|
|
 |
 |
Tuesday, July 05, 2005
Russia Will Equip Iranian Subs with Missiles
 // Arms Export
Yesterday the Second International Naval Show (IMDS-2005) finished its work in St. Petersburg. During its course there were negotiations about new shipments of naval military equipment to China and Mexico, and about the refurbishing Iranian submarines.
On the show about 300 Russian defense companies demonstrated their production ready for export. In the Sea Station pier, the visitors were able to examine ships from the Russian Navy. For a first time on the show was a demonstration of the Russian submarine of new generation “Sankt-Petersburg” Project 677 “Lada”, which the state company Admiralty Shipyards finishing for Russian Navy. The export version of this sub –Project 1650 “Amur”- the Admiralty Shipyards was offering to India for sale. However, Indian Navy preferred to buy six French subs Scorpene and currently finalizing the negotiations of the deal that amounts to $1.8-2 billion.
However, Admiralty Shipyards signed contracts with India and China to supply parts for the diesel-electric submarines of Project 877EKM and their modernized version of Project 636 that were sold to these countries earlier. Each contract is appraised at about $1 million. The Indian Navel force has 10 submarines of Project 877EKM and two more would be shipped this year directly from the Russian navy. China has two subs of Project 877EKM and two of Project 636. From last year, the Chinese navy also started to receive new subs of Project 636 that according to a contract from 2002 will amount to eight submarines worth $1.4 billion.
The St. Petersburg shipbuilding company Almaz was negotiating with representatives of the Chinese defense ministry. Before the end of the year, they hoped to sign a contract for the building of two Zubr Class Air Cushioned Landing Craft (CMSTS) of Project 1232.2 with options for several more such ships. Each craft costs more than $60 million. And the corporation Concern of Middle and Small Tonnage Shipbuilding until the end of the year plans to strike an agreement with Mexico for not less than two patrol cutters of Project 14310 Mirage. “Cameroon is also interested to buy Cutter of the Project 12150 Mongoose. Within several months they are ready to sign a contract for up to 10 Mongooses,” Valentine Lyashenko, deputy director of CMSTS told Kommersant.
Moreover, Kommersant found out that Rosoboronexport is negotiating with Iran about repair and modernization of Iranian submarines. Iran has three submarines of Project 877EKM that were supplied by Russia in 1992 (Russian name of the sub B-219, Iranian—901 Tareq), in June 1993 (B-224, 902 Noor) and in November 1996 (B-175, 903 Yunes). It was expected that all the major components that already exceeded their life expectancy will be replaced. Also, the new anti-ship missile complex Club-S with the target distance of 200 km will be installed on these subs. The refurbishing of each sub would be done under the contract which costs anywhere from $80 to $90 million. Originally it was expected that the refurbishing will be done in Zvezdochka Co (Severo-Dvinsk) but Admiralty Shipyards are also fighting for the contract.
Vladimir Pakhomov, deputy director general of Rosoboronexport, stated in the IMDS-2005 show that naval ships and systems this year will take first place among all Russian weapons exports and according to him the company is planning to export production of the military use for $5.1 billion from which 51 percent will be military naval equipment. Last year, Rosoboronexport exported weapons valued at $5.12 billion, from which only 24 percent were represented by naval production.
by Alexandra Gritskova, St. Petersburg; Konstantin Lantratov
Posted at 03:04 pm by R7fel
Permalink
Oil ' will hit $100 by winter'
Worst-ever crisis looms, says analyst · Surging demand to keep prices high
Heather Stewart, economics correspondent
07/03/05 "The Observer" - - Oil prices could rocket to $100 within six months, plunging the world into an unprecedented fuel crisis, controversial Texan oil analyst Matt Simmons has warned.
After crude surged through $60 a barrel last week, nervous investors were pinning their hopes on a build-up in US oil-stocks to depress prices in the coming months.
But Simmons believes surging demand will keep prices bubbling well above $50. 'We could be at $100 by this winter. We have the biggest risk we have ever had of demand exceeding supply. We are now just about to face up to the biggest crisis we have ever had,' he said.
Opec producers held emergency talks last week to consider making their second 500,000 a barrel increase in production quotas in a fortnight: but the discussions were suspended last Thursday after prices dipped back below $60.
The looming oil crisis is not high up the agenda at this week's G8 meeting, although the heads of state are expected to repeat their finance ministers' call for greater transparency from Opec and other oil-producing nations about their reserves.
However, global warming is one of Britain's two major priorities, and Tony Blair hopes to secure a pledge to pour more cash into developing alternatives to the oil-intensive technologies that cause climate change.
Simmons believes such moves will be too little, too late. He will publish a hard-hitting book this week in which he argues that Saudi Arabia, the world's largest producer, is running out of oil, and further price rises are inevitable as supplies decline. He warns that the scramble for resources could eventually descend into war.
Many analysts expect extra production over the next year, as high prices boost investment by energy firms. But Simmons says after many years of underinvestment, there is even a shortage of drilling rigs.
'Many of these projects are aspirations; many of them won't create peak production in the first year, and many of them within five years will be in decline,' he said.
However, the Economist Intelligence Unit predicts that oil prices will peak by the end of this year, and decline by 10 per cent in 2006 as the Chinese economy slows, reducing demand. Chinese imports have been crucial to propping up the oil price in the last two years.
But the EIU warned that its forecasts - which show a 30 per cent increase in oil prices for 2005 - could prove too conservative if there are further wobbles in supply. 'The narrow margin of spare production capacity has made prices vulnerable to unforeseen reductions in supply or rises in demand,' it said.
Paul Horsnell, head of commodities analysis at Barclays Capital, said supply constraints would continue to bite for the rest of the year. 'It's all getting a bit tight'
Brent crude closed almost $2 a barrel higher in New York on Friday night, while futures contracts for heating oil, widely used in the US, hit a record high, which analysts said was unusual for summer.
'It's fear,' said Kyle Cooper, an analyst at Citigroup. 'It's not based on what is happening now. It's based on fear of what could happen.'
© Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
Posted at 02:56 pm by R7fel
Permalink
Monday, July 04, 2005
US Senate Votes To Revive Nuclear Weapon Program
The "bunker-buster" program enjoys thestrong support of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who has been personally lobbying for funds for the penetrator and wrote to the energy secretary early this year about the need "to revitalize the nuclear weapons infrastructure." |
Washington (AFP) Jul 02, 2005
The US Senate has moved to revive a controversial weapons research program aimed at enabling the US military to conduct precision nuclear strikes against hardened underground facilities, including those suspected of storing weapons of mass destruction.
By a vote of 53-43, senators defeated Friday an amendment sponsored by California Democrat Dianne Feinstein that would have prohibited use of government funds to study the feasibility of the so-called Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator, also known as the "bunker-buster" bomb.
The failure of the measure means leading US nuclear research laboratories will in all likelihood receive in fiscal 2006 four million dollars for continued work on the bomb that was interrupted last year under intense international and domestic criticism.
The action came ahead of a Group of Eight industrial nations summit in Scotland, where nuclear proliferation issues are expected to dominate the security agenda.
Senator Feinstein insisted expert data available to her indicated that there could be no such thing as a "clean" nuclear strike and any use of a "bunker buster" would result in massive radioactive contamination and substantial loss of life.
On top of that, she argued, the program will make it harder for the United States to persuade other countries like Iran or North Korea to foreswear their nuclear ambitions.
"In essence, these policies encourage other nations to develop their own nuclear weapons thereby putting American lives and our national security interests at risk," the senator said. "We are telling the world, when it comes to nuclear weapons, do as we say, not as we do."
But the "bunker-buster" program enjoys thestrong support of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who has been personally lobbying for funds for the penetrator and wrote to the energy secretary early this year about the need "to revitalize the nuclear weapons infrastructure."
The four million unsuccessfully targeted by the amendment are contained in a spending bill covering water and energy programs for the fiscal year that begins October 1.
The House of Representatives signaled its intention to restore "bunker-buster" research when it voted in late May to approve a 491-billion-dollar defense authorization bill that includes money for the program.
The study explores the possibility of converting into "bunker busters" two existing warheads - the B61 and B83, according to administration officials.
The B61 is a tactical thermonuclear gravity bomb that can be delivered by strategic as well as tactical aircraft - from B-52 and B-2 bombers to F-16 fighter jets.
The B83 is designed for precision delivery from very low altitudes, most likely by B-2 stealth bombers, military experts said.
Prior to the program's suspension, scientists were working on finding ways to harden the bombs' shells so they can survive penetration through layers of rock, steel and concrete before detonating, the experts said.
However, a study released by the National Academies of Sciences in April said it would take a 300-kiloton bomb to destroy targets buried 200 meters (650 feet) deep underground.
The explosion, the report warned, would have practically the same effects as a surface blast and could kill more than a million people, if it occurs in a densely populated area.
All rights reserved. © 2005 Agence France-Presse.
Posted at 10:06 pm by R7fel
Permalink
A Solid Foundation for Friendship
Russia, China give U.S. veiled rebuke
By Vladimir Isachenkov
Associated Press
07/02/05 "AP" - - MOSCOW -- Russia and China warned other nations Friday against attempts to dominate global affairs and interfere in the domestic issues of sovereign nations in what appeared to be a veiled expression of their irritation with U.S. policy.
Presidents Vladimir Putin and Hu Jintao signed a joint declaration after two days of talks calling for a stronger United Nations role in global affairs and opposing attempts "to impose models of social and political development from outside."
The two leaders also urged other states to renounce "striving for monopoly and domination in international affairs and attempts to divide nations into leaders and those being led."
While the declaration did not identify any specific country, it echoed similar veiled hints by Moscow and Beijing about U.S. policy in global affairs.
Moscow and Beijing have developed what they call a strategic partnership since the 1991 Soviet collapse, pledging their adherence to a "multipolar world," a term that refers to their opposition to U.S. domination.
China and Russia share a concern about increased U.S. influence in Central Asia since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, which led to American troop deployments in Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan for operations in neighboring Afghanistan.
While Russia remains a U.S. ally in fighting terrorism, relations often have been strained by U.S. concerns about backtracking on democracy under Putin and Moscow's worries about what it sees as U.S. meddling in former Soviet republics.
Beijing is unhappy about U.S. ties with Taiwan. Beijing claims Taiwan as part of its territory and says the island has no right to conduct foreign relations.
"We reinforced our mutual support on key issues like Taiwan and Chechnya, which concern our vital interests," Hu said after the talks.
The two leaders gave an upbeat assessment on Russian-Chinese relations, which have flourished in recent years and were cemented in a border treaty ratified this year.
"We have set a solid foundation for friendship, trust and cooperation for Russia and China for a long time to come," Putin said Friday.
Moscow and Beijing dominate the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, a regional security grouping that also includes the ex-Soviet Central Asian nations of Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan.
Uzbekistan's President Islam Karimov, facing Western criticism for his government's bloody suppression of a May uprising, has found staunch support in Moscow and Beijing.
Copyright © 2005, Chicago Tribune
Posted at 12:06 pm by R7fel
Permalink
Friday, June 24, 2005
Don't Buy What You Can't Return
Neocons Have Their Gazes Fixed on Syria
Sarah Whalen, sawhalen@xula.com.edu |
| |
|
The news out of Iraq?
It has come down to a monthly body count if you’re American. A daily body count if you’re Iraqi.
126 US troops killed in January! 88 in May! 45 in June so far! 25,000 Iraqis! 58 Iraqis on June 15 alone! Exploding autos! Suicide bombers! Americans hardly blink anymore. Ho hum. It’s just the price of “freedom.”
But usually when you pay such high prices, you come back from the shops with something to show for it.
What’s America got in its shopping bag?
Oil, or at least bargain-basement oil prices, was what neocons promised initially. But now, cheap oil is a pipe dream. Literally. Because insurgents are blowing up the pipes! And expatriate “contractors” in Iraq aren’t building or re-building anything, but are instead heavily armed and armored mercenaries paid to guard the guardians of “freedom”!
What’s the US bought in Iraq? A piece of real estate — what bits of it the US can actually control. And on most days, this doesn’t even include the road to Baghdad’s airport!
And how to develop our new real estate purchase? Neocons and their influential Israeli spouses, now tell us that Iraq will make a nice base from which to launch that Pentagon plan, described by former US general and presidential candidate Wesley Clark in his book, as “Seven Middle East countries in Five Years.”
“Don’t forget the shopping list, honey!” trill the Israeli spouses as neocons head out to Capitol Hill. Hmmmm, let’s see: Afghanistan, Iraq. That’s two down...well, sort of down, being that even Afghanistan is now re-exploding in fury. So that leaves five Middle East states to go. More or less. Whatever conquering a nation has come to mean these days.
Iran was next on the neocon shopping list. But those Persians have proved so wily! Instead of gassing up their tanks and parading goose-stepping battalions around Martyr’s Square, the Iranians opted to develop an “atomic energy for peace” program. And why not? This slogan enabled US President Eisenhower to make America the foremost nuclear power on the planet. Moreover, it could not have escaped Iran’s notice that the US huffs and puffs at North Korea, but has so far failed to blow even one house there in. Not by the hair of Kim Jung Il’s chinny chin chin.
So Iran has gone shopping and now proudly owns a nice new nuclear reactor, designed and built in such a way to make Israeli sabotage difficult and costly! And being savvy shoppers themselves, the Israelis have now decided to let the US make their bargain for them.
What’s the price of bombing, invading, and occupying Iran? Rather incalculable.
Neocons and their Israeli spouses trying to whip American shoppers into a buying frenzy are meeting a cool disinterest, despite claims that Zarqawi and Osama Bin Laden met with those crazy Iranian mullas. Even neocons’ new efforts to stir American patriotism with cries for separation of church and state and disparaging Iran’s ongoing elections meet with growing skepticism. American shoppers, never big fans of Iran’s turbaned elite since the 1979 hostage crisis, nevertheless understand that mullas have a certain pride of place in Iranian political life. It’s not the same in the US, where clergy only very occasionally run for office. But storming Tehran to push the mullas out of politics? Or even to hunt down Zarqawi, Bin Laden, and their minions?
There’s a high price to be paid for that!
And Americans bought something similar in Iran not too long ago. It turned out to be not a very good deal. It cost America 444 days of grief — stricken waiting, a suicidal, fatally flawed military “rescue” operation that took 8 American lives (a helicopter-full), and a presidential election!
Neocons and their Israeli spouses are now jawing “War! War!” at Syria. They claim Syria needs invading because it supposedly secreted Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction, that when Zarqawi and Osama Bin Laden are not in Iran, they’re in Syria, sending their followers into Iraq, and most recently, that Syria has sent secret agents into Lebanon to assassinate a politician and Samir Qassir, a university professor and writer.
When Marco Biagi, a law professor-writer, was mercilessly gunned down in Italy, supposedly by Red Brigade terrorists, did neocons and their Israeli spouses urge America’s military to secure Italy’s borders? Did France, Germany, or Spain fret they were being criminally penetrated? Did the FBI examine the bloody Italian crime scenes? What would be the price to run Biagi’s killers to ground?
It would be so cheap. So why aren’t neocons and their Israeli spouses interested in securing Italy?
Think the war for “Seven Countries in Five Years” is all about fighting terrorism?
Buyer beware. Don’t buy what you can’t return. |
Posted at 02:49 pm by R7fel
Permalink
Wednesday, June 22, 2005
Back Away From This Precipice
A Risky Favor on
Nuclear Exports
With concerns about nuclear terrorism on the rise, one would think it a no-brainer that Congress should be tightening, not loosening, controls over the export of bomb-grade uranium. Yet the comprehensive energy bill that passed the House and is pending in the Senate would foolishly weaken restrictions on the export of highly enriched uranium to make medical isotopes.
These isotopes are used to diagnose and treat illnesses like cancer, and the measure has been paraded as critical to nuclear medicine. But the real need appears to be a desire by isotope manufacturers for laxer standards. The Senate should back away from this precipice.
Under current law, written by Senator Charles Schumer of New York, the federal government is allowed to ship highly enriched uranium to reactor operators abroad as long as they agree to switch to safer low-enriched uranium as soon as technically and economically feasible. But the chief supplier of medical isotopes for the American market, a Canadian company called MDS Nordion, is said to have broken its pledge to cooperate. Incredibly, the pending legislation would reward this resistance by easing the rules for exporting uranium to make isotopes in Canada and four European nations.
Some medical groups are backing the relaxation. But the Physicians for Social Responsibility, which takes a broader view, notes that the law will not disrupt supplies as long as manufacturers work conscientiously toward safer forms of uranium. In the interests of reducing the amount of bomb-grade uranium in circulation, the Senate should support amendments being prepared by Mr. Schumer and Senator Jon Kyl, Republican of Arizona, to keep the current restrictions in place.
Posted at 10:03 am by R7fel
Permalink
Nuclear Industry to Receive More Than $10 Billion in Tax Breaks and
Subsidies in Senate Energy Bill
Public Citizen Says Nuclear Power Doesn't Deserve More Taxpayer
Handouts; 50-Year-Old Industry Should Stand on Its Own
WASHINGTON, D.C. - In a new cost analysis of the Senate energy bill,
Public Citizen today said that the nuclear industry would stand to gain
more than $10.1 billion in subsidies and tax breaks, as well as
unlimited taxpayer-backed loan guarantees and other incentives.
"The government should not be promoting the construction of new
reactors, which will only add to the nuclear waste and security problems
while costing taxpayers billions," said Wenonah Hauter, director of
Public Citizen's energy program. "The nuclear industry is demanding
cradle-to-grave subsidies, and the Senate energy bill is an attempt to
give it to them."
The $10.1 billion includes $5.7 billion in production tax credits and
$4.4 billion in various subsidies, but does not include the potential
costs of loan guarantees or the Price-Anderson Act, which puts taxpayers
on the hook for potentially billions in cleanup costs in the event of a
major accident or terrorist attack on a reactor.
The production tax credits equal 1.8 cents for each kilowatt-hour of
electricity from new reactors (up to 6,000 megawatts) during the first
eight years of operation - costing $5.7 billion through 2025, according
to the Energy Information Administration. However, only $278 million
through 2016 is counted in the $18 billion in tax breaks in the bill,
because most of the nuclear credits would be claimed after 2016. This
means that the true cost of all the tax breaks, including those for
non-nuclear industries, is more than $24 billion.
Separately, the loan guarantees in the Senate bill could prove
extremely costly to taxpayers. According to the Congressional Budget
Office (CBO), the risk of loan default by industry would be very high --
"well above 50 percent" -- leaving the public to pay as much as 80
percent of the cost of building a reactor. This provision authorizes
"such sums as are necessary," but if Congress were to appropriate
funding for loan guarantees covering six nuclear reactors, this subsidy
could potentially cost taxpayers $6 billion (assuming a 50 percent
default rate and construction cost per plant of $2.5 billion, as the CBO
has estimated).
Other subsidies for the nuclear industry in the Senate energy bill
include:
* Reauthorization of the Price-Anderson Act, extending the industry's
liability cap to cover new nuclear power plants built in the next 20
years, which means in the event of an accident or attack, taxpayers
would be liable for the remainder of the cost, estimated to be $600
billion for a single serious accident (2004 dollars).
* Authorization of more than $432 million over three years for nuclear
energy research and development, including the Department of Energy's
Nuclear Power 2010 program to build new nuclear plants, and its
Generation IV program to develop new reactor designs. Half the cost of
applications for new reactors would be paid for by taxpayers, estimated
to be as much as $87 million per reactor.
* Authorization of more than $1.25 billion from FY2006 to FY2015 and
"such sums as are necessary" from FY2016 to FY2021 for a nuclear plant
in Idaho to generate hydrogen fuel. Hydrogen could be a clean fuel of
the future, but using nuclear power to produce it negates the benefits.
Existing reactors have been heavily subsidized for decades, receiving
56 percent of the federal energy supply research and development funding
between 1948 and 1998, capped insurance rates and limited liability in
the case of an accident, and billions in taxpayer bailouts in the 1980s.
"Despite a pro-nuclear push by the Bush administration and some members
of Congress, nuclear power is not an acceptable option for the future,"
said Hauter. "We have 'been there, done that' and it has been a failure.
After more than 50 years, the problems of nuclear power are far from
solved. In fact, they are more widely recognized than ever."
In March, e-mails were released indicating that government scientists
falsified data related to water infiltration and climate modeling for
the proposed Yucca Mountain waste dump site; investigations are still
ongoing. Also, recent reports by the National Academy of Sciences and
the Government Accountability Office pointed out security
vulnerabilities of the highly radioactive waste stored at reactor sites.
The energy bill contains no requirements for improving security at these
sites.
Nuclear power has made headlines this year as proponents attempt to
convince a wary public that nuclear energy can solve the global warming
problem. Last week, nearly 300 environmental and public interest
organizations sent a letter to Congress flatly rejecting nuclear energy
as an "acceptable or necessary" solution to combat rising temperatures
on the planet because it is an expensive, dangerous and polluting
technology.
"We urge the Senate to remove these unjustifiable subsidies, tax breaks
and loan guarantees from the energy bill," Hauter said. "After 50 years,
the nuclear industry should stand on its own. Instead of endless
subsidies to nuclear companies, Congress should dedicate funds to
harness the promise of energy efficiency and renewable technologies,
such as wind and solar energy."
Last month, Public Citizen released a new fact sheet series outlining
the five fatal flaws of nuclear power: cost, waste, safety, security and
proliferation (to read them, go to www.citizen.org/cmep/fatalflaws.) For
more information about the subsidies and other incentives in the Senate
energy bill, go to
http://www.citizen.org/documents/senatebillnukeprovisions.pdf. For a
copy of the statement opposing nuclear power, go to
http://www.citizen.org/documents/GroupNuclearStmt.pdf.
Yesterday, the Senate added Sen. Chuck Hagel's climate change
amendment, which authorizes additional financial assistance through
2010, including direct loans, loan guarantees, a line of credit and
production incentive payments, that could include new nuclear power
plants.
###
Public Citizen is a national, nonprofit consumer advocacy organization
with 150,000 members. For more information, visit www.citizen.org
==========
Tell your senators to oppose this bill!
http://action.citizen.org/pc/mail/oneclick_compose/?alertid=7707271
==========
*** S P E C I A L N O T I C E T O M I S S I S S I P P I A C T I
V I S T S ***
Speak Out Against Nuclear Power in Mississippi!
This coming Tuesday, June 28, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC) will host a public meeting in Port Gibson, Mississippi -- in
Claiborne County -- to discuss Entergy's proposal to build two new
reactors at the Grand Gulf nuclear plant along the Mississippi River.
The meeting will allow members of the public to give transcribed,
on-the-record comments about new reactors in Mississippi and their
environmental, health and safety impacts.
If possible, please attend this meeting to make your voice heard.
Visible public opposition has the power to stop this nuclear expansion.
For more information, visit http://www.citizen.org/cmep/grandgulf.
While the time allocated for each individual to give comments at the
meeting will be only several minutes, the impact will be huge. This is
the one and only public meeting to discuss the negative health, safety,
and economic consequences the new reactors will have on Port Gibson and
Mississippi. There's likely to be a substantial media presence there, so
high turnout among opponents of the project will be important.
The Grand Gulf plant is already a burden on the local population --
unjust tax laws prevent Claiborne County from recouping in taxes what
they have to pay to provide emergency services. As a result, those
services--from the police to fire fighters to hospital -- are not up to
the appropriate standard, posing a hazard that extends beyond the county
line. Even the NRC admits that with a new reactor, "It is not clear
whether Claiborne County would receive property taxes, sales, and use
taxes, or other taxes and public monies commensurate with the costs of
its additional emergency management and public services obligations.
The net financial burden may fall on local residents and taxpayers, most
of whom are minority and low-income persons."
As a nation, we can't afford to start down the road of nuclear power
again, after a 30-year hiatus. Nuclear power continues to rely heavily
on taxpayer subsidies because it is so expensive, and draft language in
the energy bill in the current Congress indicates billions more dollars
could be on the way. There is still no solution to the waste problem;
the proposed nuclear waste dump at Yucca Mountain is in a downward
spiral and wouldn't be large enough to hold waste from a new reactor
even if it did go forward. Safety continues to be sacrificed in favor of
higher profits by both the industry and the NRC. And security standards
at nuclear plants are downright pathetic.
Please help us put a stop to nuclear power once and for all by
attending this public meeting from 7-10 p.m. at the Port Gibson City
Hall, 1005 College Street, Port Gibson, MS. Please encourage family and
friends to attend also. If you'd like to speak at the meeting, be sure
to arrive at least 30 minutes early to register, or e-mail
GrandGulfEIS@nrc.gov. If you are unable to attend on Tuesday or
don't wish to speak publicly, we encourage you to send written comments
by July 14 via e-mail to GrandGulfEIS@nrc.gov.
For more information about the specific problems with a new reactor at
Grand Gulf, visit http://www.citizen.org/cmep/grandgulf. You can also
direct questions to Brendan Hoffman of Public Citizen's Critical Mass
Energy and Environment Program at bhoffman@citizen.org or (202)
454-5130.
Posted at 10:00 am by R7fel
Permalink
U.S. Borders
Vulnerable,
Witnesses Say
WASHINGTON, June 21 - The federal government's efforts to prevent terrorists from smuggling a nuclear weapon into the United States are so poorly managed and reliant on ineffective equipment that the nation remains extremely vulnerable to a catastrophic attack, scientists and a government auditor warned a House committee on Tuesday.
The assessment, coming nearly four years after the September 2001 attacks and after the investment of about $800 million by the United States government, prompted expressions of frustration and disappointment from lawmakers.
"If we go ahead and spend the money and don't succeed, I don't understand that," said Representative Steve Pearce, Republican of New Mexico.
Four federal departments - Homeland Security, Defense, Energy and State - are involved in a global campaign to try to prevent the illicit acquisition, movement and use of radioactive materials, which includes efforts to prevent theft of nuclear materials from former Soviet stockpiles and inspecting cargo containers on arrival from around the world.
Dirty bombs, crude devices that widely spread low levels of radiation, are relatively easy to detect. But highly enriched uranium, a crucial ingredient in a nuclear bomb, could easily be shielded with less than a quarter-inch of lead, making it "very likely to escape detection by passive radiation monitors" now installed at ports and border stations, Benn Tannenbaum, a physicist and senior program associate at the American Association for the Advancement of Science, testified at Tuesday's hearing.
The monitors are unable to distinguish between naturally occurring radiation from everyday items like ceramic tile and dangerous material like enriched uranium.
"It has been, let me say, a bad few years," Dr. Tannenbaum said.
Customs officials also at times allow trucks to pass through the monitors too quickly, said Gene Aloise, an official from the Government Accountability Office. And because the devices sound so many false alarms, Mr. Aloise said, their sensitivity has been turned down, making them less effective still.
Nationally, less than a quarter of the radiation detection devices needed to check all goods crossing the borders have been installed, federal officials said. In New York, for example, none of the cargo that moves through the largest ship terminal or goods leaving the port by rail or barge are inspected for radiation, Bethann Rooney, manager of security for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, testified.
The problems extend beyond the borders, witnesses said. About half of the monitors given to one former Soviet state were never installed or put into use. A monitor that the State Department gave to Bulgaria was set up on an unused road. And sea spray and winds at some ports overseas may have compromised the detection equipment, Mr. Aloise said.
Richard L. Wagner Jr., a physicist at the Los Alamos National Laboratory and chairman of the Defense Department task force on preventing a clandestine nuclear attack, agreed that the radiation detection systems installed across the United States were "quite limited in their capabilities and, in general, are insufficient to the task." But the situation, Dr. Wagner said, is not surprising given the rapid start up of the effort.
"There will be false starts and there will be money wasted," he said.
Representative Jim Langevin, Democrat of Rhode Island, asked how Homeland Security should apportion $125 million in the coming fiscal year between buying more of the same radiation monitor technology and supporting research into better technology. Two witnesses called for putting the detection equipment on ships, so threats could be identified before reaching the United States.
Members of Congress have also recently questioned a proposal by the Bush administration to spend $227 million in the coming year to create a Domestic Nuclear Detection Office, skeptical that it will do more than add a new layer of bureaucracy.
"I am not too hopeful about this situation," Representative Bill Pascrell Jr., Democrat of New Jersey, said.
Posted at 09:13 am by R7fel
Permalink
Tuesday, June 21, 2005
Do Not Go Quietly Into That Good Night
Be Afraid, Be Very Afraid—Something Evil This Way is Coming!
By: Jack Dalton
06/21/05 "ICH" - - George W. Bush stated in 1999 that he wanted to invade Iraq. He wanted to go down in history as a great American president. Last year during an interview with Tim Russert, Bush told the world that, “I am a war president…I make all my decisions with war in mind…” For Bush, his road to immortality and greatness was, and still is, thru war; and not just one war, but continuous war.
Bush and those around, beside and in back of him have articulated non-stop that they (he) are after permanent republican “rule” over this nation and us, the citizens of this nation. Virtually every government agency within the federal bureaucracy has as its head or director a BushCo loyalist. Those that the U.S. Senate have been unwilling to give an up or down vote for, Bush has waited for a congressional recess and then just signed off on an “executive order” recess appointment, totally by-passing the “advice and consent” of the Senate.
Bush and company have stated many times and in no-uncertain of terms that they will be satisfied with nothing less than 100% approval for everything they want; and they will do whatever it takes to make sure of that. Lie, cheat, steal and hire pundits to read the BushCo script and try and pass it off as “news.”
Today the fight goes on in the Senate over John Bolton, the BushCo proposed U.N. ambassador. Bolton will not get the senate vote, but no matter as the senate will recess this next week for the 4th of July and Bush will give Bolton a recess appointment by way of an “executive order” much as he has done in the past. There goes the U.N. which BushCo wants and needs. Other wise they run the risk of being prosecuted at some point in time by the international community for committing a war of aggression under the Nuremberg principals—which to date BushCo has not withdrawn from, at least not yet.
That was what was behind all the “force protection” so-called “agreements” BushCo extorted so many to sign. At least they would sign if they still wanted U.S. dollars coming their way. So much for “agreements.”
This is all about power, pure unadulterated political power. Everything is secondary to securing permanent political power. The securing of this political power extends way past just the rest of the world. In order for BushCo to do that they must of necessity secure their power over us here in the U.S. first and foremost.
Virtually everything BushCo has done since 9/11 especially the “Patriot Act” has been to silence dissent and opposition to the plans of BushCo, which simply stated is permanent one party “rule” (their word not mine) and the pushing of their “world view” and moralistic self-righteousness down our throats; and all while BushCo violates every international law, agreement and our own constitution. But, no matter as BushCo is rewriting that document on a daily basis.
Now we have something else that BushCo wants to rewrite, or just do away with all together and the BushCo mouth pieces in the U.S. House of Representatives are right there to help—can anyone say, Tom DeLay & Co?
They are out to repeal the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution—the two term limit on the presidency! The GOP has already announced it is out to “restructure the entire federal government” just last month. In fact they made this declaration just 2 weeks after the Downing Street Memo was released to the public.
This cannot be allowed to happen! BushCo has already turned this nation on its head to the point I do not recognize my own country any more. BushCo lies its butt off about everything it does and has done the while the army of hired Karl Rove pundits tags all voices of opposition as liars, or un-American, or, traitors, or un-patriotic, or, or, or… Everyone lies but BushCo according to them, and half the country just quietly accepts that and joins in the choir of condemnation.
I for one shall not go “…quietly into that good night…” I will resist this till I draw my last breath. If this, concerning the move to eliminate the two term limit to the presidency, does not motivate people to take immediate action I am afraid this nation truly is lost. For those of you that write this off as just another nut-job Vietnam vet screaming “the sky is falling” I have news for you—the sky is falling!!
So while the members of BushCo attempt to divert our attention with false arguments—like the one they are trying to generate by falsely saying the Downing Street Memo is a forgery—they are quietly about the business of turning this nation into something it is not supposed to be—a tyrannical dictatorship and they will succeed to a great extent if they manage to overturn the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution.
Just keep in mind when you read the following that this is not old news—it is recent today history in the making—how it turns out is up to us.
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the 22nd amendment to the Constitution. (Introduced in House)
HJ 24 IH
109th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. J. RES. 24
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the 22nd amendment to the Constitution.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
February 17, 2005
Mr. HOYER (for himself, Mr. BERMAN, Mr. SENSENBRENNER, Mr. SABO, and Mr. PALLONE) introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
JOINT RESOLUTION
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the 22nd amendment to the Constitution.
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification: Article --`The twenty-second article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is repealed.'.
The 22nd Amendment
Section 1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this Article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this Article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.
Section. 2. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission to the States by the Congress.
Jack Dalton is a disabled Vietnam veteran, activist and independent writer that lives in Portland, Or. He has a blog, Jack’s Straight Speak and is a columnist for the POAC as well as many other web publications.
Posted at 04:30 pm by R7fel
Permalink
Saturday, June 18, 2005
Strategic and Technical Cooperation
 |
|
| Russia, China Join Against US 'Star Wars' |
|
|
|
|
UPI - Friday, June 17, 2005 |
| |
|
Date: Friday, June 17, 2005 8:10:08 PM EST By MARTIN SIEFF, UPI Senior News Analyst
WASHINGTON, June 17 (UPI) -- Russia and China have joined forces in a major U.N. forum to oppose U.S. plans to develop new space weapons. And the move could herald a far more wide-ranging strategic cooperation between the two nations.
Russia and China have joined forces to urge the U.N. Conference on Disarmament to launch a new round of international negotiations to prevent the increased militarization of space. On June 9, the two countries issued a joint working paper calling for the reactivation of the moribund Committee on Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space that was discontinued in 1994. The appeal was delivered to the Disarmament Conference in Geneva.
Hu Xiaodi, China's veteran top negotiator, and one of its most influential policymakers on space weapons systems, told the conference, "The recent developments concerning outer space are worrisome and require more urgent efforts to start work on preventing an arms race in outer space... China and Russia stand for the negotiation, at the Disarmament Conference, of an international legal instrument prohibiting the deployment of weapons in outer space and use of force against outer space objects."
Analyst Sergei Blatov writing for the Eurasia Daily Monitor of the Washington-based Jamestown Foundation called the Sino-Russian initiative "an apparent strategic partnership" and added that it was "understood to be anti-Washington, due to known joint Russo-Chinese opposition to the planned U.S. National Missile Defense (NMD) program."
The initiative is not likely to get anywhere.
Efforts through the U.N. Disarmament Conference to update international space disarmament agreements have deadlocked. The United States has said it sees no need for any new space arms control agreements.
Also, President George W. Bush has appointed a neo-conservative super-hawk, Robert G. Joseph, to replace John Bolton as undersecretary of state for arms control and international security affairs. Joseph has been a leading advocate of countering Chinese and other potentially threatening ballistic missile build ups not with arms control agreements but with the unilateral U.S. deployment of high tech active, as well as passive weapons systems.
Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov used the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the founding of the famous Baikonur cosmodrome, still operated by Russia but now in independent Kazakhstan, on June 2 to warn that his country was prepared to deploy counter weapons to any new ones the United States launched into the heavens.
"If some state harbors plans to deploy weapons in space or starts doing this, we will certainly take measures in response to this," he said.
Some U.S. and Russian experts have pooh-poohed both the signals from the Bush administration that it intends to boldly develop new strategic capabilities in space and the ability of nations like Russia and China to block them.
However, U.S. experts have warned that Chinese military scientists have been seriously exploring forms of asymmetrical warfare with which they could cost-effectively disable America's space domination.
The easiest way to paralyze the entire U.S. space satellite system in so-called Low Earth Orbit, or LEO, they warn, is by detonating a nuclear weapon above the Earth to produce a radiation belt at the altitude where the satellites orbit. Satellites built to function for 10 years will then all die a slow death over just a few weeks as they pass through the most irradiated areas.
"Given the inherent vulnerability of space-based weapons systems (such as space-based interceptors or space-based lasers) to more cost-effective anti-satellite, or ASAT, attacks, China could resort to ASAT weapons as an asymmetrical (defense) measure," Hui Zhang, an expert on space weaponization and China's nuclear policy at the John F, Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University told United Press International in a recent interview.
Also, if China, Russia or even North Korea were to detonate a single nuclear weapon in the upper atmosphere it would produce an electric magnetic pulse, or EMP. One nuclear weapon detonated in near space would therefore melt down the entire electronic communications network of the United States. That could ruin the U.S. economy and utterly disrupt society
China has repeatedly made clear that it would vastly increase the size of its intercontinental ballistic missile force, building hundreds more nuclear armed ICBMs if necessary to swamp America's new ABM defenses. That could include producing as many as 14 or 15 times as many ICBMs with a range of more than 7,800 miles that are able to threaten the United States, Zhang said.
Currently, China has about 20 liquid-fueled, silo-based ICBMs with single warheads. But if the United States deployed a Ground-Based Missile Defense system with 100 to 250 ground-based interceptor rockets, China would probably be willing to build and deploy anything from 100 to almost 300 more warheads and the missiles necessary to carry them, Zhang said.
Even if the new Alaska-California system of ABM interceptors eventually works as planned to prevent individual or small numbers of ICBM launches by so-called "rogue" nations like North Korea or Iran, it was never designed to protect the United States against any attack by Russia's still huge Strategic Rocket Forces, with their 2,500 nuclear weapons - more than 10 times as many as are needed to obliterate every city in the northern hemisphere or every U.S. town and city with a population greater than 50,000.
Neither the West Coast-Alaska ABM system nor any of the visionary "Star Wars" type programs currently being developed at astronomical cost by the Air Force and, to a far lesser extent, by the Army, show any possibility of defending America against the Multiple Independently Targeted Reentry Vehicle, or MIRV, capabilities of the Strategic Rocket Forces.
So far Russia, apart from the United States, is the only other country in the world with a MIRV capability. And China, despite all its astonishing industrial and technological progress, is still believed to be decades away from developing a MIRV capability of its own.
Up to now, Russia has jealously guarded its MIRV technology and refused to sell or share it with China. But there is no doubt that Russian-Chinese strategic cooperation is developing rapidly. And no one truly knows how far it will ultimately go.
This fall, Russia and China are going to hold massive war games that Blagov described as "unprecedented."
"The war games are expected to involve Russia's strategic Tu-95MS bombers firing cruise missiles, presumably an exercise on how to overcome missile defense," he wrote.
Many experts like respected U.S. space analysts Dwayne Day and James Oberg, and Russian Maj. Gen. Vladimir Dworkin have expressed skepticism that most if not all of the projected new U.S. wonder weapons will ever be deployed at all, given the enormous engineering and technological costs and problems involved
But the very fear that they might be could be enough, others warn, to propel Russia and China to level of strategic and technical cooperation they might never otherwise have contemplated against what may only be a "phantom menace."
--
Copyright 2005 by United Press International. |
|
|
Posted at 07:15 pm by R7fel
Permalink
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
