on Lebanon. The Israeli peace party, Meretz, which initially supported the military's actions, has more recently begun questioning the extent of the current violence, according to a spokesperson for Meretz head Yossi Beilin. * Yonatan Shapira, a former Captain in the Israeli Air Force Reserves. In 2003 Yonatan initiated the group of Israeli Air Force pilots who refused to fly attack missions on Palestinian territories. He is also one of the founders of the organization Combatants for Peace. * Uri Zaki, chairman of Young Meretz. RUSH TRANSCRIPT AMY GOODMAN: We're joined in our Firehouse studio here in New York by Yonatan Shapira, a former Israeli soldier who left the military in 2003, is now founder of the group, Combatants for Peace. We welcome you to the Democracy Now! YONATAN SHAPIRA: Hi. I’m not the founder. I’m one of the founders of this group, and I was a pilot in the Israeli Air Force. AMY GOODMAN: When did you join the Israeli military? YONATAN SHAPIRA: Just like all the other Israeli boys, when they finish their high school. It was the year of 1991, and I finished my pilot course in the end of 1993. I served about ten years as a rescue pilot flying Bell 212 and Black Hawk helicopters. AMY GOODMAN: And where did you serve? YONATAN SHAPIRA: Most of the mission I did were rescue and also transport of commando forces into Lebanon and into the Occupied Territories. In the year of 2003, I initiated and found a group of Air Force pilots, including colonels and brigadier generals, all of them from all of the most respectable squadrons in the Israeli Air Force. Attack helicopter pilots, squadron commanders, F-16 pilots, F-15 pilots, all of them join me to this petition that I have here with me, and we published this letter, which called a “Pilots’ Letter,” in which we declared our refusal to take part in these attacks on civilians. And since then, we were all dismissed from the Air Force, and many of us became peace activists, anti-occupation activists, and some of us formed with other soldiers, other refusers from the Israeli Army, the group named Combatants for Peace, which is a group of Israeli former militants and Palestinian former militants who came together to the conclusion that there is no military solution to the violence and the conflict in the Middle East. And my message here today is that if you will let the Israeli government to solve this conflict, it means the destruction of my country and the destruction of the neighbors’ countries. JUAN GONZALEZ: What was it that brought you to that conclusion during your time of service? What were the particular incidents or situations that you can confronted that led you to conclude that? YONATAN SHAPIRA: You know, it’s a long process. And I give lectures here in the United States and in Europe and in Israel, sharing my process of transformation and realizing that in order to contribute to the security of my country and to the security of all the people who live in this region, I must refuse. I can talk to you about that for hours and hours. But if I have to put some particular events, it was the assassination policy that was led by Prime Minister Sharon and the same general who is now the commander of the Army, General Dan Halutz, who was the commander of the Air Force. And they started to use my friends and my fellow pilots in the F-16 pilot squadrons and Apache squadrons, in order to assassinate suspects in Gaza and in the Judean-Samarian Occupied Territories. And that process brought us to the situation where we finally understood that we are just part of this circle of mutual violence, circle of revenge. And once you understand that you are part of this circle, you understand that there is no much difference between the terror that you are suffering from and the terror that you are involved in. And it’s a very, very hard thing for one to understand and to go through. It involved personal crisis sometimes, and it involved with a lot of things that now connecting to each other, not just in the issues in the Middle East, but all over the world. But now the idea is we believe that people like us who were part of the Israeli Army, who were part of the core of the Zionist enterprise and still care about their country and their people and love Israel, and I’m talking out of love to my country and my family. I’m going to be back there in a few days. I have friends that are now sitting in shelters and all this kind of stuff. I know the suffering also of my people. But we believe that it’s our obligation now to shout this and to call the world: if you care about my country, if you care about the Israeli people, as well the Palestinian and the Lebanese who are now suffering, you must put massive pressure on the Israeli government, and putting pressure on the Israeli government means putting pressure on your government. AMY GOODMAN: Uri Zaki is also with us, chair of Young Meretz in Israel, the Meretz Peace Party. What is your position on what Israel is currently doing in Lebanon and Gaza? URI ZAKI: First of all, hello. I must say that unlike Yonatan, I differentiate between what’s going on in the Occupied Territories, meaning Gaza and the West Bank -- and I’m saying Gaza, even though we withdraw from Gaza -- and what’s going on in Lebanon. The way I see it, the peace camp, the camp that I’m a member of, proud member of, has been always advocating towards a withdrawal to international recognized borders by Israel. And that’s what we did in Lebanon. We withdrew exactly by meter by meter, centimeter by centimeter, to the borders as were declared by the United Nations. Now, once these borders were determined, any violation of Israeli sovereignty beyond these borders, like Hezbollah did, meaning attacking Israel with rockets and killing some of our soldiers, kidnapping others, that has to be answered by force, because that was a violation of our sovereignty beyond our border. YONATAN SHAPIRA: I have a question to Uri. The conclusion that you made, that that has to be answered by force, who said that? Who said that by force we are going to save our country? Maybe it’s some conception that you were raised upon and all those values and all those principles that we got during our education, in processing Israel. I don't believe and I think the rest of the world, the enlightened world, do not believe that there is a solution that will come out by using force and using the Israeli military. And just think about what the Israeli government is saying now. They refuse for ceasefire. They refuse to stop the war. And missiles are falling on our families in Haifa, and at the same time, our leaders refuse to stop the war. URI ZAKI: Yonatan, I respect your act of refusal, even though I don't necessarily support it. But I think because of your courageous act, you cease to differentiate between two different realities, the reality of occupation and the reality of a country defending itself. I think Hezbollah and also the Lebanese state, the Lebanon state -- I mean, the Lebanese government did not try to prevent Hezbollah from standing on our border. I think Hezbollah is a terrorist group, a similar group to many groups that are now threatening the Western world. We did nothing to provoke the Hezbollah from attacking us. I think it’s a different story than the Occupied Territories, which the activities there were the reason for your act of refusal. I think it’s a different story, and I think, yes, once a country is being attacked on its borders, I don't see any other thing we can do. By the way, in a way, we tried another way. Israel -- it’s not the first time that the Hezbollah attacked over our northern borders. The two past times that it was done, there was no reaction, no military reaction. And indeed for the third time, if we would have been silent right now, in a few months they would do another violent act, maybe more viciously. AMY GOODMAN: Yonatan Shapira. YONATAN SHAPIRA: Just to refer with a few points to what you said now. First of all, this morning I talked to one of the leaders of Meretz, Zehava Galon, and she agreed with me that international pressure must be applied on the state of Israel, on the government of Israel, to force them to stop this crazy operation that eventually can cause to a nuclear war. We know that the situation in the Middle East is very fragile, and the Bush administration do not need much things to happen in order to get us all involved in a regional war and maybe a world war. These are things who are much more dangerous for us from missiles in Haifa. The situation can get much worse. And tell me, please, why do you think that killing innocent Lebanese, by now 330, most of them civilians, children and women, why do you think that killing these innocent people will bring you some kind of security? It’s the same kind of logic to think that if you kill Lebanese civilians, you will force them to bring Israel security or to press the Hezbollah is the same kind of logic that maybe Nastrallah is trying to shoot Israeli cities and forcing, by that, the Israeli people to convince the Israeli government to stop this war. It’s the same kind of insanity. And although -- just last important thing -- although it’s not the same situation in Gaza and in the Occupied Territories and in Lebanon, the same insanity and the same cruelty and the same stupidity of our leaders is now being on the spot. This is the danger, because the leaders of this country now and in the Lieutenant General, General Halutz, who is now leading this crazy war, will not hesitate to get Syria and to get Iran involved, and this is my greatest fear. AMY GOODMAN: Uri Zaki, that first point, why you think the killing of Lebanese civilians is justified? URI ZAKI: I don't think that the killing of -- God forbid -- that the killing of the Lebanese civilians is the purpose of the Israeli assault. Of course, that happens in situation of offenses. Now, I don't think that the NATO forces, when they tried to bring down Milosevic, with what they did with the former Yugoslavia, wanted to hurt innocent civilians, and yet it did, and eventually Milosevic was tried in an international court of justice. What I’m saying is -- and by the way, Yonatan is right. We have different views in our own party, because in this operation I think Zehava is maybe the most extreme, extreme presenter of the view that Yonatan is presenting, but most of the party is not there. It’s not by mistake, we’re the most dovish peace party in Israel, and yet -- AMY GOODMAN: We only have ten seconds, but your comment to that, Yonatan. YONATAN SHAPIRA: Maybe the reason that Zehava Galon is the only one who is now supporting publicly those who refuse to participate in these crazy attacks, is a woman. She is a woman, and maybe she suffers less from our own machoistic problem and ego problem. And this is kind of, I think, one of the most important things that’s happening now in the leadership of my country. AMY GOODMAN: We're going to have to leave it there, but we will continue this discussion. Yonatan Shapira, a former captain in the Israeli Air Force Reserves, calling on Israeli soldiers to resist serving in the Israeli military in Lebanon now. Uri Zaki, chair of the Young Meretz Party. I want to thank you both for being with us.