NucNews August 30, 2006 -------- NUCLEAR -------- africa South Africa may enrich uranium Wednesday, August 30, 2006 Pakistan News International http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=21743 Johannesburg: South Africa, which has backed Iran’s right to enrich uranium, says it is considering processing its own uranium and envisages building up to six more nuclear reactors. Buyelwa Sonjica, minerals and energy minister, said that any enrichment of uranium by South Africa would be pursued within international obligations. South Africa has said it hopes to expand its economy by around six per cent in the future and would need new energy capacity to fuel the expansion of the continent’s biggest economy. Sonjica said: “I therefore believe that time has come for South Africa to conduct a cost-benefit analysis into the beneficiation (processing) of uranium. I will soon be making certain announcements in this regard.” South Africa abandoned its nuclear arms programme before the end of apartheid in 1994. But it opposes forcing nations to abandon uranium enrichment, saying this could hurt its potential commercial activities to supply the nuclear power industry. Sonjica said: “The expansion of peaceful uses of nuclear energy worldwide is looking more and more irreversible. “Clearly there is potential in this country and in this continent for us to look at ways of increasing the role nuclear technology plays in our economies.” Speaking at the launch of the 200-strong South African Young Nuclear Professionals, Sonjica said the proposed plan would require building four to six new nuclear reactors, and that the country had enough uranium reserves to fuel such a nuclear energy programme. Koeberg, near Cape Town, is Africa’s only nuclear-fired facility and imports all its fuel. Its two nuclear reactors each generate about 900 megawatts of electricity. -------- australia Communities Unite to Oppose National Nuclear Waste Dump 30/08/2006 Melbourne Indymedia http://melbourne.indymedia.org/archives/archive_by_id.php?id=9984&category_id=13 Concerned Melbourne citizens disrupted ‘business as usual’ at the Parsons Brinckerhoff office as part of a national day of action opposing the federal government's plan to impose a nuclear dump on the NT. Parsons Brinckerhoff is the company contracted to assess the proposed dump sites. “Parsons Brinckerhoff is a key player in the expansion of Australia’s nuclear industry, collaborating with the Howard government to push ahead with new uranium mines, nuclear reactors and waste dumps in Australia” said Dr. Jim Green, nuclear campaigner with Friends of the Earth. “Last year the Howard government passed legislation overriding NT environmental and Aboriginal heritage protection laws to facilitate the nuclear dump project. The planned dump is an unwanted, unnecessary imposition and Parsons Brinckerhoff should play no part in the government's grubby, racist nuclear dump plans." -------- business EU Toshiba buy of Westinghouse Wed Aug 30, 2006 (Reuters) http://today.reuters.com/news/articleinvesting.aspx?type=mergersNews&storyID=2006-08-30T092751Z_01_BRU004870_RTRIDST_0_ENERGY-WESTINGHOUSE-EU.XML BRUSSELS, Aug 30 - The European Commission has extended by two weeks its deadline for deciding whether to approved Toshiba Corp.'s (6502.T: Quote, NEWS, Research) plan to purchase Westinghouse, the U.S. power plant arm of British Nuclear fuel. The deadline was moved from Sept. 5 to Sept. 19 so that the Commission could ask competitors and customers about proposed remedies offered by Japan's Toshiba. That means that the Commission found problems with the deal and the company has proposed changes in it to fix the competitive problems. Westinghouse builds and runs nuclear power plants worldwide and is a leader in the Chinese nuclear power market. -------- depleted uranium Weapons to die for Tehran Times Opinion Column, Aug. 30, 2006 By Leuren Moret http://www.mehrnews.ir/en/NewsDetail.aspx?NewsID=373906 TEHRAN, Aug. 30 (MNA) -- Two images changed my life when I visited the Peace Museums in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August of 2000, on my first trip to Japan. I had worked as a geoscientist in two U.S. nuclear weapons labs -- Lawrence Berkeley National Lab and Lawrence Livermore National Lab -- but I never knew what a nuclear weapon really was, nor the horrific effects of radiation on the environment and biological systems. Now I know. In the Hiroshima Museum, as a nuclear weapons lab whistleblower I wandered through the exhibits with TV cameras in my face, keeping it together by stuffing my emotions. I walked past the mangled lunch boxes and tricycles, thinking of the school children as I looked at the watches and clocks stopped at the moment the first thermonuclear weapon detonated on a human population. Shadows of people vaporized on stones, and on the steps of a building where one had sat, waiting for the bank to open on that fateful morning. A diorama showed the reality of dying people walking through the streets of Hiroshima with skin dripping and hanging from their bodies. In another image a man stood looking down at his eyeball he held in his hand. When I looked up at a model of LITTLE BOY, the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima, I lost it and broke down in sobs which did not stop until half an hour later, halfway through a press conference. The cameras continued to roll, capturing my horror and real feelings at the realization that scientists had made that “gadget” possible. I am a scientist, I worked in those laboratories of death. And I am a graduate of the University of California, which will forever be known as “the University that poisoned the world.” The university managed those laboratories of death, unchallenged, for more than 60 years. Three days later in the Nagasaki Peace Museum, I saw FAT MAN, the first plutonium atomic bomb which was dropped on Nagasaki. There were photos taken by a local photographer just hours after the bomb destroyed the city. People were standing on a bridge absolutely devastated, lying on the ground dying, patterns from their kimonos burned into their skin. And then I saw THE photo: a young mother standing with her kimono open, barebreasted, with a vacant stare, while she nursed her dying baby. Sobbing overwhelmed me once again, and it still brings tears to my eyes when I think of that image, which is burned into my brain by now. I am a mother, and in that moment I knew that mother could have been me, with the life of my baby taken from me, or any other mother around the world. Radiation respects no living thing. That is when I made the decision to spend the rest of my life doing research and educating the public about radiation. I never knew that I could make a difference. Now I know that, as a citizen scientist, empowering others is the best way of all. I started by writing a Letter to the Editor, not expecting to have it published, but it was. And then I started writing articles about depleted uranium which I had learned about from a journalist, Akira Tashiro, whom I met in Hiroshima on that first trip to Japan. In 2002 he asked me to write the Foreword to his prize-winning book “Discounted Casualties: The Human Cost of Depleted Uranium”. Then I was asked to be an expert witness in Japan for the International Criminal Tribunal for Afghanistan in 2003. Marion Fulk, a Manhattan Project scientist and Livermore nuclear weapons program researcher, prepared me with the best science in the world for my testimony. The testimony resulted in a very strong conviction on depleted uranium weapons, illegal under all laws, war conventions, U.S. Federal Code, and U.S. military law. In fact, during testimony, the exposure of the original 1943 Manhattan Project plan to develop DU as a radioactive poison gas weapon convinced the international panel of Judges to make two additional charges: It was a crime against the environment, and President George W. Bush was guilty of war crimes by knowingly exposing his own troops to illegal radioactive weaponry. My motivation to expose the horrible truth about depleted uranium resulted in very unexpected successes. One of the most important actions was taking a bill, introduced and stuck in limbo in the Connecticut legislature, to New Orleans on a speaking tour in March 2005. I joined anti-war protestors and veterans marching through the streets of New Orleans on March 19. We ended up standing on the white marble steps of the antebellum Louisiana Supreme Court in the heart of the French Quarter. While I stood in the hot sun describing the horrors of depleted uranium weapons, a withered grinch of a security guard glared out at me from behind the locked doors of the Courthouse, while a police van across the street secretly videotaped our speeches. Bob Smith, a Vietnam veteran, came up afterwards and asked me for a copy of the Connecticut depleted uranium bill originally written and introduced by Pat Dillon. Dillon is an epidemiologist and was the Speaker of the House in Connecticut, a position she lost shortly after her bill was introduced. Much to my complete shock, Bob Smith and Ward Reilly, two Vietnam era veterans, took it to the Louisiana legislature. They told two legislators willing to introduce the bill to “white out Connecticut and write in Louisiana.” It was quickly passed unanimously by the legislature and signed into law by the governor within a few months. What I didn’t know then was that the bill would set states rights against federal rights, and National Guardsmen against regular military personnel, busting the depleted uranium issue open on a national scale. Because state governments have legal jurisdiction over the National Guard, the state bill requiring mandatory testing for depleted uranium exposure did not cover regular military personnel. This angered the regular soldiers who were frustrated and angry over being “kicked to the curb” by the Pentagon and Veterans Administration. The state is legally entitled to force the Pentagon to pay the costs of implementing the bill, because the Pentagon is in violation of its own mandates, directives and orders, which require training, testing and treatment for soldiers handling depleted uranium. In May of 2005, Congressman Jim McDermott, M.D. (D-WA), introduced a depleted uranium bill in Congress. Attached to the bill as a supporting document was an entire issue of President Bush’s hometown newspaper in Crawford, Texas, The Lone Star Iconoclast, which Leon Smith, the editor, had dedicated to “What is DU?.” On March 1, 2006, a second issue, “Have DU Will Travel,” came out with extensive interviews with scientists. After covering Cindy Sheehan and Camp Casey last summer, the paper is now widely read in Washington, D.C. Recently, Leon Smith published a book called “The Vigil: 26 Days in Crawford, Texas” about Camp Casey. Today, more than 15 states have introduced a depleted uranium bill, and Louisiana and Connecticut have passed theirs. It has created a nightmare for the federal government and put the Pentagon in permanent PR counterspin as well as exposed 15 years of official coverup under three Presidents and corruption in Congress. Our children, our sons and daughters, have been sent off to the battlefields of the Middle East and Central Asia to become uranium meat. The cost of their care has been dumped on the state medical facilities. Their families have been destroyed, not to mention their lives. It is time for citizens and state elected officials to pass depleted uranium bills which will help all soldiers by putting pressure on the federal government. Each of us has a part to play by demonstrating at local facilities like Alliant (manufacturer of depleted uranium weapons), writing letters to local newspapers, contacting elected officials, counter-recruiting in schools, or just passing on the information so that others can become aware. Put a song in their hearts by sending “Johnny Got A Gun” to your local radio station or Indymedia site to play on the air. Depleted uranium is Washington’s secret nuclear war. Leuren Moret is an independent scientist and environmental commissioner in the City of Berkeley. She is featured in documentary films on depleted uranium: BEYOND TREASON (2005), BLOWIN’ IN THE WIND (2005), BAGDAD RAP (2004). They can be purchased by contacting her at leurenmoret@yahoo.com. She also does speaking events. (PulseTC.com) ---- Ceremony kicks off nuclear fuel plant By Staff and wire August 30, 2006 Albuquerque Tribune http://www.abqtrib.com/albq/nw_local_state_government/article/0,2564,ALBQ_19859_4956072,00.html EUNICE - The first major nuclear facility to be licensed in the United States in three decades has moved a step closer to construction as officials broke ground for a $1.5 billion uranium enrichment plant in eastern New Mexico. Officials said Tuesday the National Enrichment Facility, which will make fuel for commercial nuclear power plants, was making history. The plant about five miles east of Eunice is expected to create as many as 1,000 construction jobs and 300 permanent jobs. The first private enrichment plant in the nation could be ready to sell enriched uranium in early 2009. Two groups are fighting the plant in court, saying the company has not shown a plausible strategy to dispose of depleted uranium waste. -------- india Glos rules out nuclear cooperation with India DPA 30 August 2006 http://www.expatica.com/source/site_article.asp?subchannel_id=52&story_id=32668&name=Glos+rules+out+nuclear+cooperation+with+India NEW DELHI - Germany will not cooperate with the Indian government in its construction of new nuclear reactors despite the billions of dollars in investment at stake, German Economics Minister Michael Glos said Wednesday. Germany's decision to phase out its own nuclear-power programme excludes it from exporting atomic technology, Glos said on a trip to India while adding that the two countries could work together in the fields of renewable energy and energy efficiency. His comments came as India plans to build numerous power plants, including nuclear reactors, to fulfil its growing energy needs and feed its surging economy, which has grown by more than 8 per cent in the past three years, according to the government. The legal situation in Germany has it so "that we must shut down safe nuclear-power plants for reasons that are, in my opinion, arbitrary," Glos said in New Delhi. Germany's previous government, a coalition of the Social Democrats and Greens, decided to remove the country from nuclear-power generation by 2021, a policy criticized by conservatives like Glos. Glos' visit to the Indian capital ended Wednesday with talks with Energy Minister Sushil Kumar Shinde before he travelled on to Mumbai. He said that his trip to India was aimed at highlighting opportunities for German businesses in India. There is "a high level of interest by German business to participate in this growing market," said the minister, whose six-day Asian trip began in Malaysia and was due to end with his return to Germany on Thursday. Glos, who was accompanied on his trip by a large German business delegation, called on Indian's government to further streamline its bureaucracy and cut its red tape. He said there was also interest on the Indian side in investing in Germany as it "rigorously" seeks to work more with the European country. Glos added that in light of the failed World Trade Organization talks, the European Union should look at closing its own trade agreement with India and with other Asian countries. -------- iran Iran President Challenges Bush To Debate, Defends Nuclear Enrichment Wednesday, August 30th, 2006 Headlines Democracy Now! http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/08/30/1417251 In Iran, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has issued a new challenge to President Bush – a televised debate. On Tuesday, Ahmadinejad said he would like to debate Bush about “world affairs” and the ways to solve them. He also defended Iran’s right to nuclear energy. * Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad: "Peaceful nuclear energy is the right of the Iranian nation. The Iranian nation has chosen that based upon international regulations, it wants to use it and no one can stop it." Ahmadinejad’s comments come ahead of the UN’s deadline Thursday for Iran to suspend nuclear enrichment. The Security Council has threatened sanctions if Tehran fails to comply. ---- 'We Don't Want War' - Leading Iranian Dissident and Former Political Prisoner Akbar Ganji Wednesday, August 30th, 2006 Democracy Now! http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/08/30/1418211 Renowned Iranian investigative journalist and dissident Akbar Ganji discusses why he recently declined an invitation to the meet with President Bush in the White House. Recently released from prison, Ganji discusses human rights abuses in Iran, the nuclear issue and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's rise to power. [includes rush transcript] Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has issued a new challenge to President Bush - a televised debate. On Tuesday, Ahmadinejad said he would like to debate Bush about "world affairs" and the ways to solve them. Ahmadinejad's comments come ahead of the UN's deadline Thursday for Iran to suspend nuclear enrichment. The White House dismissed the idea of a debate, describing it as a diversion from concerns over Iran's nuclear program. Well, as Bush refused the Iranian president's invitation to a debate, today we turn to an Iranian dissident who refused Bush's invitation to the White House. Akbar Ganji is a renowned Iranian activist and investigative journalist. He recently visited Democracy Now!'s firehouse studio in the midst of his month-long world tour to raise awareness about human rights violations in Iran. His visit came just months following his release from an Iranian jail where he was imprisoned for nearly six years. Akbar also used his time in the United States to speak out against human rights abuses in Iran. He took part in a three-day hunger strike outside of the UN aimed at forcing the Iranian government to release political prisoners. But he also carried a message for the Bush administration. Ganji declined a personal invitation to the White House to meet with top U.S officials overseeing Iran policy. I began by asking Akbar Ganji why he declined the offer. The conversation was translated by Hossein Kamaly. * Akbar Ganji, Iranian dissident and investigative journalist. (translated by Hossein Kamaly) Click for Part I of Democracy Now!'s interview with Akbar Ganji RUSH TRANSCRIPT AMY GOODMAN: Today, we turn to an Iranian dissident who refused Bush's invitation to the White House. Akbar Ganji is a renowned Iranian activist and investigative journalist, recently visited Democracy Now!’s Firehouse studio in the midst of this month-long world tour to raise awareness about human rights violations in Iran. His visit came just months following his release from an Iranian jail where he was imprisoned for nearly six years, imprisoned and tortured. Akbar also used his time in the U.S. to speak out against human rights abuses in Iran. He took part in a three-day hunger strike outside of the UN, aimed at forcing the Iranian government to release political prisoners. But he also carried a message for the Bush administration. Yes, he declined that personal invitation to the White House to meet with top U.S. officials overseeing Iran policy. This is part two of our interview with Akbar Ganji. I asked him why he declined the White House offer. Our conversation was translated by Hossein Kamaly. AKBAR GANJI: [translated] As I mentioned before, Amy, I don't think this can help in any way our democratic movement. Our first demand and our first concern is to make sure that there is not going be a military invasion against our country. We do not want war. I say these things, and I appreciate your making it available and broadcasting it. They hear what I say, and if they are really interested in peace, they will not invade. Always in a negotiation, there's a give and take. And I have nothing to offer to the President. I’m an intellectual. What can I offer him? If there are negotiations, it must take place between the government of Iran and the government of the United States, and it must be a transparent negotiation. AMY GOODMAN: Are you concerned if Iran develops nuclear weapons? AKBAR GANJI: [translated] More than that, I’m concerned about the possibility of a disaster like what happened in Chernobyl. What Iran has acquired has been through black market. And we don't know anything about the security and the safety of this project. Should there be an explosion, should there be a catastrophe, the environment, the ecosystem and the people will be destroyed. It's not the West that is confronted with the possibility of a nuclear Iran, an Iran armed with a nuclear weapon, but it's the people of Iran faced with a potential disaster like a Chernobyl. And also I should say that the policies of the West, in this regard, are fundamentally -- it’s fundamentally a dual standard. They disregard the atomic weapons, atomic bombs, available to Israel, Pakistan and India, but Iran is said not to have the right to enrich uranium. Of course, I find the policies of the Islamic Republic fundamentally unwise. We should strive to disarm internationally, for an international disarmament. We have to fight the militarization of the world. AMY GOODMAN: Is there a country, Akbar Ganji, that you think is dealing with Iran correctly, in a constructive way? AKBAR GANJI: [translated] Well, that's another issue to talk about: the government of Iran vis-a-vis Western governments. Both sides are at fault in this issue. The Iranian regime, by adopting, through adopting wrong policies has created a consensus against itself. You know that there was a disagreement, fundamental chasm between Europe and the United States over the question of Iraq. But in Iran, because of the unwise positions taken by our government, there is an international consensus against us. On the other hand, the fear, the concern, is there with the Iranian people that the West is just looking for a false reason to invade Iran anyway, regardless of what they do. The best way we can think of to stop this is to promote and to call for a direct negotiation and transparent negotiation between the two sides, negotiations about peace. Our concern is about the violation of human rights and the establishment of democracy. AMY GOODMAN: You were arrested in Iran. You had exposed during the Khamenei regime the killings of many dissidents. You were held for six years. Were you tortured in prison, just recently released? AKBAR GANJI: [translated] I was gravely mistreated. But it's not only me. It's a matter of dozens, scores of prisoners who are treated in the worst conceivable way. I have always tried to be their voice. I was lucky enough to be well known in the world. However, there are numerous people in prison in Iran, but their names are unknown, even to the people in Iran, within Iran. They are kept in solitary confinement on no grounds. No access to books, newspapers or telephone. No attorney present, no legal representation. And they are deprived of meeting with their families. And they are under pressure to confess to charges of espionage. They bring them in front of camera in the same way Stalin used to do and make them confess. And they will convict them to prison, sentence them, give them sentences based on those television shows. We object to this process. AMY GOODMAN: Do they broadcast these so-called confessions on television in Iran? AKBAR GANJI: [translated] Yes, they do. Yes, they beat them up in prison and then bring them in front of camera, and they confess to crimes they have never committed. AMY GOODMAN: Akbar Ganji, were you beaten up? AKBAR GANJI: [translated] I had similar problems. AMY GOODMAN: Did they broadcast your so-called confession? AKBAR GANJI: [translated] I never went to any show. I never withdrew my position, from what I put forward. My positions that I advocated from prison were far more radical from what I had said before going to prison. The harsher they treated me, I became more radicalized. But I have no personal problems with anyone, and I have no personal complaints. Our problem is democracy. Our concern is democracy, human rights and freedom in the country. AMY GOODMAN: Can you, Akbar Ganji, give us the landscape of the pro-democracy movement in Iran? Who makes it up? AKBAR GANJI: [translated] First of all, we have a strong class of intellectuals. And our intellectuals, this strong class, demands democracy. Secondly, we have a large younger generation, and the structure of the population in Iran has a large youth population, and that part of the population, that segment of the population, wants democracy. Half of the population, composed by women, also advocates and demands freedom and equality, legal equality with men, with the other half. Ethnic and linguistic minorities are deprived of their rights, and they demand equality with other groups. Religious minorities are deprived of their rights, and they demand equality. The foundation of democracy, of course is equality. We have several different currents and movements in Iran that all agree on the demand for democracy. AMY GOODMAN: Are there also those, for example, who are calling for the return of the Shah or, you know, like the son of the Shah, who would be opposed to this government? AKBAR GANJI: [translated] This group mostly is based outside Iran and mostly in the United States, and they have been away from Iran for too long, way too long, and they don't keep in touch with what is going on in Iran. Over the past 27 years, so many people have been imprisoned and suffered, but none of this group. Of course, we demand equality, and we oppose any form of discrimination and special privileges. The current regime says it is the prerogative and the privilege of the clerics to rule. And the monarchists advocate the right of a single family to rule. This is in violation of democracy. AMY GOODMAN: How did Ahmadinejad get elected? AKBAR GANJI: [translated] At least there are eight reasons, eight causes for this. First was that many people, including myself, banned participation in the election. Therefore, by doing this, we withdrew millions of people who would have otherwise voted for the reformists. AMY GOODMAN: Why were you banned? AKBAR GANJI: [translated] Because participation in the elections is collaborating. It's a form of collaboration with the regime and legitimizing the activities of the regime. And even if we were to succeed in the elections, that would be futile, just as we saw in the eight years of the reform movement. The second reason for the election of Ahmadinejad is the poor performance of the reformists over the eight years of their tenure. In the best case, the people say the reformists were incompetent; in the worst case, they say they were traitors and they betrayed us. The third reason the reformists were defeated was that they could not agree on one candidate to run. And the fourth problem, the fourth reason, was that the people at large are highly suspicious of Hashemi Rafsanjani. AMY GOODMAN: Just an excerpt of our conversation with Akbar Ganji, renowned Iranian activist and investigative journalist, imprisoned by Iran for six years and tortured, says US military action against Iran would only strengthen Ahmadinejad, the Iranian president’s hand. Tomorrow, Iran faces a UN deadline to suspend nuclear enrichment. -------- korea Westinghouse Snags $300 Million Contract in South Korea From the Pittsburgh Business Times Wednesday, August 30, 2006 http://neinuclearnotes.blogspot.com/2006/08/westinghouse-snags-300-million.html Westinghouse Electric Co. said it signed contracts worth more than $300 million to provide equipment and support for two nuclear power plants in South Korea. The Westinghouse contracts are with Doosan Heavy Industries and Construction Co. Ltd., and the Korea Power Engineering Co. Inc. [...] The plants will be operated by the Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power Co., a subsidiary of Korea Electric Power Corp. The contracts will provide work at a number of Westinghouse locations in the U.S., including: Windsor, Conn., Newington, N.H., and Monroeville. -------- missile defense Missile defense interceptor set to fly from VAFB By Janene Scully/Associate Editor August 30, 2006 Lompoc Record http://www.lompocrecord.com/articles/2006/08/30/news/news01.txt For the first time, a missile defense interceptor is set to fly from Vandenberg Air Force Base in a test to collect data, and not necessarily to collide with a target weapon that is set to launch from Alaska. The $85 million test for the Missile Defense Agency is scheduled between 7 and 11 a.m. Thursday, with the 54-foot-long interceptor built by Orbital Sciences Corp. blasting out of an underground silo on north Vandenberg. About 15 minutes later, a target weapon is scheduled to launch from Fort Greely, Alaska, according to Richard Lehner, a Missile Defense Agency spokesman. Somewhere above the Pacific Ocean, several hundred miles west of Vandenberg, the weapons will draw near. However, an actual intercept isn't necessarily expected, officials said. “That's really not the objective,” Lehner said, adding that while officials don't intend to hit the target, the interceptor could collide with it if the pair wind up in the same path. “It's really an end-game, data-collection exercise to collect data about the target through the intercept sensors ... to see what it can see. This obviously is to make the system better.” However, weather doesn't appear overly accommodating for an early launch attempt. During the first part of the launch window, thick fog causing low visibility will ground a helicopter required for range support. The Western Range establishes guidelines to ensure safety as rockets and missiles fly from the Central Coast. “Surface visibility will improve late in the window as the stratus ceiling lifts slightly. However, the on-shore flow will prevent the clouds from moving off shore. This will keep the concern for violating the visibility constraint until late in the window,” the launch forecast says. That gloomy outlook led to a 100-percent likelihood conditions will prevent liftoff. Later in the morning, visibility will improve slightly, leading to just a 60-percent chance of a delay. The forecast for a 24-hour scrub to Friday doesn't improve, and in fact would worsen for the end of the window. This test also will mark the first time an early warning radar at Beale Air Force Base, in Marysville, will play a role as the command and control system or brains. At the end of this year or early next year, another test will use the same scenario, but aims to end with a planned intercept. The Pentagon's Ground-Based Midcourse Defense segment, designed to guard against a limited, long-range, missile attack, is made up of radar, a command-and-control equipment or central nervous system, and in-ground interceptors topped with an “exoatmospheric” kill vehicle. If an enemy missile is launched toward the United States, satellites and radar are supposed to spot the incoming weapon, and fire an interceptor carrying the 152-pound “kill vehicle” to destroy the warhead. The system is likened to trying to hit a bullet with a bullet. Citing several test flops and rigged flights, critics have charged that the system won't work against a real-world attack. In previous missile defense system tests, Vandenberg served as the launch site for targets, while interceptors flew from Kwajalein Missile Range, more than 4,000 miles away in the central Pacific Ocean. Officials have said they want to use Vandenberg as a launch site for an Alaskan weapon to measure how the system performs in different scenarios. Vandenberg is home to a pair of operational missile defense boosters on the northern tip of the 99,000-acre installation. In an April ceremony, officials gathered to dedicate the facility as the Ronald W. Reagan Missile Defense Site. The bulk of the operational interceptors are based at Fort Greely, with the 11th installed this week. -------- u.s. nuc facilities NRC wants to speed things up United Press International August 30, 2006 http://www.topix.net/content/newscom/3140143742180600057319065452152577960425 The new head of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission says the NRC should be able to review license applications for new plants in less than 42 months. That's how long it currently takes to process an application for a license, Dale Klein said Wednesday at a Platts Energy Podium in Washington. Klein said he believed the licensing process should not take almost as long to complete as plant construction. The nuclear industry estimates a new reactor could be built in 48 months. I believe we can accelerate the process after we go through the first few, with no compromise on safety, Klein said of the application process. The NRC has received indications from 16 entities, representing a potential 27 new units, that they intend to apply to the commission for permission to build and operate new plants, Klein said. Interest in building nuclear facilities has risen as concerns over global warming have intensified. -------- michigan Company celebrates finished cleanup at nuclear plant site August 30, 2006 Associated Press http://www.woodtv.com/global/story.asp?s=5343085 CHARLEVOIX, Mich. People cheered and fireworks boomed during a celebration marking the cleanup of the former Big Rock Point Nuclear Power Plant. The plant near Charlevoix first produced electricity in 1962. It was the nation's oldest operating nuclear plant when it shut down nine years ago. Now there's a large open space where the reactor and buildings once stood. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission expects to designate the 475-acre property a "greenfield" within several months. That means it can be used safely for any purpose. But spent nuclear fuel remains inside steel and concrete casks buried on the site. They'll remain there until the long-delayed opening of a federal repository for nuclear waste. ---- Nuclear power site returns to nature Consumers restores Big Rock Point August 30, 2006 BY JOHN FLESHER ASSOCIATED PRESS http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060830/BUSINESS06/608300438 Bert Medley of Grayling views the reactor near Gaylord as it begins its journey from the decommissioned plant outside Charlevoix. (2003 photo by WILLIAM ARCHIE/Detroit Free Press) Nine years after the Big Rock Point nuclear power plant near Charlevoix stopped generating electricity, Consumers Energy said Tuesday it has finished demolishing the structure and returning the woodsy grounds to their natural condition. "We're extremely proud that we have met our promise to return the site to a greenfield," company spokesman Tim Petrosky said. Originally constructed for research and development by the Atomic Energy Commission, forerunner of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Big Rock Point began generating power in 1962. It started commercial operations three years later, generating 67 megawatts from its boiling water reactor, and became the nation's oldest operating commercial nuclear plant in 1993. The reactor was housed in a round, aquamarine containment building perched by the edge of Lake Michigan. Motorists driving along U.S.-31 a few miles north of Charlevoix could glimpse the structure through the trees. Although licensed to operate until 2000, Consumers shut down Big Rock Point in August 1997, saying it wasn't economically feasible to continue operations. The plant has since been torn down. Its reactor was shipped to a low-level nuclear waste landfill in Barnwell, S.C. But the spent fuel rods will remain on the premises inside concrete and steel casks until a national storage site for high-level radioactive waste is available. The Department of Energy plans to open such a facility at Yucca Mountain in Nevada by March 2017, despite local opposition. Consumers Energy, the principal subsidiary of Jackson-based CMS Energy Corp., says tests have detected the barest trace of plant-generated radiation remaining at the Big Rock Point site. The company says the grounds are suitable for any use, including residential development, but that it hopes to sell them to the state for public recreation. Most of the 475-acre property is heavily wooded. It includes 1.5 miles of Lake Michigan shoreline. "It's the largest undisturbed piece of Lake Michigan frontage in this part of the state," said Tom Bailey, executive director of the Little Traverse Conservancy, which supports government acquisition of the site. The area is culturally significant. For centuries it was a seasonal gathering spot for American Indians. It also hosts numerous endangered and threatened species, including the piping plover and plants such as Pitcher's thistle and Lake Huron tansy. The conservancy is helping the Michigan Department of Natural Resources seek state and federal grants, but no purchase deal has been reached, Bailey said. -------- vermont Yankee nuclear plant told to stop releasing warm water THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Wednesday, August 30, 2006 http://www.telegram.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060830/NEWS/608300395 VERNON, Vt.— The Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant has been ordered to stop releasing warmer water into the Connecticut River. Environmental Court Judge Merideth Wright said the environmental groups suing to block the releases have shown a “substantial possibility that they will prevail.” The warm water being released from the plant could harm fish in the river, particularly the American shad, the judge wrote. “Appellants have shown sufficient potential for irreparable injury to American shad in the Connecticut River, both at present as the juveniles become accustomed to cooler water temperatures prior to their migration down the river in the fall, and in the summer of 2007 for the growth of the next generation of juveniles,” the judge wrote in a four-page ruling. Last March, the Agency of Natural Resources issued Vermont Yankee a permit allowing it to increase the temperature of the water it discharges into the Connecticut River. The Connecticut River Watershed Council of Saxtons River is appealing the discharge permit. A trial is scheduled for January. State Rep. David Deen, D-Westminster, the river steward for the council, said yesterday’s ruling was a victory for the river. Deen said about 500 American shad pass a hydroelectric dam in Vernon each year. About 150,000 shad a year pass through a similar dam downriver in Holyoke, Mass. “It appears as the temperature of the Connecticut River has gone up after Vermont Yankee’s discharges, the number of fish has gone down,” he said. -------- MILITARY -------- arms Italy warns Syria on arms to Lebanon 30 Aug 2006 (Reuters) http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L30229149.htm ROME, Aug 30 - Italy's foreign minister said the international community would "not stand by and watch" if Syria sent arms to Lebanon, news agency Ansa reported on Wednesday. "In Syria they should also know that if arms arrive from Syria ... the international community will know about it and won't stand by and watch," Massimo D'Alema said in a radio interview, Ansa reported. Italy is contributing 3,000 troops to the United Nations peacekeeping force in Lebanon that is aimed at turning a truce between Israel and Hizbollah guerrillas into a sustainable ceasefire. Its contingent is the largest so far, and Italy is expected to take over command of the mission from France in 2007. "We ask Syria for cooperation," Ansa quoted D'Alema as saying. In a telephone conversation on Tuesday, Prime Minister Romano Prodi spoke to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad about possible ways to solve the crisis in Lebanon and in the Middle East in general. -------- business Soldiers die, CEOs prosper By Derrick Z. Jackson, Boston Globe Columnist | August 30, 2006 http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/08/30/soldiers_die_ceos_prosper/?p1=MEWell_Pos1 MORE THAN 2,600 US soldiers have died in Iraq. July's toll for Iraqi civilians was 3,500, the deadliest month of the US occupation. Iraq's civil war is on pace to kill 25,000 to 30,000 civilians by year's end. If you add in the tens of thousands of deaths from the 2003 invasion (we do not know the exact number because the Pentagon won't comment), researchers will inevitably say that the body count has crossed 100,000. All of this madness to stop a madman, Saddam Hussein. The litany of US mistakes and excessive force has the Pentagon commissioning at least two secret strategy studies in Afghanistan and Iraq. ``This is a struggle for the soul of the Army," said Colonel Peter Mansoor, the head of the Army and Marine Corps Counterinsurgency Center. Just as odorous, a mountain of corporate cash grows next to the piles of bodies. In this bizarre war where Iraqi civilians fear both suicide bombers and the United States, the biggest sacrifice that President Bush asked of American civilians was to get on a plane and show those terrorists a thing or two by going to Disney World. Defense contractors took that request to a logical extreme. They built their own fantasy land. There is no evidence of a contractor having a soul in the 13th annual Executive Excess CEO survey by the Institute for Policy Studies, a progressive think tank, and the Boston-based United for a Fair Economy. The report found that 34 defense CEOs have been paid nearly $1 billion since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. As soldiers have died in displaying personal patriotism, the pay gap between soldiers and defense CEOs has exploded. Before 9/11, the gap between CEOs of publicly traded companies and army privates was already a galling 190 to 1. Today, it is 308 to 1. The average army private makes $25,000 a year. The average defense CEO makes $7.7 million. ``Did this surprise us? No, because we've been watching since Sept. 11," said Betsy Leondar-Wright, communications director for United for a Fair Economy. ``While the rest of us were worrying about terrorism and mourning the people who died, the CEOs were maneuvering their companies to take advantage of fear and changing oil supply, not just for competition but for personal enrichment." The top profiteers after 9/11 were the CEOs of United Technologies ($200 million), General Dynamics ($65 million), Lockheed Martin ($50 million), and Halliburton ($49 million). Other firms where CEO pay the last four years added up to $25 million to $45 million were Textron, Engineered Support Systems, Computer Sciences, Alliant Techsystems, Armor Holding, Boeing, Health Net, ITT Industries, Northrop Grumman, Oshkosh Truck, URS, and Raytheon. While Army privates died overseas earning $25,000 a year, David Brooks, the disgraced former CEO of body-armor maker DHB, made $192 million in stock sales in 2004. He staged a reported $10 million bat mitzvah for his daughter. The 2005 pay package for Halliburton CEO David Lesar, head of the firm that most symbolizes the occupation's waste, overcharges, and ghost charges on no-bid contracts, was $26 million, according to the report's analysis of federal Securities and Exchange Commission filings. ``Those examples take the cake, especially because it's all related to their government contracts, which is money straight out of the taxpayer's pocket," Leondar-Wright said. The Executive Excess report, with the help of the Wall Street Journal's 2006 survey of executive compensation, made similar observations of oil executives as their firms enjoy record profits during war. The pay gap between the average oil and gas CEO and the average oil worker is 518 to 1. The general national CEO to worker gap is 411 to 1. The report said that the typical oil construction laborer would have to work 4,279 years to match the $95 million pay last year for Valero Energy CEO William Greehey. This is so out of line that the authors of the Executive Excess report recommend wartime pay restraints for defense CEOs and a permanent congressional watchdog panel for contract fraud and waste. Companies that cannot adhere to restraints should be ineligible for contracts, they said. The report said ``democracies decay when one segment of society flourishes at another's expense." Leondar-Wright said, ``It is now at the point where we have lost any sense of proportion. There is no sense of shared sacrifice, no sense that we're all in this together." Spreading democracy to Iraq is far-fetched when defense and oil CEOs speed its decay at home. They are all in it for themselves, at our expense. Derrick Z. Jackson's e-mail address is jackson@globe.com. -------- war crimes Lebanon Considers Suing Israel for War Crimes Wednesday, August 30th, 2006 Democracy Now! http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/08/30/1418205 The Lebanese government is considering possible legal procedures to sue Israel for war crimes and crimes against humanity. We speak with Lebanese parliament member Ghassan Moukheiber who is leading the charge in the case. Moukheiber is an attorney and a member of Lebanon's parliamentary human rights committee. [includes rush transcript] Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has rejected calls for a swift end to Israel's air and naval blockade of Lebanon. Speaking after talks with United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan, Olmert said the seven-week siege would only be lifted once the ceasefire terms were fully implemented. Annan, who flew to Israel from a visit to Lebanon, has described the continuing embargo as "a humiliation and an infringement on [Lebanese] sovereignty." Amnesty International cited the blockade in a recent report that accused Israel of committing war crimes in Lebanon. The report called for a UN investigation into whether Israel broke humanitarian law by targeting civilian infrastructure and using of cluster bombs in the month-long war. Now, the Lebanese government is considering possible legal procedures to sue Israel for war crimes and crimes against humanity. Lebanese parliament member Ghassan Moukheiber is leading the charge in the case. He is an attorney and a member of the parliamentary human rights committee. Democracy Now!'s Ana Noguiera caught up with him in Beirut. * Ghassan Moukheiber, member of Lebanese parliament. RUSH TRANSCRIPT AMY GOODMAN: Lebanese parliament member Ghassan Moukheiber is leading the charge in the case. He's an attorney and a member of the parliamentary human rights committee. Democracy Now!'s Ana Nogueira caught up with him in Beirut. GHASSAN MOUKHEIBER: My committee and myself are leading the coordination of many efforts within civil society, but also within the official bodies in Lebanon, mainly to prosecute the general and the Minister of Justice, to prosecute the war crimes of Israel. For some background, for many viewers of yours, or many politicians or political analysts, war is a simple game of power. It's the rule of power. And we would like to see that changed. Instead of the rule of power, we'd like to turn it into the power of rules. And the rules, in that sense, are the international rules that are set forth by the Geneva Conventions that put criteria and principles even for the worst actions which mankind can do, which are wars. Even wars must follow rules. And if you look at the events, if you look at the war that has been -- the war of aggression that has been waged by Israel, you would see that almost every single one of these rules of war have been broken. And the violations of the Geneva Conventions are not simple matters to be brought into reports. These are grave violations of a huge magnitude that are considered by international law as war crimes, and these are extremely dangerous and must be looked at as such by the international community. Whatever we're talking about are nothing else but actions that have led to more than 1,300 dead, a third of them being children; more than 4,000 wounded; one million Lebanese displaced, forcefully displaced by the Israeli Army, the Israeli aggression. We have hundreds of bridges that have been destroyed, roads, infrastructure, homes. In excess of 14,000 homes were destroyed, leveled down to the ground. There has been an unimaginable aggression against civilians. Particularly now, we still see the wounds in cluster bombs that have littered civilian areas that also are in violation of international law. The list could be very long. However, for as much as some politicians and international diplomacy looks at the facts and tried to reach a ceasefire, which we are seeking now and are seeking to lift the blockade, we're also looking beyond that to the acts of war that have been caused and looking at making sure that there will be no impunity of Israel in any future action. It is important that the world looks at war actions as crimes. If you kill a man, you're brought to trial in a court of law. If you kill a thousand, this is considered a war. And a thousand man and child and women dead are almost simple numbers that you accounted on TV programs. It's horrible. This is why, I think, myself and many of my colleagues, mostly lawyers, but all civil rights activists, are seeking, first, to investigate properly and in a manner that will be technically sound and could be accepted in a court of law, that will be credible in a court of law, whether in an international court or any domestic court that would have jurisdiction. We are collecting all the data that relate to these war crimes. We will make sure that Israeli war criminals, whether civilian leaders or military leaders, are brought to trial. It is not an easy task, because Israel has the fourth largest army in the world, and it has huge support within the world, but also in particular within the United States. But this is politics. What is important in whatever we're trying to do is bring the attention back into the rules which no one, no warring faction, should ever forget, that you need to protect the civilians. Civilians should be outside of the scope of any of the war games, which politicians and warring players, such as generals and the like, are willing to wage for every or any reason that they can believe sound. We consider that the war of Israel is not in self-defense. It has become so disproportionate that it is a war of aggression on its own merit. It has caused so many casualties that these casualties amount to war crimes. No impunity means trying Israeli war criminals within the appropriate jurisdictions. ANA NOGUEIRA: Can you explain a little bit which jurisdictions you're hoping to take Israel to court in and who you want to address these war crimes to, attribute them to? GHASSAN MOUKHEIBER: It will depend on the jurisdiction. There is, indeed, the first possibility is for any injured person, any victim, can sue Israeli authorities, both individuals and the state of Israel, within national domestic laws whenever they have dual nationalities. And there have been many such casualties. A United Nations peacekeeper, a Canadian, was killed along with four others by the Israelis on the Lebanese-Israeli border for no reason. And, unfortunately, this couldn't bring any action of the United Nations, and we know that the wife of this serviceman is suing now in Canada. We have several other cases of Lebanese Canadians, Lebanese Americans, Lebanese French, Swiss, Italians, all these nationalities, Germans, also have been hit. Brazilian Lebanese have been killed, Kuwaitis. All these nationalities, dual nationals, can sue within their own national jurisdiction. Now, you're talking about families that have been totally destroyed -- their houses. The full families sometimes have been totally wiped out. So we're seeking to assist those families, both in collecting information and evidence and in providing them full legal services, and many international human rights organizations have been offering these services. Domestic courts are one avenue for legal action. Another is the International Criminal Court, which has been recently established, that has come into operations only in the year 2002. Now, this international court has specific competence to try war crimes and war criminals. Only individuals can be tried by this international court, and we're pushing -- myself and my colleagues are wishing that the Lebanese government submits to the jurisdiction of those courts, although it had not ratified the Rome treaty, which has established the International Criminal Court. The third court that could have jurisdiction is the International Court of Justice. However, this would also require that Israel accept the jurisdiction of this court, which we, for the time being, we do not expect is forthcoming, as we see that for as much as Israel has been evading any form of acceptance to its liability, it would keep on neglecting international law, neglecting its own responsibility under international law. So, all these forums now are under study. Nothing is definite yet, except that we are working effectively with civil society, Lebanese and international civil society organizations, at collecting data, establishing a network of lawyers, and also making sure that the appropriate qualification of the war of Israel is done as war crimes. ANA NOGUEIRA: If in the International Criminal Court you would have to take an individual, would it be Olmert? AMY GOODMAN: Lebanese parliament member, Ghassan Moukheiber, leading the charge to investigate Israel for human rights abuses. He was interviewed by Democracy Now!'s Ana Nogueira in Beirut. -------- ACTIVISTS Ban for anti-nuclear protesters The protest did not halt work at the plant Wednesday, 30 August 2006 (BBC) http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/tees/5297930.stm Protesters who chained themselves to the gates of a nuclear power station have been banned from approaching any power plants in England and Wales. Police said 20 green activists from Reclaim Power were arrested after a 12-hour protest outside British Energy's Hartlepool power station. Six were cut free by a Ministry of Defence team, according to police. All were released on condition they do not return to the town or approach any other power-generating facility. The group were angry at the government's plans to build more nuclear power stations. Bail conditions All were arrested on suspicion of aggravated trespass. Reclaim Power claims to be a network of green campaigners made up from other environmental organisations, including Greenpeace and the Camp for Climate Action. A Cleveland Police spokesman said: "Late last night all 20 had been interviewed and released on conditional police bail. "The conditions are that they do not enter Hartlepool and that they keep away from all other power generating plants." Power generation began at Hartlepool in 1983. It is due to be decommissioned in 2014. Earlier this year the government said nuclear power could make a "significant contribution" to Britain's future energy needs.