Drat! I only have two degrees in technical fields from well-respected universities, and ten years of experience in engineering. Oh the shame to now know nothing!

TheDenverChannel.com
Former Rocky Flats Operators Try To Prevent Testimony Of Grand Jury Foreman
Court Filings Made In Class Action Lawsuit

POSTED: 6:01 pm MDT October 21, 2005

DENVER -- Attorneys defending operators of the former Rocky Flats nuclear weapons site against a multimillion-dollar class-action lawsuit are seeking to prevent testimony by the foreman of a 1992 grand jury that voted to indict officials over contamination there.

Attorneys for Rockwell International Corp. and Dow Chemical Co. said in a court filing late Thursday that Wes McKinley, now a member of the state Legislature, was expected to testify about his experiences on the grand jury and about a bill he proposed to warn of potential lingering contamination at the site 10 miles northwest of Denver.

McKinley, who said Friday he hopes to be able to testify, refused to answer questions on those subjects during a deposition, citing grand jury secrecy rules, defense attorneys said.

"It is obvious that what plaintiffs want McKinley to tell the jury is: `The cleanup effort at Rocky Flats is flawed and there are continuing health risks at Rocky Flats, but because of (secrecy rules) I cannot tell you why I believe this,"' defense attorneys said.

"Plaintiffs and McKinley should not be allowed to disclose matters occurring before the grand jury when they believe it to be in their interests to do so, and not disclose such matters when doing so would be adverse to their interests," they said.

In a federal trial that is expected to last through December, several residents who owned property near Rocky Flats when it was shut down in 1989 allege that contamination from the plant drastically reduced the value of their property and that of about 13,000 other landowners. They are seeking damages that defense attorneys have said could reach $500 million.

In their lawsuit, landowners claimed Rockwell and Dow, who operated the plant under a Department of Energy contract, intentionally mishandled radioactive waste and tried to cover it up.

During testimony Friday, landowner Merilyn Cook told the jury she agreed to be one of the lead plaintiffs in the case "to bring out the right."

"The truth is a hard thing here," she said during questioning by defense attorney David Bernick. "One of the main ... responsibilities of a class representative is to help find the truth in a situation."

Last week, the contractor in charge of a cleanup project at Rocky Flats declared the $7 billion, 10-year project complete, a major milestone in converting the site to a national wildlife refuge.

U.S. District Judge John Kane has not ruled on motions by Rockwell and Dow to prevent testimony not only from McKinley, who had been scheduled to testify Friday, but also from Jon Lipsky, a former FBI agent who led a raid at Rocky Flats in 1989. During his deposition, Lipsky refused to answer some questions about his investigation, citing a letter from the FBI "urging him to follow certain confidentiality obligations related to his prior employment," defense attorneys said.

Lipsky declined comment.

McKinley said he hoped his testimony and Lipsky's would raise public awareness of lingering contamination he believes exists at Rocky Flats.

"In another 10 or 15 years it'll pretty much be forgotten. People should have the opportunity to know what went on out there," he said. "It's kind of our duty. There's not a personal thing in it, it's just the fact that some things you really hate to see happening."

McKinley unsuccessfully introduced a bill in this year's legislative session to post signs around the wildlife refuge to warn the public about radioactive contamination he believes is still there. He said the measure was killed for lack of funding, but he plans to try to revive it next year.

McKinley and his attorney, Caron Balkany, published a book last year accusing the Justice Department of covering up environmental misconduct at Rocky Flats. The book, "The Ambushed Grand Jury: How the Justice Department Covered up Government Nuclear Crimes and How We Caught Them Red Handed," relied in part on interviews with Lipsky.

Government officials have denied allegations of a coverup.

Indictments that McKinley's grand jury wanted to issue were rejected by prosecutors who worked out a plea agreement. Rockwell pleaded guilty to 10 hazardous waste and clean water violations in 1992 and was fined $18.5 million.
-------------------------------------------
(Posted for educational and research purposes only, in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107).

Rocky Flats was a military installation that experienced several problems because it was basically stuck in the midst of Cold War secrecy. Namely, it was involved in weapons manufacturing.

I see no reason why the military's troubles with making WMDs has any bearing on commercial nuclear power.

Depends on what "nothing" is (with apologies to Clinton).

Nuclear power is the safest, least environmentally hazardous, longest lasting form of energy known to mankind.

Yes, there are some issues with waste management - - this is true with all other energy sources.

We can deal with these.

There is plenty of Uranium around (AND NOT IN THE MIDDLE EAST) to last 1000 years. That's good enough for me.

U.S.A. Federal Dirty Bomb Cleanup Policy

"A Nuclear Katrina in the Making"
Department of Homeland Security Issues Grossly Lax
Dirty Bomb Cleanup Guidance (01/04/06):
Posted: Thu Jan 05, 2006 2:09 am
--------------
Dirty Bomb Cleanup Guidance

US Department of Homeland Security Dirty Bomb Cleanup Guidance
published Jan 3, 2006 would allow radiation levels that will cause cancer
in 1 in every 3 to 4 people exposed for 30 years, using National Academy
of Sciences BEIR VII or EPA risk estimates.

NIRS Press Release. January 4, 2006.
http://www.nirs.org/radiation/radstds/rads....htm/#dirtybomb
Quote:
The guidance permits radioactive contamination from a terrorist dirty bomb to remain in place, with no long-term cleanup measures required, at doses up to 10,000 millirems per year indefinitely. This is about a thousand times higher dose and risk than EPA Superfund guidance currently allows for cleanup of the nation's most contaminated sites.

"Some pro-nuclear government officials publicly claim that a radiological weapon couldn't cause any harm except fear," said Diane D'Arrigo of the Nuclear Information and Resource Service, a Washington, D.C. policy group. "Yet in DHS FEMA guidance, the government is quietly admitting that radiation from dirty bombs could cause one in four people to get cancer—and makes it potentially acceptable to leave that contamination long into the future while people live and work in the area." DHS's dirty bomb "cleanup" levels far exceed all previous US health guidance, regulations and risk levels.

http://www.commondreams.org/news2006/0104-04.htm

http://www.nirs.org/

Mothersalert: http://www.mothersalert.org
http://www.mothersalert.org/moreinfo.html
--------------
See also: NucNews Links and Archives (by date) at :
http://nucnews.net (Posted for educational and research
purposes only, in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107).

To: All People concerned about American Wars Worldwide
From: Leuren Moret

Subject:: Warning to SE Asian countries about Iran war and monsoon rains depositing radiation in environment.

Dear Editor and staff - The United states has now caused depleted uranium illnesses in more than 50% of our soldiers who have served on the depleted uranium battlefields in Iraq, Yugoslavia and Afghanistan. "Depleted Uranium: Dirty Bombs, Dirty Missiles, Dirty Bullets" http://www.sfbayview.com /081804/Depleteduranium081804.shtml

People at the top of the US govt and Military know this: "Terrell E. Arnold, who has been responsible for training our most senior and most promising military officers as chairman of the Department of International Studies at the U.S. National War College in Washington, reports that Coalition dead and wounded may actually be twice what the US government admits and that, including the effects of our use of depleted uranium and other toxic weapons, "a long-term casualty rate for American forces of 40-50 percent appears realistic.""

The US and Israel are threatening nuclear war on Iran.

The Chinese intelligence have already warned countries that will be contaminated with radiation from monsoon rainout of nuclear materials: http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/dec30-jan606.htm Page Down the page for the article on Chinese Intelligence.

"Southeast Asian intelligence sources report that Burma's (Myanmar's) recent abrupt decision to move its capital from Rangoon (Yangon) to remote Pyinmana, 200 miles to the north, is a result of Chinese intelligence warnings to its Burmese allies about the effects of radiation resulting from a U.S. conventional or tactical nuclear attack on Iranian nuclear facilities."

"There is concern that a series of attacks on Iranian nuclear installations will create a Chernobyl-like radioactive cloud that would be caught up in monsoon weather in the Indian Ocean."

"Reports from Yemen indicate that western oil companies are concerned about U.S. intentions in Iran since the southern Arabian country catches the edge of the monsoon rains that could contain radioactive fallout from an attack, endangering their workers in the country."

"Low-lying Rangoon lies in the path of monsoon rains that would continue to carry radioactive fallout from Iran over South and Southeast Asia between May and October."

"Coastal Indian Ocean cities like Rangoon, Dhaka, Calcutta, Mumbai, Chennai, and Colombo would be affected by the radioactive fallout more than higher elevation cities since humidity intensifies the effects of the fallout. Thousands of government workers were given only two days' notice to pack up and leave Rangoon for the higher (and dryer) mountainous Pyinmana."

Moret continues: I have been on SAHAR TV - Teheran Office - warning about this radiation and discussing other issues. Please contact Afsaneh Ostovar, the Producer of the programs if you would like more information. You should do a big story on this coming nightmare from the "Infidels". I have lived in Iran briefly. I love Iran and the people. This cannot be allowed to happen to Iran by the people of the world. It will make the country radioactive forever. Please do what you can to help.

Here is an article I wrote for the World Affairs Journal. Look at the map and see where Iran is in this nuclear war: "Depleted Uranium: The Trojan Horse of Nuclear War" http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2004/DU-Trojan-Horse1jul04 .htm
Or, *http://tinyurl.com/7dydm*

Here is a Letter to the Editor for you to post everywhere:

BATTLE CREEK ENQUIRER – Letter to Editor/Opinion, August 9, 2005

Depleted uranium is WMD by Leuren Moret
http://www.battlecreekenquirer com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050809/OPINION02/508090332/1014/OPINION
Or, *http://tinyurl.com/87crs*

Thank you,
Leuren Moret

* See also: NucNews Links and Archives (by date) at http://nucnews.net * (Posted for educational and research purposes only, in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107) *

this strange
Forbidden
You don't have permission to access /Nucs/ on this server.

vets,
Yes I can....you just don't like it....and want to stop it! Sorry!
-----------------------------

‘Fiasco’ of secret nuclear waste tips
15 January 2006 UK Sunday Herald
By Rob Edwards, Environment Editor

http://www.sundayherald.com/53590

# Probe into Ayrshire dumps
# Questions over lost records
# Concerns of erosion due to global warming and rising seas

INVESTIGATIONS have been launched into the risks to public health and safety
posed by secret radioactive waste dumps on the North Ayrshire coast, the
Sunday Herald can reveal. Thousands of cubic metres of contaminated rubbish
from Hunterston nuclear power station have been dumped in five shoreline
pits accessible to the public. Yet official records of what the pits contain
have been destroyed.

Recent monitoring of the Ayrshire foreshore has uncovered unexpectedly high
levels of radioactivity, and there are mounting concerns that the pits could
be eroded or flooded by the rising sea levels caused by global warming.

The emerging story of the hitherto unknown waste pits has been described as
a “scandal” and a “fiasco” by critics, who are calling for urgent action to
clean up the mess. The Scottish Environment Protection Agency (Sepa) and
North Ayrshire Council have both stressed the importance of ensuring public
safety.

The five pits are on reclaimed land outside the perimeter fence of the
Hunterston A nuclear site, near West Kilbride. The two ageing reactors on
the site were closed down 16 years ago, though more modern reactors at the
adjoining Hunterston B site are still generating electricity.

The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, the government agency which is now
overseeing the clean-up of Hunterston A, says the pits contain about 6500
cubic metres of low-level radioactive waste. This is thought to include
contaminated soil, rubble and concrete dumped between 1977 and 1982.

But according to the British Nuclear Group, the state-owned company that
runs Hunterston A, documents detailing the dumped material have been thrown
away. They had been damaged by water leaking into the room where they were
stored.

Now surveys for the company have detected “elevated contamination readings”
at the pits. A patch of soil on the surface of one of the pits was found to
contain traces of the radioactive isotope caesium-137.

The British Nuclear Group, which used to be known as British Nuclear Fuels
Limited, has commissioned a series of studies from consultants. Experts have
been probing the pits in an attempt to find out what they actually contain
and what needs to be done about them.

Another study is examining the condition of the foreshore and its
vulnerability to the long-term effects of climate change, which is predicted
to result in rougher and higher seas. As the Sunday Herald revealed in
November, this is a problem facing many coastal nuclear sites.

Information about the waste pits has emerged only because of persistent
questioning by Rita Holmes, who represents Fairlie Community Council on the
Hunterston Site Stakeholder Group.

“These revelations show just how badly the industry has behaved,” she said.

“It dumped contaminated waste on public land for years and then managed to
lose the records of what it had dumped. As a result, we now have no clear
idea of the threat that the pits pose to public health,” she added.

“This is a scandal, and it will shock people locally and across Scotland. I
fear that the pits are just the tip of the iceberg of the mess we face
cleaning up Hunterston A.”

Holmes thought that the new investigations might help but would not reveal
all the dangers. “The only way to be sure is for all 6500 cubic metres to be
examined,” she argued. “Then, if there is a real risk of erosion, flooding
and leakage, waste will need to be dug out and taken elsewhere. Goodness
knows what problems remain to be discovered.”

Chris Ballance MSP, the Greens’ speaker on nuclear issues, said: “All of
this shows how completely irresponsible and reprehensible the behaviour of
the nuclear industry has been.

“This new and disturbing fiasco at Hunterston is yet another example of the
problems of dealing with a dirty and dangerous technology of the past. The
sooner we move on to sustainable energy for Scotland, the better.”
more....
------------------
* See also: NucNews Links and Archives (by date) at http://nucnews.net *
(Posted for educational and research purposes only, in accordance
with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107) *

LOL, ROY!

I think he's trying to say that he can't access the page- maybe it's for folks who have signed in only, not that it's somehow wrong to access it.

This is not a direct comment on Uncle Roy's article about pollution in Scotland. I do wish to raise the question, "Has anyone ever put the Greens under the microscope to determine whether they are a responsible political party?" It seems like these guys can move across the globe and make wild accusations about nuclear and other subjects. It also seems like they are never truly taken to task for their actions. Isn't it time someone threw up the BS flag regarding these folks?

There are real environmental issues to be addressed that are covered up by the excessive rhetoric and drivel produced by the Greens and similar wild eyed radical organizations. I wish we had a responsible press that would give their pronouncements the time which they truly deserve which is very little. We would all be better off if we had more objective reporting given to us on these subjects.

Eino,
The aim of nuclear power is weapons. Atom bombs, dirty bombs, so-called depleted
uranium ordinance and etc.. Not electricity.

It doesn't matter if you are a blind Zulu witch doctor with one tit, right in the middle!
The truth is the truth! Nuclear power plants routinely vent man-made ionizing radiation to the atmosphere.

A number of deaths is part of it's license. Nuclear power does not and will not stop global warming.
---------------------
http://www.sundayherald.com/53711
Sunday Herald - 22 January 2006
Sleaze probe into nuclear lobbying at Holyrood
By Paul Hutcheon, Scottish Political Editor


PARLIAMENT bosses have been asked to investigate whether a controversial Holyrood body has flouted anti-sleaze rules.
The cross-party group (CPG) on the civil nuclear industry has failed to register a number of trips and dinners financed by organisations that support the controversial energy source.

The body, which is supposed to be neutral, has also failed to declare the administrative support it receives from nuclear power firm British Energy.

Critics say the group has broken the MSPs’ code of conduct and compromised the forum’s impartiality by accepting financial benefits from outfits that back new reactors. They want parliament to examine the role of commercial lobbyists in arranging meetings between their pro-nuclear clients and politicians.

The CPG was set up by MSPs to promote “consideration and discussion” of the civil nuclear industry, including planning issues and decommissioning.

But the Sunday Herald can reveal that the group, chaired by pro-nuclear Labour MSP John Home Roberston, may have broken rules by failing to declare the backing it receives from the industry.

The CPG didn’t mention on its website that secretarial support is provided by British Energy, the pro-nuclear company that runs eight power stations in the UK. Services include drafting agendas and taking minutes of meetings, none of which is made available to the public.

The group’s register also leaves the “financial benefits” section blank, despite Holyrood rules requiring CPGs to register “financial or other benefits” exceeding £250 received from any source.

But last August, nuclear plant operator British Nuclear Fuels Limited funded “accommodation” costs for MSPs to visit the reprocessing plant at Sellafield.

Weeks later, the CPG and its Westminster equivalent, the all-party group on nuclear energy, attended a dinner paid for them by the nuclear industry. This was preceded months earlier by a trip to Torness, home to one of Scotland’s nuclear plants, part of which was funded by British Energy.

Presentations have also been given to the CPG by the Nuclear Decommission Agency (NDA) and radioactive waste body Nirex, which last week briefed MSPs in parliament.

Alex Johnstone MSP, co-convener of the CPG, said: “If there is any doubt that the rules have been followed to the letter, it would be appropriate for these events to be considered.”

Another concern is that commercial lobbyists seem to be helping pro-nuclear groups access MSPs. The NDA, which is stepping up its Scottish activities, relies on public affairs firm Bell Pottinger to liaise with the parliament.

The United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA), responsible for decommissioning existing facilities, employs lobbyists Grayling Political Strategy to organise events such as the “stakeholder reception” this Wednesday. In addition, Nirex pays US-owned Fleishman Hillard to keep abreast of nuclear issues at Holyrood and to maintain a dialogue with the CPG.

After the Sunday Herald started making enquiries about the group last week, the name of a well-known lobbyist mentioned on the website was erased.

Green MSP Chris Ballance, who is a member of the CPG, admitted: “I have always been concerned with the pro-nuclear direction of the group, as it is supposed to be impartial.”

SSP leader Colin Fox demanded an inquiry and said. “The standards committee should investigate this cross party group as soon as possible. Given the undeclared financial help it has received, it seems it is a front for the nuclear lobby.”
------------------------
* See also: NucNews Links and Archives (by date) at :
http://nucnews.net * (Posted for educational and research
purposes only, in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107).

Thursday, February 16, 2006 - 12:00 AM
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nati...ckyflats16.html

U.S. facing $553.9 million payout for plutonium leaks

By Catherine Tsai
The Associated Press

DENVER — With a half-billion-dollar verdict hanging over its head, the Department of Energy was reviewing legal options Wednesday after a jury ruled that two DOE contractors allowed plutonium from the Rocky Flats weapons plant to contaminate nearby land.

A federal jury on Tuesday decided Dow Chemical and the former Rockwell International damaged land around the now-defunct plant through negligence that exposed thousands of property owners to plutonium and increased their risk of health problems.

Jurors awarded the plaintiffs $553.9 million in damages. The government already is facing an estimated $58 million in legal fees for the contractors.

State and federal laws likely will limit any verdict payout to $352 million, attorneys said, but taxpayers may have to foot the bill because the two companies' contracts called for the federal government to indemnify them.

Appeal planned

The companies were moving ahead with plans to appeal. Energy Department spokesman Mike Waldron said the agency and the contractors "are evaluating how best to proceed."

Dow Chemical operated Rocky Flats for the government from the 1950s until 1975; Rockwell ran it from 1975 until 1989, when it closed. The plant made plutonium triggers for nuclear warheads.

Dow Chemical spokesman Scot Wheeler said property values around Rocky Flats have continued to rise, and that several regulatory agencies have said the surrounding areas could be developed.

U.S. District Judge John Kane will review the verdict, said Louise Roselle, an attorney for some of the plaintiffs. The lawsuit was filed 16 years ago on behalf of 13,000 people.

Who pays

Generally, government contracts with companies that work for it require the Department of Energy to reimburse contractors that are ordered to pay penalties, Waldron said.

"The neighbors, the citizens of Colorado, have waited 16 years for the defense and the government to compensate them for the harm caused to them," Roselle said. "No amount of money will compensate them for what happened, but the government should stop spending money to fight the neighbors. They should spend money to settle and compensate neighbors."

The companies and their lawyers have cited several grounds to appeal, including jury instructions they say were too liberal. Defense attorney David Bernick has said the jury was allowed to award damages if it determined the companies were responsible for even one particle of plutonium on the plaintiffs' properties.

He has said the judge wrongly allowed jurors to consider certain testimony, including claims that the Energy Department was a conspirator.
----------------------
*NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.*

* See also: NucNews Links and Archives (by date) at http://nucnews.net *

http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/...enjamin%20Grove

Las Vegas SUN
February 07, 2006

Nuke plan is called science fiction
Bush's proposal needs technology

By Benjamin Grove <grove@lasvegassun.com>
Sun Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON - Wrapped inside the 2007 Energy Department budget proposal is a provocative question: Can U.S. scientists invent a solution to nuclear waste that would also curtail the spread of nuclear weapons?

The answer has implications ranging from national defense to the future of Yucca Mountain.

The Bush administration wants to put money into research immediately as part of a nuclear energy renaissance. Construction of the nation's last nuclear plant began 30 years ago.

Critics say the idea is pure science fiction. They are gearing up to oppose it in Congress.

"Reprocessing will perilously undermine U.S. nonproliferation efforts and will only exacerbate our nuclear waste problems," a coalition of environmental groups wrote to lawmakers last month.

The proposal is included in the $2.77 trillion federal budget President Bush sent to Congress on Monday. It included $23.5 billion for the Energy Department.

Bush's program is known as the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership. It is intended to meet the world's unrelenting thirst for energy by developing new nuclear power plants in the United States and worldwide, with the United States leading in technology and lending nuclear fuel to other nations.

The program has the potential to do nothing less than "change the world," Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said.

"The scale of what we're proposing to undertake is massive," said Clay Sell, Bodman's deputy, who is to help pitch the program to Congress.

The program depends on future development of two highly complex and expensive technologies.

One is a method of reprocessing spent nuclear fuel that makes it difficult to convert into plutonium for use in nuclear weapons. That form of reprocessing is known as "recycling."

The other technology required would be development of "fast" reactors that can use the recycled fuel.

Several other nations currently recycle nuclear waste. But they use existing technology, which separates out weapons-grade plutonium. If that plutonium fell into the wrong hands, it could be used to make nuclear weapons.

The as-yet undeveloped technology the Bush administration forsees would lessen the proliferation danger by effectively limiting the plutonium that is separated out, Energy Department officials said. They have requested $250 million for the nuclear partnership next year and will request considerably more in the next three years, with the goal of demonstrating the technology in 10 years.

The program has implications for Yucca because any new "fast" reactors ultimately would produce an unusable waste bound for the proposed permanent waste repository, Energy Department officials acknowledged.

That could include waste from foreign reactors if, as Bush proposes, the United States begins leasing uranium fuel to other nations then taking back the waste for disposal.

Energy Department officials say that if they could develop waste recycling, the 60,000 tons of waste already piled up at the nation's nuclear reactors could be recycled.

Recycled waste would be less toxic, so the underground Yucca repository could be redesigned to allow more waste storage in its tunnels, Energy officials said. The nation wouldn't need a second repository for another 100 years, they said.

It also means that the radioactive material inside Yucca would not be as serious a threat to the environment and human health, the officials said.

Critics dispute that.

One Public Citizen analyst has called recycling a "fairy tale." Developing the technology, and ultimately a recycling plant, would cost untold billions of dollars over decades, critics say. And even new recycling techniques still pose weapons proliferation risks, according to the Union of Concerned Scientists.

Then there's Congress, which would have to pay for it.

Lawmakers are not expected to embrace a plan to accept foreign waste for burial at Yucca, especially when the repository program itself is badly behind schedule for accepting U.S. waste. Some Yucca advocates fear that Bush's new plan could take attention away from developing the repository.

The marginal disposal benefits of reprocessing are more than offset by high cost, risks to the environment and human health, and by the proliferation threat, former Clinton administration energy undersecretary Ernest Moniz and former CIA director John Deutch wrote in a Washington Post column last month, predicting "considerable" opposition in Congress.
-----------------------
* See also: NucNews Links and Archives (by date) at :
http://nucnews.net * (Posted for educational and research
purposes only, in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107).

This should be a real process and not an imaginary one such as the Roy process.



I wonder if these critics had great grand parents that said men will never learn to fly. - You don't find something unless you look. Research is looking for a solution. Sitting on your hands and complaining that everything is not "green" is not.

It's pretty bizarre that this anti science administration wants to do complex scientific research. It is also bizarre that this administrations opposition would be opposed to it.

It may be that the solution will be found in some other country rather than the US. It seems like more and more innovations of the kind that used to be done here are now done in other places.

Politics will once again tie up real progress to be made in the US. The Luddites will win again.

Most people would welcome this type of research. $250 million is about 0.1% of the federal budget. They probably spend more than that on office supplies. Even if the technology turns out to cost billions and takes decades to develop, the payoff could be huge.

And of course, now Uncle Roy can apply to DOE for a research grant.

LUNG CANCER EPIDEMIC FROM DU HAS BEGUN IN U.S.

By Dr. James Howenstine, MD.
April 6, 2006
NewsWithViews.com

http://www.newswithviews.com/Howenstine/james43.htm

In the year 2005 there were 175,000 new cases of lung cancer in the United
States. The months of January and February of 2006 have already yielded
172,000 new cases of lung cancer in our nation. What has lead to this
shocking new development?

Second hand smoke exposure and cigarette smoking obviously can not explain
this dramatic rise in lung cancer. Following exposure to radioactive iodine
particulate debris in the air from shells and bombs, between 2 to 5 years of
time is needed to lead to the appearance of malignancies. Our bombing of
Afghanistan began in October 2001 (four and a half years ago) and the new
bombing in Iraq began in March 2003 (exactly three years ago). Aerial bombs
are more effective than artillery shells in increasing airborne radioiodine
because they release more dust into the atmosphere. The radioactive iodine
increment from these bombings was registered in the UK in the Aldermaston
Report[1] released on Feb. 19, 2006.

The U.S. government has not released any information about the levels of
radioactivity being observed in the U.S. and the controlled media in Europe
and the U.S. has said nothing about the 4 genocidal nuclear wars the United
States and it’s British ally have foisted off on the populace of the world.
(Bosnia, Iraq twice and Afghanistan). The DU wars surely reflect the
population lowering program for the world being implemented by the New World
Order elitists (Tilateral Commisson., Bilderbergers, Club of Rome, 33 rd
degree Masons, Illuminati, Council of Foreign Relations.)

Breathing radioactive particlulate matter has long been known to cause lung
cancer. Miners working in uranium mines and other types of mining where
radioactivity is an occupational hazard have a higher incidence of lung
cancer. This danger from airborne radioactive iodine is greater than that
found from cigarette smoking. The radioactive iodine particles go directly
to DNA which is “trashed”. There are no ways the human body can rid itself
of the radioactive particles so the health damage is permanent. This results
in severe health problems particularly malignancies which have no effective
therapies. Physicians in Bosnia are seeing patients present for care with
three simultaneous malignancies something never previously reported in
medicine.

Children in Iraq are dying in epidemic numbers from malignancies. In most
nations cancer in children is uncommon. This makes depleted uranium shells
and bombs an ideal vehicle to diminish the world population. The absence of
media exposure critical of this genocidal program makes DU warfare a low
risk program for lowering world population. One of the attractive features
of using radioactive uranium for biologic warfare and population lowering is
that there are no known effective ways to heal an individual who develops a
malignancy after radioiodine iodine exposure.

A frightening aspect of depleted uranium warfare is that there is no way to
protect oneself from this hazard. Clothing and gas masks are easily
penetrated. The key persons running the New World Order are brilliant
planners. They would not want themselves to die from lung cancer along with
the rest of humanity. My guess is they have discovered methods to protect
themselves from developing lung cancer. Certainly one has to be impressed
with how effectively David Rockefeller, Zignev Brezinski and Henry Kissinger
appear to have managed to avoid the infirmities of aging at least to outward
appearances.

I do not know if persons living in the Southern hemisphere are also being
exposed to radioiodine fallout. Recently Christopher Reeves wife, Dana, died
of lung cancer at age 44. She was a healthy non smoker so her death appeared
puzzling. The DU fallout may provide a rational explanation.

Because prevailing winds have carried radioiodine dust to Europe and
probably the U.S. it appears that at least half the persons on planet earth
are currently breathing radioiodine. The topic of depleted uranium bombs and
shells will not be discussed in the media because the world’s media is
controlled by the New World Order elitists. World wide public outrage could
ruin their plans to rapidly lower the world’s population by 90 % if this
issue was publicly discussed.

When a biologic warfare agent like the borrelia burgdorfi spirochete (Lyme
Disease) turns out to spread person to person it becomes a gigantic success
We all must breath to stay alive. With at least half the persons on earth
now breathing radioactive iodine the bio-warfare scientists appear to have
their second big winner. Expect lung cancer deaths to rapidly increase
worldwide.

Footnotes:

1, CNN American Morning program March 8, 2006 Miles and Soledad O'Brien
----------
* See also: NucNews Links and Archives (by date) at http://nucnews.net *
(Posted for educational and research purposes only, in accordance with Title
17 U.S.C. section 107) *

Invisible Threat of Radiation

April 8, 2006 Rutland Herald

http://www.rutlandherald.com/apps/pbcs.dll.../604080317/1037

If I remember correctly, in the book "The Little Prince" by
Antoine De Saint-Exupery, we are told that it is the things
that we can't see that are most important. The Little
Prince, of course, was speaking about love and having been
tamed by a flower. I would like to suggest that, in the
conflict raging in Vermont over windmills, we have missed
that which we can't see. Sadly, it is not love, but radiation.

The United States is the only country that ever used a
nuclear bomb. After years of deadly testing, the United
States now has some 70,000 nuclear bombs ready to go. Since
the first Gulf War, this time in a practically unnoticed
nuclear war, the United States has been spreading about the
world several thousand tons of so-called "depleted" uranium.
And then there is Vermont Yankee, that, under normal
circumstances constantly releases a certain amount of
radiation, causes us to live in the shadow of a nuclear
accident or a terrorist attack, requires that we have an
evacuation plan that can't work, and worse, presents us
daily with more and more dangerous nuclear waste for which
there is no solution and which will contaminate our world
for millions of years to come. And now, as if that nightmare
were not enough, and as most of us looked away, the NRC and
the PSB approved a 20 percent "uprate" at the plant, (which
began a short time ago), and Entergy Vermont Yankee is
working on a plan to extend the life of the plant 20 years
beyond 2012, thus creating a situation in an old creaky
plant that is almost sure to kill us, or make us sick, and
make New England uninhabitable.

I can't tell you if there is any hope, but if there is, it
lies in the questionable hands of the Vermont Legislature,
which, having sold us out on dry cask storage, may not help
us now if most of us either remain in the dark, or are so
preoccupied by windmills, that we can see, that we pay no
attention to the most important thing that we can't see,
radiation.

Please, by learning about the dangers of nuclear power in
the hands of a giant, profit-driven corporation that has no
concern for our safety, help us shut down Vermont Yankee, if
not right away, at least by the once agreed upon year of
2012. Windmills in Vermont are not going to stop
Entergy-Vermont Yankee from creating what might easily be,
like war, one more corporate crime against humanity, but
they could be one tiny step in the right direction. The
anniversaries of Three Mile Island and Chernobyl are upon
us. Please think about radiation, after which, if we
survive, we may be able to give our attention to things like
love and flowers.

JANE NEWTON

South Londonderry
-------------
* See also: NucNews Links and Archives (by date) at http://nucnews.net * (Posted for educational and research purposes only, in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107) *

Ireland: Chernobyl blast 'contaminated 68pc of this country'

Saturday April 8th 2006
Conor Sweeney
European Editor Unison.ie

http://www.unison.ie/worldnews/stories.php3?ca=27&si=1595176

STORMY weather after the Chernobyl nuclear accident has meant that this country has been facing a radioactive legacy that is much worse than previously feared.

Three heavy downpours just after the accident 20 years ago dumped far more radioactive material here than on almost any other country as the clouds traveled across, claims a detailed new report.

The Other Report on Chernobyl (Torch) argues that almost all previous studies vastly understated the long-term environmental and health consequences of the world's worst nuclear accident. It found that 68pc of the entire Irish surface area was contaminated. This is much worse than figures for Britain or most of Western Europe.

The explosion and subsequent 10-day fire at the nuclear power plant released 200 times more radioactivity into the atmosphere than the combined power of the bombs dropped in 1945 on Japan.

The Torch report, commissioned by the European Green Party and compiled by scientists, looked at 2,000 reports, including 1,000 documents from Russia and Ukraine which have previously been ignored because of translating problems.

The fire burnt for 10 days and in that time three heavy rain storms passed over Europe, and a lot of that rain fell across Ireland, which is why there was such high contamination, explained Dr Ian Fairlie, one of the authors of the report.

Key findings included: fallout contaminated about 40pc of Europe's surface area, including 34pc of Britain's and 68pc of Ireland's; two-thirds of the collective radioactive dose was distributed mainly in Western Europe and 30,000 to 60,000 excess cancer deaths are predicted, seven to 15 times greater previous reports suggested.

Radioactive contamination was more intense as "many grass plants on upland pastures accumulate it. These findings apply to varying extents to such countries as the UK and Ireland," the report found.

Drawing on the conclusions to argue against any new round of nuclear power stations, the Green Party said it proved that what happened in Chernobyl could occur again at some stage.

"The present report cannot make up for the 20 years of systematic downplaying, secrecy, misinformation and misunderstanding of the effects of the Chernobyl catastrophe," said the German Green MEP Rebecca Harms at it's launch in Berlin.Her comments come just days after Forfas suggested Ireland should seriously consider developing a nuclear power plant.

Designed and hosted by Internet Ireland
-------------
* See also: NucNews Links and Archives (by date) at http://nucnews.net * (Posted for educational and research purposes only, in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107) *

NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


http://www.sundayherald.com/55029
Sunday Herald - 09 April 2006
Leading scientists attack Blair over nuclear power
40 experts urge change of focus to renewables
By Rob Edwards, Environment Editor


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


TONY Blair’s plan to resurrect nuclear power is going to be dealt a damaging blow by 40 of Britain’s leading energy and climate scientists, the Sunday Herald can reveal.
Engineers, experts and academics from Glasgow, Edinburgh, London, Oxford and Cambridge will forcibly tell the Prime Minister this week that building more nuclear reactors is not the solution to global warming.

Nuclear power is “a limited, inflexible, expensive and potentially dangerous energy source which creates unique problems”, they say. Alternatives including greater energy efficiency and renewable sources are more likely to deliver safe, secure and climate-friendly energy.

The UK government launched its heavily trailed review of energy policy in January. It is widely expected to conclude that Britain needs to build a new programme of nuclear power stations in order to help combat climate change.

But tomorrow, Downing Street will be presented with a powerful counter-argument from some of the country’s best energy brains. “Continued use of nuclear power will increase the opportunities for the spread of nuclear weapons,” they warn.

Nuclear waste will have to be isolated from the environment “for timescales which dwarf that of human civilisation”, they point out. They added: “We also believe that nuclear facilities pose a very serious risk due to the possibility of terrorist attack.”

In a joint letter to Blair, they conclude: “We strongly urge the UK government not to decide in favour of a new generation of nuclear power stations, but rather to invest the resources and research effort into alternatives.”

One of the scientists behind the move is Keith Barnham, a professor of physics from Imperial College, London. “Nuclear new build will be too little, too late, too expensive and too dangerous,” he told the Sunday Herald.

“Every man, woman and child in the UK is committed to paying over £30 per head per year for over 30 years to clear up the waste from the existing reactors. No industry with a record like that should be allowed a second chance.”

Barnham pointed out that it will take at least 10 years to build a new nuclear reactor. “We need to act now to stop global warming,” he said. “Germany already has more wind power capacity than all the UK nuclear reactors together, and in five years will have installed as much solar electricity.”

Another signatory is Tim Jackson, a professor at the Centre for Environmental Strategy at the University of Surrey. “This is completely the wrong time for Tony Blair to be issuing party invitations to the nuclear lobby,” he said.

“The industry has failed to make a coherent financial case, failed to come up with a credible strategy for dealing with long-term radioactive waste, and failed to allay public concerns over the security implications of the nuclear fuel cycle.”

He added: “The Prime Minister should be strengthening his government’s weak-willed commitment to energy efficiency, demand reduction and renewable energy, not mortgaging the future for countless generations to the hazards of nuclear power.”

The joint letter was co-ordinated by Scientists for Global Responsibility, an independent, 850-strong group concerned about social justice and environmental sustainability. It is anxious to dispel the notion that scientists are all pro-nuclear.

Stuart Parkinson, the group’s executive director, said: “There’s a perception that all scientists and engineers think new nuclear power is the way to go to tackle climate change and improve energy security, but this is not true.

“Many are sceptical of nuclear [energy] and believe that other measures such as controlling energy demand, improving energy efficiency and expanding renewable energy are superior options.”

Parkinson attacked the UK government’s record on energy efficiency and renewables as “piecemeal and half-hearted”. He pointed out that the costs of cleaning up the legacy of the past 60 years of nuclear power were spiralling ever upwards, with some estimates now over £100 billion.

“We simply do not believe the government when it says that a new generation of nuclear power stations can be built, operated and decommissioned without significant sums of public money.”

Parkinson was also concerned about the global example being set by the UK. “Our government seems keen to stick with both nuclear power and nuclear weapons. So how are we to convince countries like Iran and North Korea that they shouldn’t try and copy us?”

Another prominent signatory to the letter is Nottingham University professor Mark Whitby, a former president of the Institution of Civil Engineers. He criticised the construction industry for lobbying strongly behind the scenes in favour of a new nuclear programme.

That industry’s claim that the lights would go out because nearly all of Britain’s nuclear power stations would be closed by 2020 was “sensationalist”, he said. Only a few small stations would be closed, and there were plentiful supplies of gas from abroad.

Nuclear power would not be a low emitter of climate-wrecking carbon pollution, either, Whitby argued, because of the high energy costs of extracting low-grade uranium ores in the future.

“Nuclear power is very expensive compared to other technologies,” he said. “It has gone bankrupt on a number of occasions. It is not cheap to build, to run or to decommission.”

The letter was also signed by Dr Katherine Begg, an energy and climate policy analyst from Edinburgh University. She said she was worried about the implications for the spread of nuclear weapons, and the costs: “The money spent so far on promoting and implementing alternatives is increasing, but is a drop in the ocean compared to that required to build new nuclear stations and support them.”

Other signatories include Dr Marion Hersh, a senior lecturer in electrical engineering at Glasgow University; Roy Butterfield, emeritus professor of civil engineering at Southampton University; Dr Sarah Darby, an environmental scientist from Oxford University; Dr Tim Foxon, a climate scientist from Cambridge University; and Dr Frank Barnaby, a nuclear scientist from the Oxford Research Group.

The nuclear industry responded by arguing that nuclear power was necessary to slow global warming. “Climate change is one of the greatest threats facing us today and we need to use all the tools at our disposal to tackle it,” said Simon James, the spokesman for the UK Nuclear Industry Association.

“While we’ve not seen this letter, we’re sure its authors would agree that renewables or energy efficiency on their own can’t tackle the problem. We should be using renewables, energy efficiency, nuclear and carbon sequestration to really make a difference.”
_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings or access the archives at:
http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/...ergyjustice.net

Big Lie: Chernobyl 20 Years Later


http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:szYesI...s%2520later.pdf

Joint initiative by Alla Yaroshinskaya and Rosalie Bertell on 20th anniversary of Chernobyl catastrophe

“And the third angel sounded; and there fell a great star from heaven, burning as it were a lamp_ and it fell upon the third part of the river, and upon the fountains of waters; and the name of the star is called Wormwood: and third part of the waters became wormwood; and many men died of the waters, because they were made bitter”. Revelations 8.

“Chernobylnik: a variety of absinthe (wormwood) with red-brown or deep purple stem”. S.Ozhegov.Dictionary of the Russian language.

The 20th anniversary of the Chernobyl catastrophe (April 26, 2006) is an appropriate time to remind people and authorities world-wide and inform them about current facts involving the largest nuclear power plant catastrophe in human history and its planetary consequences. The impact is truly enormous – it equals at least 300 Hiroshima. 9, 000, 000 people still are living in the effected zones and now forgotten by society and authorities. They need immediate national and international attention so they may receive the help to survive. There are some facts on Chernobyl catastrophe:

- the USSR communist’s authorities 3 years lied that nothing happened in Chernobyl and millions people did not know that they leave and breath and eat in contaminated areas. The people in 16 region of the Russian Federation were known on that in 6 years after explosion!

- hundreds tons of contaminated meet were secretly send by authorities to people tables around of the country excepting Moscow and St.Petersburg.

- 12, 000 people were hospitalised during first 2 weeks after Chernobyl. But it was top secret. They all became suddenly “heath” because the authorities secretly made higher from 10 to 50 times the radioactive doze to people.

- 3, 000, 000 children received critical dozes of radiation for their health. - 148, 000 people in Ukraine were died only during first ten years after Chernobyl explosion.

- according to the data of the Committee of liquidators about 100, 000 of them already died. There were 800, 000 liquidators.

- according to the data published by Belarusian scientists in Swiss Medical Weekly the cancer increased for 40% between 1990 and 2000. In Gomel region it is even more higher – 52%. They compared the post Chernobyl period with rates before the accident on April 26, 1986.

- In 2000 the UN experts predicted that the worst was still to come for more than 7 million people affected by the disaster.

- The World Health Organisation researchers reported that the Chernobyl disaster will case 50, 000 new cases of thyroid cancer among young people living in the worst-effected regions.

New soviet’s secret documents I found and exclusively released in Salzburg for mass media and during my public meetings show that 75 million people of he former USSR were covered by Chernobyl’s radio nuclides (!).

Mr.Kofi Annan said “Chernobyl is a world we would all like to erase from our memory. …. More than 7 million of our fellow human beings do not have the luxury of getting. They are still suffering every day, as a result of what happened’. Mr. Annan said the exact number of victims may never be known, but that 3 millions of children require treatment and “many will die permanently”.

Who did response on that crime against millions people against humanity? These who cover up the truth on Chernobyl nuclear explosion must finally to response!

Exactly for such a goal we establish together with Rosalie Bertell our joint initiatives. We would like to organise an international group of scientists, lawyers activists and victim of Chernobyl to prepare special appeal to European Court and to organise International ‘Chernobyl Nurenberg” for the former soviet authorities who cover up Chernobyl. There is no limited time for crime against humanity!
---------------
* See also: NucNews Links and Archives (by date) at http://nucnews.net * (Posted for educational and research purposes only, in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107) *

More DISINFORMATION from theroyprocess.

The Chernobyl reactor was an RBMK design:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_accident

There never has been, never will be, an RBMK reactor built in the USA.

These are the types currently used in the USA and planned for the future:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power#Reactor_Types

"The truth shall set you free"

IGNORANCE is not STRENGTH

NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)

Tuesday March 28, 2006 marks the 27
anniversary of the partial meltdown at TMI.
Please forward this to all lists, media outlets
and interested journalists:

"Three Mile Island Revisited," directed by Steve Jambeck, will be aired on
Free Speech TV Tuesday at 3 a.m., 6 a.m., 10 a.m., 3 p.m., 5 p.m. and 10
p.m. Free Speech TV broadcasts via the Dish Satellite Network (Channel
9415) and on 156 cable TV stations in 33 states reaching 25 million homes.

For more information visit: www.envirovideo.com
The award-winning EnviroVideo documentary "Three Mile Island Revisited"
will be aired on Free Speech TV through the day Tuesday, March 28 ---the
27th anniversary of the major accident at the nuclear plant in
Pennsylvania.

The documentary challenges the claim of the nuclear industry
and government that "no one died" as a result of the core meltdown at
Three Mile Island. Utilizing the testimony of area residents and
scientific findings, it reveals that deaths, especially from cancer, and
birth defects in children, were widespread in years following the
accident.

Indeed, states the documentary's narrator and writer, Karl Grossman,
speaking in front of the nuclear facility, the area around it became a
"valley of death" following the accident. The plant's owner quietly
settled damage cases with persons seriously impacted by the accident,
it discloses.
--------------------
(Posted for educational and research purposes only,
in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107).

You have to love it how this kinda nuclear disinformation has to get broadcast on a network like "free speech TV".

Personally, I think that the NOVA documentary on PBS does TMI justice. Basically, it shows both the side of the UCS and also the side of every major academic institution on the planet (they have a nuclear engineering PhD from Cornell explain it). The UCS claims that it would have killed a couple dozen people; the Cornell guy calmly explains that there's a 99% chance it would have poisoned the groundwater and raised background radiation levels very modestly in a 2-5 mile radius around the plant for about 40 years and caused 1-2 extra undetectable cancer deaths during that time.

And frankly, nuclear is the obvious alternative to coal or oil, and it can substitute for oil with PHEVs. Personally, I'd rather have a nuke 20 miles from my house and at least be able to get away from it for a while by visiting ANWR than have modern industry EVERWHERE. Also, if we had a nuclear meltdown at Indian Point tomorrow morning and the nuclear industry immediately shut down, the nuclear industry still would have had fewer negative externalities per kwh generated than coal over the past 30 years.

NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/world/inter...l-director.html
Chernobyl Boss: "True Cause of Disaster Was
Hidden"

By REUTERS
Published: April 25, 2006
Filed at 11:35 a.m. ET

KIEV (Reuters) - The world has failed to learn the
lessons of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster,
according to the man who was in charge of the
reactor that blew up 20 years ago this week.

Former Chernobyl director Viktor Bryukhanov told
Russia's Profil magazine in a rare interview that
scientists had covered up the full truth about the
design faults that helped cause the world's worst
nuclear accident.

Bryukhanov, who was jailed for negligence over the
accident, was speaking at a time when nuclear
power is returning to favor in countries like
China and the United States as a way of producing
electricity with no carbon emissions, unlike
fossil fuels.

``You need to understand the real causes of the
disaster in order to know in what direction you
should develop alternative sources of energy,''
Profil quoted Bryukhanov as saying in its latest
issue, published on Monday. ``In this sense,
Chernobyl has not taught anything to anyone.''

The Chernobyl plant's No. 4 reactor blew up as
staff were running a test early on April 26, 1986.
The reactor, in what was then the Soviet republic
of Ukraine, spewed a huge cloud of radioactive
dust over much of Europe.

Most scientists now agree the accident was caused
by a fatal combination of flaws in the reactor's
design and a failure by the staff on duty to
follow safety procedures.

Bryukhanov acknowledged his staff had made
mistakes. But he said official investigations into
the cause of the disaster had been a whitewash
designed to exonerate the nuclear industry.

``The scientists, the construction engineers, the
prosecution experts, they all defended their
professional interests and that was all. It was a
tissue of lies that distracted us from the search
for the real causes of the accident,'' he said.

Reactors of the same design as the one at
Chernobyl are still in operation in eastern
Europe, though they were modified after the
accident to eliminate the safety flaws uncovered
by the Chernobyl investigation.

The official probe into the accident was part of a
broader, international cover-up about the risks of
nuclear power, Bryukhanov said, though he offered
no evidence to back this up.

``(It's) not just us: the Americans, the French,
the English, the Japanese, are all hiding the real
causes of accidents at their own nuclear power
stations,'' he said.

Bryukhanov was at his home near the plant when the
reactor blew up. He served half his 10-year jail
sentence and now lives in the Ukrainian capital,
Kiev, the magazine said.
______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings or access the archives at:
http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/...ergyjustice.net

NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)

--------------------
FYI: Please click on link and forward. Thanks.

Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 16:26:13 -0400

The church bells in the Ukraine are ringing in remembrance of Chernobyl. I am trying to buy the award winning documentary "Chernobyl Heart" Why is it so hard to find ?
However, these pictures is all one needs to see. I ask you to PLEASE take the time..... and weep.

Every member of Congress should watch the following film before authorizing another nuclear power plant.

http://todayspictures.slate.com/inmotion/e...nobyl/?GT1=8019

click play after the first few pictures.
______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings or access the archives at:
http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/...ergyjustice.net