Friday, November 02, 2007

Treason of the Highest Order

Missing Nukes: Treason of the Highest Order
by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya


According to a wide range of reports, several nuclear bombs were “lost” for 36 hours after taking off August 29/30, 2007 on a “cross-country journey” across the U.S., from U.S.A.F Base Minot in North Dakota to U.S.A.F. Base Barksdale in Louisiana. [1] Reportedly, in total there were six W80-1 nuclear warheads armed on AGM-129 Advanced Cruise Missiles (ACMs) that were “lost.” [2] The story was first reported by the Military Times, after military servicemen leaked the story.

[for complete article links, please see source here.]

11/02/07 "Global Research" - It is also worth noting that on August 27, 2007, just days before the "lost" nukes incident, three B-52 Bombers were performing special missions under the direct authorization of General Moseley, the Chief of Staff of the U.S. Air Force. [3] The exercise was reported as being an aerial information and image gathering mission. The base at Minot is also home of the 91st Space Wings, a unit under the command of Air Force Space Command (AFSPC).

According to official reports, the U.S. Air Force pilots did not know that they were carrying weapons of mass destruction (WMDs). Once in Louisiana, they also left the nuclear weapons unsecured on the runway for several hours. [4]

U.S. Air Force Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations, Plans, and Requirements, Major-General Richard Y. Newton III commented on the incident, saying there was an “unprecedented” series of procedural errors, which revealed “an erosion of adherence to weapons-handling standards” [5]

These statements are misleading. The lax security was not the result of procedural negligence within the U.S. Air Force, but rather the consequence of a deliberate tampering of these procedures.

If a soldier, marine, airman, or sailor were even to be issued a rifle and rifle magazine — weaponry of a far lesser significance, danger, and cost — there is a strict signing and accountability process that involves a chain of command and paperwork. This is part of the set of military checks and balances used by all the services within the U.S. Armed Forces.

Military servicemen qualified to speak on the subject will confirm that there is a stringent nuclear weapons handling procedure. There is a rigorous, almost inflexible, chain of command in regards to the handling of nuclear weapons and not just any soldier, sailor, airman, or marine is allowed to handle nuclear weapons. Only servicemen specialized in specific handling and loading procedures, are perm certified to handle, access and load nuclear warheads.

Every service personnel that moves or even touches these weapons must sign a tracking paper and has total accountability for their movement. There is good reason for the paperwork behind moving these weapons. The military officers that order the movement of nuclear weapons, including base commanders, must also fill out paper forms.

In other words, unauthorized removal of nuclear weapons would be virtually impossible to accomplish unless the chain of command were bypassed, involving, in this case, the deliberate tampering of the paperwork and tracking procedures.

The strategic bombers that carried the nuclear weapons also could not fly with their loaded nuclear weaponry without the authorization of senior military officials and the base commander. The go-ahead authorization of senior military officials must be transmitted to the servicemen that upload the nuclear weapons. Without this authorization no flights can take place.

In the case of the missing nukes, orders were given and flight permission was granted. Once again, any competent and eligible U.S. Air Force member can certify that this is the standard procedure.

There are two important questions to be answered in relation to the "lost" nukes incident:

1. Who gave the order to arm the W80-1 thermonuclear warheads on the AGM-129 Advanced Cruise Missiles (ACMs)? At what level in the military hierarchy did this order originate? How was the order transmitted down the command chain?

2. If this was not a procedural error, what was the underlying military-political objective sought by those who gave the orders?

The Impossibility of "Losing" Nuclear Weapons

As Robert Stormer, a former U.S. lieutenant-commander in the U.S. Navy, has commented: “Press reports initially cited the Air Force mistake of flying nuclear weapons over the United States in violation of Air Force standing orders and international treaties, while completely missing the more important major issues, such as how six nuclear cruise missiles got loose to begin with.” [6]

Stormer also makes a key point, which is not exactly a secret: “There is a strict chain of custody for all such weapons. Nuclear weapons handling is spelled out in great detail in Air Force regulations, to the credit of that service. Every person who orders the movement of these weapons, handles them, breaks seals or moves any nuclear weapon must sign off for tracking purposes.” [7]

Stormer continues:

“Two armed munitions specialists are required to work as a team with all nuclear weapons. All individuals working with nuclear weapons must meet very strict security standards and be tested for loyalty — this is known as a ‘[Nuclear Weapons] Personnel Reliability Program [DoDD 5210 42].’ They work in restricted areas within eyeshot of one another and are reviewed constantly.”[8]

Stormer unwraps the whole Pentagon cover-up by pointing out some logical facts and military procedures. First he reveals that: “All security forces assigned [to handle and protect nuclear weapons] are authorized to use deadly force to protect the weapons from any threat [including would-be thieves].” [9]

He then points out a physical reality that can not be shrugged aside: “Nor does anyone quickly move a 1-ton cruise missile — or forget about six of them, as reported by some news outlets, especially cruise missiles loaded with high explosives.”

He further explains another physical and procedural reality about nuclear weapons assembly:

“The United States also does not transport nuclear weapons meant for elimination attached to their launch vehicles under the wings of a combat aircraft. The procedure is to separate the warhead from the missile, encase the warhead and transport it by military cargo aircraft to a repository — not an operational bomber base that just happens to be the staging area for Middle Eastern operations.” [10]

This last point raises the question of what were the nuclear weapons meant for? In this context, Stomrer puts forth the following list of important questions to which he demands an answer:

1. Why, and for what ostensible purpose, were these nuclear weapons taken to Barksdale?
2. How long was it before the error was discovered?
3. How many mistakes and errors were made, and how many needed to be made, for this to happen?
4. How many and which security protocols were overlooked?
5. How many and which safety procedures were bypassed or ignored?
6. How many other nuclear command and control non-observations of procedure have there been?
7. What is Congress going to do to better oversee U.S. nuclear command and control?
8. How does this incident relate to concern for reliability of control over nuclear weapons and nuclear materials in Russia, Pakistan and elsewhere?
9. Does the Bush administration, as some news reports suggest, have plans to attack Iran with nuclear weapons?

It is a matter of perception, whether it is “clear” or “unclear”, as to why the nuclear warheads had not been removed beforehand from the missiles.

For those who have been observing these series of “unclear” events it is becoming “clear” that a criminal government is at the helm of the United States. There was no way that the six nuclear missiles could have been “mistakenly” loaded, especially when their separate warheads had to be affixed to the missiles by individuals specialized in such a momentous task.


It is also being claimed that military teams in both U.S.A.F. Base Minot and U.S.A.F. Base Barksdale made major "procedural errors". What are the probabilities of this occurring simultaneously in two locations?

It is also worth noting that original reports from military sources talked about only five of the six nuclear warheads from Minot being accounted for in Barksdale.[11] Nuclear warheads are also kept in specialized storage areas or bunkers. Moreover, nuclear weapons are not being decommissioned at Barksdale.

The Role of the Nuclear Weapons Surety Program: What happened to Electronic Monitoring?

The Nuclear Weapons Surety Program is a joint program between the U.S. Department of Defence and the U.S. Department of Energy. The National Security Agency (NSA) is also involved as well as other U.S. federal government agencies. The Nuclear Weapons System Safety Program is part of this program, which involves a monitoring and safeguards regime for the U.S. nuclear arsenal.

The Nuclear Weapons Security Standard falls under the Nuclear Weapons Surety Program and is in place to disallow any “unauthorized access to nuclear weapons; prevent damage or sabotage to nuclear weapons; prevent loss of custody; and prevent, to the maximum extent possible, radiological contamination caused by unauthorized acts.”

Under this or these safeguards system there also exists a rigorous control of use scheme, which is tied to the military chain of command and the White House.

“Command and Control (C2)” and “Use Control”

“Use control” is a set of security measures designed to prevent unauthorized access to nuclear weapons. These measures involve weapons design features, operational procedures, security, and system safety rules.

“Command and Control” or “C2” involves the Office of the President of the United States of America. C2 is an established line of command, which is tied to the White House. Without it, nuclear weapons cannot be deployed or armed as they were in U.S.A.F. Base Minot. It is these two control elements that establish the basis of authorization through which “absolute control of nuclear weapons” is maintained “at all times.”

In addition to the checks and balances in place in regards to handling nuclear weapons, the Defence Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) and its partners manually and electronically inspect and monitor all U.S. nuclear weapons through the Nuclear Weapon Status Information Systems.

More Unanswered Questions: What Happened to the Computerized Tracking System?

The Nuclear Management Information Systems “interface with each other and provide [the U.S. Department of Defence] with the ability to track the location of nuclear weapons and components from cradle-to-grave [meaning from when they are made to when they are decommissioned].” [12]

The Military Times also makes an omission that exposes the official narrative as false and indicates that the event was not just a mistake: “The Defense Department uses a computerized tracking program to keep tabs on each one of its nuclear warheads, said Hans Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists. For the six warheads to make it onto the B-52, each one would have had to be signed out of its storage bunker and transported to the bomber.” [13]

This is where the chain of command in regards to military officers falls into play. If any of the stocked inventories of nuclear weapons are moved to an authorized location they will be noticed and tracked by the DTRA and will require the relevant authorization. There is also a code system involved that is tied to the chain of command.

The fact that the incident only apparently became known to the U.S. Air Force when military personnel reported it, suggests that either the nuclear weapons were ordered to be moved or that the electronic tracking devices had been removed or tampered with. This scenario would need the involvement of individuals with expertise in military electronics or for those responsible for the monitoring of nuclear weapons to look the other way or both.

Mysterious Deaths in the United States Air Force: Whitewash and Cover-up

Several military personnel died under mysterious circumstances shortly before and after the incident. There are now questions regarding the fate of these individuals in the U.S. Air Force who could have had relationships in one way or another to the incident or possibly have been directly involved. It is also necessary to state that there is no proof that these deaths are linked to the August flight from Minot to Barksdale in question.

Citizens for Legitimate Government has pointed towards the involvement of the U.S. Air Force in a cover-up and has linked several deaths of U.S. servicemen to the incident. Lori Price has also stated for Citizens for a Legitimate Government that “you need about fourteen signatures to get an armed nuke on a B-52.”

Based on several news sources, including the U.S. military, we provide below a detailed review of these mysterious and untimely deaths of U.S. servicemen.


Todd Blue

Airman 1st Class Todd Blue went on leave days after the nuclear weapons were “lost.” Blue died under questionable timing while on leave, visiting his family in Wytheville, Virginia at the age of 20 on September 10, 2007. He was a response force member assigned to the 5th Security Forces Squadron. What does this mean?

Airman Todd Blue occupied a key position in weapons systems security at Minot. [14] At Minot U.S.A.F. Base the 5th Security Forces Squadron to which he belonged was responsible for base entry requirements and a particular section, the Weapons System Security section, was responsible for preventing the unauthorized removal of military property. The latter is responsible for security of all priority resources, meaning the security of nuclear weapons. In other words not only did the 5th Security Forces Squadron keep eyes on what entered and left Minot, but they kept an eye on and monitored the nuclear weapons.

John Frueh


U.S. Air Force Captain John Frueh is another serviceman who could have been indirectly connected to the “lost” nuclear weapons. He was reported as being last seen with a GPS device, camera, and camcorder being carried with him in a backpack. Local police in Oregon and the F.B.I. seemed to be looking for him for days. His family also felt that something bad had happened to him.

On September 8, 2007 Captain Frueh was found dead in Washington State, near his abandoned rental car, after the Portland Police Department contacted the Skamania County Sheriff’s Officer. [15] The last time he spoke with his family was August 30, 2007. He had arrived from Florida to attend a wedding that he never showed up at. The Oregonian reported that “Authorities in Portland found no activity on his credit or bank cards since [Frueh] was last seen (...) [and that] the last call from his cell phone was made at 12:28 p.m. [August 30, 2007] from Mill Plain Boulevard and Interstate 205 in Vancouver [Washington State].” [16]

His background was in meteorology and the study of the atmosphere and weather. He was also reported to be a U.S. Air Force pararescue officer. [17] He was also a major-select candidate, which means he was selected for a promotion as a U.S. Air Force major, but was not officially promoted.

Captain Frueh belonged to the U.S.A.F. Special Operations Command. U.S.A.F. Special Operations Command has its headquarters in Hurlburt Field, Florida and is one of nine major Air Force commands. It is also the U.S. Air Force’s component of U.S. Special Operations Command, a unified command located at MacDill Air Force Base, which is also in Florida. The force provides special operations forces for worldwide deployment and assignment to regional unified commands, such as CENTCOM. Its missions include conduct of global special operations. These operations — and this is where careful attention should be paid — range from “precision application of firepower, such as nuclear weapons,” to infiltration, exfiltration (the removal of “devices,” supplies, spies, special agents, or units from enemy territory), re-supply and refuelling of special operational elements.

In Captain Frueh’s case his death is questionable too. The U.S. Air Force would not let a missing persons’ investigation go forward by the police without conducting its own investigation. Usually the different service branches of the U.S. military would investigate for missing servicemen, to see if these individuals are Absent Without Authorized Leave (AWAL) or have deserted, before an individual’s case is handed over to the police.

Clint Huff, Linda Huff, and Weston Kissel

Another military weatherman, along with his wife, also died after August 30, 2007. Senior Airman Clint Huff, belonging to the 26th Operational Weather Squadron and his wife Linda Huff died in a motorcycle accident on September 15, 2007. [18] The husband and wife fatality happened on Shreveport-Blanchard Highway, near U.S.A.F. Base Barksdale, when according to the Caddo Parish Sheriff’s Officer a Pontiac Aztec, a medium-sized SUV, initiated a left turn at the same time that the couple attempted to pass on a no passing zone and collided. [19]




First-Lieutenant Weston Kissel, a B-52H Stratofortress Bomber pilot, also died in a reported Tennessee motorcycle accident. This was while he was on leave in, less than two months from the nuclear B-52 flights, on July 17, 2007. [20] His death came after another single-vehicle accident by another Minot serviceman, Senior Airman Adam Barrs. [21]

Adam Barrs and Stephen Garrett


Senior Airman Barrs died as a passenger in a vehicle being driven by Airman 1st Class Stephen Garrett, also from Minot. Garrett, also belongs to the 5th Aircraft Maintenance Squadron.

The death of Barrs was reported as being part of a single-vehicle car accident. Associated Press reports state that “[Minot] Base officials say 20-year-old Barrs was a passenger in a vehicle that failed to negotiate a curve, hit an approach, hit a tree and started on fire late Tuesday [July 3, 2007] night.” [22] Barrs was pronounced dead on the scene of the accident, while Garrett was taken the hospital with no updates released by the U.S. Air Force. Adam Barrs also belonged to the 5th Aircraft Maintenance Squadron, where he was responsible for the maintenance and securing of the electronic communicational and navigation mission systems aboard the B-52H Stratofortresses on base. The 5th Aircraft Maintenance Squadron is also one of the units that are responsible for loading and unloading weaponry onto the B-52H Stratofortresses.

The deaths of Kissel and Barrs could be dismissed as irrelevant because they occurred prior to the incident. However, Barrs and Kissel could have been in one way or another connected to the advanced planning of the special operation, prior to the incident (special operations are not planned in a few days and may take months and even longer). There is, of course, no proof and only an independent investigation will be able to reveal whether these deaths are connected to the incident.

If there was an internal and secretive operation bypassing most military personnel, a few men in key positions would have to have been involved over a period of time prior to the August 29/30, 2007 flight. Senior Airman Barrs, due to his expertise in communication and navigational systems, could potentially have been involved in the preparations that would have allowed the nuclear weapons to escape detection by military surveillance and be ready for takeoff.

Reprimands, Replacements and Reassignments in the U.S.A.F. Chain of Command

Senior officers, including three colonels and a lieutenant-colonel, are among seventy personnel that will reportedly be disciplined for negligence and for allowing a B-52H Stratofortress Bomber to fly across the U.S. carrying six nuclear-armed cruise missiles that should never have been loaded under its wings. [23]


According to the Military Times, George W. Bush Jr. had been swiftly informed. This is a lockstep procedure. This illustrates the importance tied to the authorization needed for handling nuclear weapons. This is part of a two-way process in regards to authorization from the White House.

The commander of the 5th Munitions Squadron and the commander of the 5th Bomb Wing, Colonel Bruce Emig, have been replaced along with a series of other senior officers. This implies that the U.S. Air Force chain of command is directly involved in this event. None of these senior officers have been authorized to speak or make statements, according to U.S. military sources. Will any of these officers receive lucrative departure packages? Have they been reassigned?

More generally, the nature of the reprimands directed against senior officers involved has not been fully disclosed.

The “memory” of the incident is being erased through a reorganization of the ranks and a purge at U.S.A.F. Base Minot. The streamlining of the chain of command as well as the mysterious deaths of personnel who could have been involved in the incident, raise a series of far-reaching questions.

There are several important issues regarding the senior officers’ chain of command at Minot, which will be addressed in this article. Once again, the most important questions in regards to the missing nukes are: Who gave the orders and authorization for the operation and what where the underlying objectives of loading armed nuclear missiles?

Other Mysterious Deaths: Was the Missing Nukes Incident connected to US War Plans directed against Iran?

Charles D. Riechers

A U.S. Air Force official, Charles D. Riechers, has been found dead on October 14, 2007. [24] Riechers was a retired Air Force officer and master navigator specializing in electronic warfare. He was a member of the Senior Executive Service of the U.S. Air Force, and was the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition and Management. A description of his duties includes “providing sound expert advice and guidance on acquisition and procurement policies, as well as formulating, reviewing and, as assigned, execution of plans, programs and policies relating to organization, function, operation and improvement of the Air Force’s acquisition system.”

He apparently killed himself by running his car’s engine inside his suburban garage in Virginia. The death of Charles D. Riechers has been casually linked by The Washington Post to his involvement in fraudulent activities and embezzlement. [25] The Washington Post reported that the Air Force had asked defense contractor, Commonwealth Research Institute (C.R.I.), to give him a job with no known duties while he waited for official clearance for his promoted rank in the Pentagon. Riechers is quoted as saying: “I really didn’t do anything for C.R.I.,” and “I [still] got a paycheck from them.” The question, of course, was whether the contractor might expect favours in return upon his assignment to the Pentagon last January. [26] A mysterious suicide letter expressing shame was subsequently reported; the letter was reportedly from a man who had already admitted without shame that he was receiving money for doing nothing. This was known to the U.S. Senate, which had approved his promotion.

In a report featured by Pravda, Russian Intelligence analysts have said that the reported suicide of Charles D. Riechers was a cover-up and that he was murdered because of his involvement in the controversial flight of nuclear weapons over the continental United States.

Pravda reports that “Russian Intelligence Analysts are reporting today that American War Leaders have ‘suicided’ [sic] one of their Top US Air Force Officials Charles D. Riechers as the rift growing between the U.S. War Leaders and their Top Military Officers over a nuclear attack on Iran appears to be nearing open warfare.” [27]

According to the Pravda report, the incident was linked to an operation to smuggle nuclear weapons away from the U.S. military in connection to launching a war against Iran.

The Commonwealth Research Institute (CRI), a registered non-profit organization is a subsidiary of Concurrent Technologies, which is registered with the IRS as a tax-exempt charity, which is run by Daniel Richard DeVos. Devos is also an associate of John P. Murtha, who was investigated by the F.B.I. for his Saudi links.

Certainly the ties of the Commonwealth Research Institute (CRI), a non-profit organization working for the Pentagon, are questionable and the organization could be a front for internal operations that bypass most military personnel. The case appears to be part of an internal operation that was being kept a secret from most of the U.S. military, but what for?

Russell E. Dougherty



More than a month before the death of Riechers, General Russell Elliot Dougherty, a retired flag officer, was also reported to have died on September 7, 2007 at his home in Falcon Landing military retirement community in Potomac Falls located in Arlington, Virginia. [28] He once was one of the most senior individuals responsible for the nuclear arsenal of the U.S. military and also the former commander of Strategic Air Command (SAC) and director of the Joint Strategic Target Planning Staff, which identified nuclear targets worldwide amongst its responsibilities. At Minot next to his obituary was a military information notice on suicide, telling servicepersons what the signs of suicide are. [29]

Russell Dougherty in the course of his military career in the U.S. Air Force had dealt with the issues pertaining to Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD), full spectrum dominance, how to defeat the enemy and avoid a nuclear war, other uses for nuclear weaponry, Nuclear Primacy for the U.S., and tackling the effects of the wind and weather — due to their unpredictable natures — on the use of nuclear weapons.

The fact that the nuclear warheads were attached to the nuclear cruise missiles could mean that someone wanted to take the weapons in one step or to use them right away.

Timely Appointments at U.S.A.F. Base Minot

Several of the commanding officers at Minot were freshly appointed in June, 2007. This may have been part of standard procedures, but the timing should not be ignored.

Colonel Robert D. Critchlow was transferred, just before the incident, from the Pentagon to Minot and appointed commanding officer for the 91st Operations Group, a missileer unit and the operational backbone of the 91st Space Wing. In Washington, D.C. he was involved in research for the Congressional Research Services and later posted into Air Force Nuclear Response and Homeland Defence.

Colonel Myron L. Freeman was transferred from Japan to Minot in June, 2007. Colonel Freeman was appointed as the commander of the 91st Security Forces Group, which is responsible for securing Minot’s nuclear arsenal.

Colonel Gregory S. Tims was also appointed as deputy commander or vice-commander of the 91st Space Wing in June, 2007. However, Colonel Tims was transfered to Minot from California almost a year before.

One of the most senior non-commissioned officers (NCOs) or non-commissioned members (NCMs), Chief Master Sergeant Mark R. Clark, was also transferred to U.S.A.F. Base Minot from Nebraska in July, 2007.

Colonel Roosevelt Allen was also transferred to Minot from Washington, D.C. to become commander of the 5th Medical Group.

Colonel Bruce Emig, the now-former commander of the 5th Bomb Wing, was also transferred to Minot from U.S.A.F. Base Ellsworth in South Dakota in June, 2007. Colonel Emig was also the base commander of Minot.

Colonel Cynthia M. Lundell, the now-former group commander for the 5th Maintenance Group, the unit responsible for loading and unloading weaponry onto the B-52H Stratofortresses was also freshly transferred from a NATO post in Western Europe in June, 2007. Were these appointments temporary? Were any of these appointments related to the six “lost” nuclear missiles?

Prior to the Missing Nukes Incident, Minot Airmen Meet with the President and the U.S. Air Force Chief of Staff

On June 15, 2007, George W. Bush Jr. met senior officers from U.S.A.F. Base Minot at U.S.A.F. Base McConnell in Wichita, Kansas during a visit to Boeing’s Integrated Defense Systems facility. Amongst them was Major Daniel Giacomazza of the 5th Operational Support Squadron.

Senator Patrick Roberts of Kansas was also present. “While he chaired the Senate Intelligence Committe from 2002 to 2007, [Senator] Roberts stonewalled attempts to investigate everything from the manipulation of intelligence in the rush to war in Iraq, President Bush’s warrantless wiretaps, and even allegations of the use of torture by the CIA,” according to Associated Press (AP) reports. [30] The same report also indicates that the U.S. President was in Wichita for a political fundraiser, and stopped at a new Boys and Girls Club of America to defray the costs of getting to Wichita via Air Force One for Senator Roberts’ campaign.

Military sources have reported that a B-52H Stratofortress was flown to Wichita so that Boeing’s engineers could take a look in order to make adjustments to the war planes for a new military program. [31] Nothing has been reported about any private meetings between President Bush Jr. or any of his presidential staff and the personnel from Minot. However, reports have been made of meetings between military families and the U.S. President in his office on Air Force One.


General Moseley, the Air Force Chief of Staff, had previously visited Minot on March 14-15, 2007, a month before Minot airmen went to Wichita. [32] If a secret mission was being prepared, these events could have played a role in the recruiting phases for an important internal special operation. Following their recruitment, Minot servicemen could have symbolically met General Moseley or White House officials to understand that the mission was being sanctioned by the highest ranks and offices in the United States.

Orders had to Come from the Top: Treason of the Highest Order

Orders had to come from higher up.

The operation would not have been possible without the involvement of more than one individual in the highest ranks of the U.S. Air Force command structure and the Pentagon.

The only way to bypass these separate chains of command is “to be above them” (from higher up), as well as have the possibility of directly overseeing their implementation.

These orders would then have been communicated to lower levels in the US Air Force command chain in different locations, to allow for a so-called “oversight” to proceed. The alternative to this is “an alternative chain of command,” although this also needs someone in the highest ranks of office to organize and oversee.

The post given to Riechers was politically motivated, given his track record in the U.S. Air Force. Riechers had been in a position of responsibility in the U.S. Air Force special operational support activities; something he had in common with Russell Dougherty, the former SAC commander. He would have been one of the best suited individuals for making arrangements in the case of an alternative command structure for a secretive nuclear operation. Moreover, he already had a record of corrupt behaviour through his involvement with the Commonwealth Research Institute. The possible involvement of U.S. Air Force weathermen and special operatives raises many questions as to what exactly was the objective of making the nuclear weapons disappear. [33]

The Investigation

The U.S. Air Force has publicly stated that it has made a “mistake,” which is very unusual and almost unprecedented for a military organization that tries to continually assure the American public of their safety.

The fact that seventy or more military personnel have been punished in the case of the “lost” nuclear weapons does not mean, however, that the senior commanding officers responsible for having carried out the special operation will be identified and punished.

Quite the opposite. The investigation could indeed result in a camouflage of the chain of command, where lower-ranking military personnel are accused and court-martialed, with a view to ultimately protecting those in high office who have committed an act of treason.

The series of deaths mentioned above, may have no ties whatsoever with the the August flight in question from Minot to Barksdale, but the issues of command, monitoring, and authorization cannot be overlooked or ignored. The American people have before them a case of treason that involves the highest offices of government and most probably the offices of the President and the Vice-President.

Once again, the “C2” process involves the Office of the President and Commander-in-Chief. It is an established line of command, without which nuclear weapons could not have been deployed or armed as they were in U.S.A.F. Base Minot. It is this command element that establishes the basis of authorization through which “absolute control of nuclear weapons” is maintained “at all times.”

With time it is possible that military servicemen and servicewomen may come forward with more information.

However, in the meantime, there has been a streamlining of military personnel at U.S.A.F. Minot. Base personnel have become dispersed and reassigned to other locations.

If they on the grounds of loyalty to their country, the United States of America, come forward and reveal what has taken place, they are to be saluted with full honour by all ranks. As George Orwell said, “In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act,” and indeed these are deceitful times.

The fact that U.S. Air Force officers came forward and reported this incident is contrary to U.S. military procedures, regulations, and laws. The U.S. military will never release any information that will risk or damage its reputation. Any information in regards to nuclear weapons can not be released without prior consultations with and authorization by the White House.

The nuclear weapons were armed and moved deliberately. Orders had to have come from the highest echelons of the U.S. government.

The question is what exactly were they meant for? Were they part of a war agenda or something else?

Bush Threatens Iran with Nuclear Weapons

What adds intrigue to an understanding of the missing nukes, are the international events and war games taking place just after the “lost” nuclear weapons incident, not to mention the President’s ongoing threats to attack Iran with nuclear weapons and Vice President Cheney's repeated warnings that a second large scale terrorist attack on America is under preparation, with the support of Iran.

In the U.S., under the Vigilant Shield 2008 war games (initiated in September, 2007) and the TOPOFF anti-terrorism exercises, some form of nuclear terrorist attack on American soil had been envisaged. The roles of Russia and China had also been contemplated. The latter would be “a likely scenario” had the U.S. attacked Iran and as a result Russia and China had decided to intervene. [34] Under Vigilant Shield 2007, held in 2006, the possibility of a nuclear war with Iran’s allies, Russia and China, had been contemplated in the war games scenario.

The Kremlin has responded by holding its own war games.[35]

An unveiled threat to trigger World War Three has been the response of George W. Bush Jr. to Russia’s statements warning that a U.S. sponsored war with Iran, could result in an escalating World War III scenario.

The six nuclear warheads were not meant for use in theatre operations against Iran. This is obvious because if they were then they would have been deployed via the proper procedural routes without the need to hide anything. Besides, there are already theatre-level nuclear weapons ready and armed in Europe and the Middle East for any possible Middle Eastern mission. There was something more to the incident.

It is also worth noting that the Israelis launched an attack on an alleged Syrian nuclear facility that both Tel Aviv and the White House claim was constructed with the assistance of North Korea. This event has been used, through official statements and media disinformation, to draw a Syria-Iran-North Korea nuclear proliferation axis. [36]

In regards to the case of the missing nuclear weapons, weathermen and military personnel with an expertise in space and missile components were involved. The incident took place during a time when the U.S. missile shield projects in Eastern Europe and Eastern Asia, directed against Russia and China, were raising international tensions and alarms. On October 23, 2007, President Bush Jr. stated: “The need for missile defence in Europe is real and I believe it’s urgent.” [37]

Nuclear warfare, the militarization of space, and “the missile shield” are interrelated military processes. The overtones of Nuclear Primacy are hanging in the air. One of the goals of the U.S. military has been to effectively shield itself from a potential Russian or potential Russian and Chinese nuclear response to a nuclear “First Strike” from the U.S. military. [38] The militarization of space is also deeply linked to this military project. Like their advanced knowledge about the U.S. missile shield project, Russian and Chinese officials have got wind of these ambitions and are fully aware of what the U.S. intends to do.

Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya is an independent writer based in Ottawa specializing in Middle Eastern affair. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).


NOTES

[1] Sarah Baxter, US hits panic button as air force ‘loses’ nuclear missiles, The Times (U.K.), October 21, 2007.

[2] The Nuclear Reactions Data Centres also estimated that the W80-1 stockpile included a total of 1,400 warheads remain in stockpile associated with the 900 ALCMs that are in storage with their warheads removed.

[3] Baxter, US hits panic button, Op. cit.

[4] John Andrew Prime, Barksdale bombers expand B-52 capabilities, The Sheveport Times, August 27, 2007.

[5] Baxter, US hits panic button, Op. cit.; Major-General Newton is also responsible for formulating policy supporting air, space, nuclear, counter-proliferation, homeland, weather, and cyber operations. Because of his role as one of the Air Forces’ key flag officers in regards to nuclear issues and counter-proliferation he has been involved in war planning in regards to Iran, Israeli preparations for attacks on Syria, and the 2006 Israeli war against Lebanon.

[6] Robert Stormer, Nuke transportation story has explosive implications, Fort Worth Star-Telegram, Octobers 8, 2007.

[7] Ibid.; To help ensure adequate shipboard security, TLAM-N is protected by an intrusion detection alarm system that indicates an intrusion, both visually and audibly, at a continuously manned station capable of dispatching a security team.

[8] Ibid.

[9] Ibid.

[10] Ibid.

[11] Michael Hoffman, B-52 mistakenly flies with nukes aboard, Military Times, September 10, 2007; Associated Press sources also made the same report. Military Times simply changed their article and AP withdrew its report on the basis of a factual error.

[12] Office of the Inspector General, U.S. Department of Defence (DoD), Year 2000 Status of the Defense Threat Reduction Agency Nuclear Weapon Information Tracking Systems, Report No. 99-235 (August 19, 1999).

[13] Michael Hoffman, Commander disciplined for nuclear mistake, Militarty Times, September 7, 2007.

[14] Minot Airman dies while on leave, Minot Air Force Base Public Affairs, September 12, 2007.

[15] Body of missing Air Force captain found, Associated Press, September 10, 2007.

[16] Kimberly Wilson, Portland police seek Air Force weatherman missing on trip, The Oregonian, September 5, 2007.

[17] U.S. Air Force operatives that are tasked with recovery and medical treatment of personnel in war environments, as well as handling astronauts returning from space. They are the only members of the U.S. military that are specially trained and equipped to conduct personnel recovery operations in hostile or denied areas as a primary mission.

[18] Victims in Saturday motorcycle accident identified, The Sheveport Times, September 16, 2007; Notice of Active Duty Death, The Bombardier, September 21, 2007, p.1.

[19] John Andrew Prime, Caddo deputies work double fatality accident, The Sheveport Times, September 15, 2007.

[20] Minot Airman dies in motorcycle accident, Minot Air Force Base Public Affairs, July 18, 2007.

[21] Minot Airman identified, Minot Air Force Base Public Affairs, July 5, 2007.

[22] Authorities identify Minot airman killed in crash, Associated Press, July 5, 2007.

[23] Baxter, US hits panic button, Op. cit.

[24] Air Force official found dead, The Tribune-Democrat, October 16, 2007; Ginger Thompson and Eric Schmitt, Top Air Force Official Dies in Apparent Suicide, The New York Times, October 16, 2007.

[25] Robert O’Harrow Jr., Air Force Arranged No-Work Contract: Experts Question Official’s Deal With Nonprofit, The Washington Post, October 1, 2007, p.A01.

[26] Ibid.

[27] Top US Air Force official ‘suicided’ [sic] as Iran war nears, Pravda, October 16, 2007.

[28] Yvonne Shinhoster Lamb, Obituaries: Russell E. Dougherty, The Washington Post, October 13, 2007, p.B06.

[29] General Dougherty, former SAC commander, dies, The Bombardier, September 21, 2007, p.9.


[30] Deb Reichmann, Bush Raises Money for Kansas Senator, Associated Press, June 15, 2007.

[31] Warbirds meet commander and chief, Minot Air Force Base Public Affairs, June 22, 2007.

[32] Staff Sergeant Trevor Tiernan, CSAF visits Minot, Minot Air Force Base Public Affairs, March 16, 2007.

[33] Infra. n.38.

[34] Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, Vigilant Shield 2008: Terrorism, Air Defences, and the Domestic Deployment of the US Military, Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), October 6, 2007; Michel Chossoduvsky, Dangerous Crossroads: US Sponsored War Games, Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), October 6, 2007; The March to War: NATO Preparing for War with Serbia? Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), October 19, 2007.

[35] Michel Chossudovsky, New Cold War: Simultaneously, Russia and America Conduct Major War Games, Centre for Research on Globalization, October 16, 2007.


[36] Both the U.S. and Israeli governments cite the arrival of a North Korean ship with alleged nuclear-related cargo as proof, but one needs only point out one fact to dislodge this claim. The U.S. government has setup an internationally illegal program involved in policing the seas and maritime traffic, the International Proliferation Initiative (IPI). Under the IPI the U.S. has been illegally stopping North Korean vessels and inspecting them, especially when they have suspected suspicious materials. Hereto, North Korea has not been given any carte blanches from vessel inspections. The U.S. Navy and NATO vessels have a virtual cordon of the waterways around the Middle East from the Indian Ocean to the Read Sea and Mediterranean Sea. If the North Korean vessel had nuclear materials it would never have reached Syria.

[37] Missile shield is ‘urgent’ - Bush, British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), October 23, 2007.

The U.S. is well in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC); “[The United States must] develop and deploy missile defences to defend the American homeland and American allies, and to provide a secure basis for U.S. power projection around the world,” and “Control the new ‘international commons’ of space and cyberspace and pave the way for the creation of a new military service — U.S. Space Forces — with the mission of space control.”

Thomas Donnelly et al., Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, Forces, and Resources For A New Century (The Project for the New American Century: September 2000), p.v.

[38] It is here that two things should be noted in regards to physics and magnetospheric physics; Firstly, nuclear explosions from the air are different than ground-based nuclear explosions in many ways (including contamination levels), but the weather and wind direction are major unknowns or variables; Secondly, as a fundamental natural law energy never disappears, it only changes or is transferred. The energy from nuclear explosions can theoretically be transferred into the Earth’ magnetic radiation fields, called the Van Allen Belt or the Van Allen Belts, and used to energize and excite various particles, sub-atomic particles, and ions. Tentatively, if manipulated this can have harmful results on surface areas, including burning electronic and communication devices, and military applications such as disrupting satellites in space. If this were possible Russian, Chinese, Iranian, or Indian military defences, communications, and missile facilities could be effortlessly neutralized.

These radiation belts also travel in loops and notionally an energized pulse set off from an area in the U.S. could circumnavigate into an area halfway around the globe.




In fact the U.S. military has been experimenting with manipulating the radiation belts since the end of the Second World War. The U.S. Navy’s Project Argus, taking place from August to September 1958, is an example. A total of five nuclear weapons were used; three atom bombs (weapons using nuclear fission) were detonated above the Atlantic Ocean and two thermonuclear or hydrogen bombs (weapons using nuclear fusion) in the Pacific Ocean in an effort to manipulate the Van Allen Belts.

© Copyright Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, Global Research, 2007

Thursday, November 01, 2007

A Canadian Uranium Moment: What the Fahhh?

Cameco confirms Cigar Lake 2011 target, Russian supplier wants higher uranium prices

October 31, 2007 - 4:28 pm

By: THE CANADIAN PRESS

SASKATOON - Cameco Corp. (TSX:CCO) has confirmed the flooded Cigar Lake uranium mine in northern Saskatchewan won't start production before 2011, and also revealed Wednesday that one of its suppliers in Russia is looking to charge higher prices for the uranium the Canadian company buys from dismantled nuclear weapons.


The news came as the world's biggest uranium producer reported a 25 per cent rise in third-quarter profit to $91 million on an 89 per cent increase in sales to $681 million, but trimmed its outlook for full-year revenue growth to reflect moderating prices.


Cameco shares were down 3.4 per cent on the TSX, losing $1.63 to close at $46.55 with a 52-week range between $59.90 and $35.35.


In a release Wednesday evening, Cameco said that joint stock company Techsnabexport has requested talks to get higher prices for the last few years of the remaining term of a commercial agreement to buy uranium from dismantled Russian nuclear weapons.


Cameco currently buys about seven million pounds or uranium a year under the commercial agreement, which ends in 2013. However, terms under the deal were set in 2001, when uranium prices were far lower than today. Cameco said it will talk to its two partners before deciding whether to reopen the deal.


Cameco and its partners, Areva and Nukem, convert the highly enriched uranium from dismantled Russian nuclear weapons into fuel for nuclear power plants in the United States. The commercial agreement falls under the umbrella of the United States-Russia government-to-government deal and supplies a significant portion of the U.S. enrichment, uranium and conversion services requirements.


In another matter Wednesday, Cameco said it hopes to resume operation next spring at its leaky uranium hexafluoride plant in Port Hope, Ont.


At the Port Hope plant near the Lake Ontario shore 100 kilometres east of Toronto, where output of the highly toxic nuclear fuel processing compound has been shut down since soil contamination was detected in July, "we expect to restart production in the latter part of the first quarter of 2008," CEO Gerry Grandey told a conference call.


"We've completed a root-cause analysis and identified the cause; we've begun corrective actions and we've developed plans for improved monitoring."


Grandey stressed that there has been no health hazard to workers or the public from "the very low levels of contamination," and he said Cameco has sufficient inventory to meet delivery commitments.


He added that long-term plans for Port Hope entail "a very, very large refurbishment of that plant that would see it upgraded, see it get ready for production for many decades to come."


At Cigar Lake, "we're making good progress" following flooding in October 2006 with construction 60 per cent complete.


A concrete plug in the tunnel where the inflow occurred is near completion, Grandey said, but Cameco has decided to sink a second shaft, needed for ventilation and as an alternative exit before excavation starts in flood-prone areas.


"Production start-up remains 2011 at the earliest," he said.


Given Cigar Lake's complexity - Cameco has to freeze the ground to prevent flooding and add rigidity around the half-kilometre-deep mining work - "there is no off-the-shelf manual to guide remediation."


Responding to questions about corporate growth plans, he said "our preference would have been to make a few large acquisitions; however, rocketing uranium prices and a rejuvenated nuclear industry sent valuations far beyond what we consider to be sustainable, profitable levels."


He asserted that "on my watch, we will not heed the public musing of short-term thinkers that want us to grab some headlines with a quick purchase."


In the meantime, "while we monitor the industry for larger acquisitions, we have been steadily making strategic alliances and equity investments with uranium companies around the world."


Saskatoon-headquartered Cameco, with more than 2,400 employees at the end of 2006, said its July-September revenue of $681 million compared with $360 million in the year-earlier quarter.


Net income of $91 million, 25 cents per share, compared with $73 million, 20 cents per share.


Earnings per share adjusted for currency effects and one-time items were reported at 74 cents, up from 12 cents a year ago and burying the Thomson Financial analyst expectation of 45 cents.


The third quarter included an all-time high selling price for Cameco's uranium of $56.78 per pound and "results from the electricity and gold businesses were also stronger, due to higher realized prices," Cameco said.


Uranium revenue increased by $273 million to $409 million, due to a 136 per cent increase in the realized price and a 31 per cent rise in sales.


For all of 2007, Cameco expects consolidated revenue to grow by 30 per cent over 2006. Three months ago it had forecast a 40 per cent increase, based on a uranium spot price of US$120 per pound.


The latest forecast assumes a spot price of US$80 per pound, reflecting the industry situation at Sept. 30.


For Cameco's fuel services business, third-quarter revenue was up $15 million to $54 million despite the Port Hope woes.


Pre-tax profit from the Bruce Power nuclear generating partnership business in Ontario (TSX:TRP) rose to $49 million from $31 million, thanks to higher prices and energy output.

Tuesday, October 30, 2007

Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007

Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007


Rep. Jane Harmon (D-CA) is sponsoring H.R. 1955, the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007. It proposes the establishment of a commission composed of members of the House and Senate, Homeland Security and others, to "examine and report upon the facts and causes of violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence in the United States...." Here are a few definitions. They seem to include anything that any authority could feel threatened by.

VIOLENT RADICALIZATION- The term `violent radicalization' means the process of adopting or promoting an extremist belief system for the purpose of facilitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social change.

HOMEGROWN TERRORISM- The term `homegrown terrorism' means the use, planned use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual born, raised, or based and operating primarily within the United States or any possession of the United States to intimidate or coerce the United States government, the civilian population of the United States, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.

IDEOLOGICALLY BASED VIOLENCE- The term `ideologically-based violence' means the use, planned use, or threatened use of force or violence by a group or individual to promote the group or individual's political, religious, or social beliefs.

Now reading this one way, I could say that this could well be pointed at the Republican Party. But a centrist Dem like Harmon would have bigger and better fish to fry. From the bill:

The Internet has aided in facilitating violent radicalization, ideologically based violence, and the homegrown terrorism process in the United States by providing access to broad and constant streams of terrorist-related propaganda to United States citizens.

This is a really weird bill.

Sunday, October 28, 2007

'BC's Hinterlands Are Opened Up for Business'







'Pristine' Edouard Pass in the Purcells.
Photo Gregory Byrne.


River power projects bring roads, people, wildlife threats.
By Colleen Kimmett
Published: October 17, 2007


TheTyee.ca
When a team of conservationists and guides set out to explore Edouard Pass in B.C.'s central Purcell Mountains they intended to document the landscape and wildlife as it exists today.

Gary Diers rhymes off a list of animals they spotted: "golden eagle, mountain goats, caribou, small mammals, lots of birds ... we just shook our heads when we got there, it's a completely pristine area."

He and other members of the Wilderness Committee, which funded the expedition, fear it might not remain so pristine for long.

A 125 megawatt run-of-river hydro project in the area is currently in the environmental assessment process. The proponent, Purcell Green Power Inc., intends to build two facilities that would divert water from Glacier and Howser creeks, approximately 50 kilometres south-west of Invermere.

A 90-kilometer-long transmission line would cross the Purcell Mountains and connect at the Invermere sub-station.

"From the south end of Purcell wilderness conservatory, all the way to the TransCanada Highway, there is no industrial development," says Diers. "With a transmission line like this and assisting roads, no longer will it be a pristine corridor."

66 run-of-river projects in the works

ADVERTISEMENT
Although the provincial government is promoting run-of-river as a clean, green source of power, critics say the speedy development of this industry, coupled with weak wildlife legislation, is destroying the landscape of B.C.'s back country and endangering wildlife there.

The Glacier-Howser project is just one of many run-of-river projects in some stage of development in the province. According to a recent report by Watershed Watch Salmon Society, some 25 such projects were approved before 2006, 41 have since received initial approval from BC Hydro and hundreds more water license claims have been made on rivers across the province.

The impact of a single project, let alone all of them together, reaches far beyond rivers, tributaries and the fish species in those waterways.

Part and parcel with hydro development, particularly in remote areas of the province, are transmission line corridors and access roads, sometimes totalling hundreds of kilometres in length.

"Just the existence of transmission lines themselves can sometimes interfere with the movements of wildlife, particularly animals that like to stick to dense cover," says biologist and environmental consultant Lee Harding. He says for grizzly bears, this development represents a loss of habitat because they might not cross such open corridors.

Importing human beings

Harding adds that other species, like caribou and moose, "can live quite happily with transmission lines in their area," but that doesn't mean those species are safe from what access roads and transmission lines bring in -- humans.

"The worst thing ... is generally the access that they give to hunters and recreationists who use powered vehicles. That's the worst impact," says Harding.

This is the kind of impact that worries Elaine Golds, conservation chair of the Burke Mountain Naturalists, a group that has taken up the fight against Run of River Power Inc.'s Upper Pitt River development.

It includes seven interconnected hydro projects on eight of the river's tributaries as well as two transmission line options, each between 42 and 53 kilometres in length and each bisecting part of Pinecone Burke Provincial Park.

"We campaigned mightily to get Pinecone Burke protected in 1995," says Golds.

"We think it's an absolutely spectacular wilderness ... it's amazing that we have an area like this so close and it's because you can't drive there, you can only get in by boat."

"This is a new intrusion into a remote wilderness area," Golds says.

'Hinterlands open for business'

Mark Haddock, a lawyer who received funding from West Coast Environmental Law to work with the Burke Mountain Naturalists, said most wildlife habitat protection measures were enacted with the forestry industry in mind. Now, IPPs are going where logging companies can't (mostly because the areas aren't profitable to log) and the same rules don't apply to them.

"B.C.'s hinterlands are opened up for business," says Haddock. "And there's a huge impact on the environment and wildlife that's not getting properly assessed."

For example, when a proponent applies for a water license, it must assess present fish populations, and how the project could affect those populations. Under the fish protection act, there are rules that set out the parameters for those assessments.

No such guidelines exist for other mammal, bird, insect or amphibian species.

"We have guidelines that we wish proponents to follow when they do an assessment of potential impacts to fisheries, but we don't have any guidelines at this time for proponents when assessing impacts to wildlife or any other non-fish species," says Ross Neuman, head of the ecosystems section of the Ministry of Environment's environmental stewardship division.

Neuman says the lack of ministry guidelines for non-fish species has been identified as a gap, but adds that such guidelines are not currently in production and are not being addressed in the ministry's current revision of the B.C. Wildlife Act (to be released early in 2008).

Still 'building the policy'

Steward Guy, manager of the ministry's conservation planning sector in Victoria, says the ministry is in policy discussion right now.

He says independent power production "is raising a whole new way for us to consider how we place environmental protection. We're building the policy with how we deal with new initiatives around the British Columbia."

"There are two aspects of most environmental legislation; the rules and procedures about how to undertake approvals, and the substance of protection for the environment," says Haddock.

Wildlife is addressed procedurally in other approvals, he says, but there is no strong legislation to make sure proponents effectively measure potential impacts and mitigate them.

Gap in wildlife assessments

When an IPP wants to develop a new hydro project, it must obtain licenses under the B.C. water act and land act, and comply with legislation under both provincial and federal fish protection acts and environmental assessment acts, among others.

These are legally binding, and these agency offices get to make the decision about whether or not to issue the license or environmental assessment certificate.

Environmental stewardship is the agency charged with protecting wildlife and wildlife habitat, but its role in the approval process is simply to guide other decision-makers.

Proponents are not required to give environmental stewardship officers requested studies, and this "gap" in wildlife assessment guidelines means the scope and depth of any proponent study can vary widely from project to project.

"If the level of work that's done does not provide us with adequate information to enable us to advise the decision maker as to the potential impacts and risks ... it's up to the decision maker to get back to the proponent and say, well you have to do more work, or to make a decision without the benefit of our advice," says Neuman.

"But we have no authority to insist either that they even use the guidelines, or that they do a piece of work that we find satisfactory."

Self-policing process

Haddock says that even with the conditions and regulations currently in place, there is another gap in making sure proponents are carrying them out as required.

He says, that in his own discussions with government officials, he's detected "a broad acknowledgement of a lack of follow-up," when it comes to monitoring the conditions placed on approvals.

For example, a proponent might be issued an environmental assessment certificate on the conditions they monitor grizzly bear activity in the transmission line area. Haddock says this kind of information is too reliant on experts who are on the payroll of the proponent.

"There's been so many cuts to the ministry of environment that there's very little ability to do any field review," he says. "It's all highly reliant on the proponent's own experts."

Neuman says he is one of 11 people in the ministry's Lower Mainland office who provide input for environment assessments. He says this represents "quite a significant workload," but it's just one small piece of what they do.

"All of these people do lots of other things at the same time. We don't have anybody where 'your job is to deal with IPPs and nothing else,'" he says. "Resources is always a challenge."

Related Tyee stories:


A 'Green' Threat to B.C.'s Rivers?
Touted by BCHydro as renewable electricity, the rush to install privatized 'micro-hydro' schemes may change the flow of 76 B.C. rivers.


BC Hydro's Amazingly Bad Deal for Ratepayers
We give big firms $15 billion. We get higher prices, no assets, no guarantee of supply.


BC's Billion-Dollar Wind Power Giveaway
We're heavily subsidizing private power developers. Will Californians profit big?

source

Saturday, October 27, 2007

now or never, warns landmark UN report

Save the planet? It's now or never, warns landmark UN report
25/10/2007 16h41

David McNew

NAIROBI (AFP) - Humanity is changing Earth's climate so fast and devouring resources so voraciously that it is poised to bequeath a ravaged planet to future generations, the UN warned Thursday in its most comprehensive survey of the environment.

The fourth Global Environment Outlook (GEO-4), published by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), is compiled by 390 experts from observations, studies and data garnered over two decades.

The 570-page report -- which caps a year that saw climate change dominate the news -- says world leaders must propel the environment "to the core of decision-making" to tackle a daily worsening crisis

"The need couldn't be more urgent and the time couldn't be more opportune, with our enhanced understanding of the challenges we face, to act now to safeguard our own survival and that of future generations," GEO-4 said.

The UNEP report offers the broadest and most detailed tableau of environmental change since the Brundtland Report, "Our Common Future," was issued in 1987 and put the environment on the world political map.

"There have been enough wake-up calls since Brundtland. I sincerely hope GEO-4 is the final one," said UNEP Executive Director Achim Steiner.

"The systematic destruction of the Earth's natural and nature-based resources has reached a point where the economic viability of economies is being challenged -- and where the bill we hand on to our children may prove impossible to pay," he added.

Earth has experienced five mass extinctions in 450 million years, the latest of which occurred 65 million years ago, says GEO-4.

"A sixth major extinction is under way, this time caused by human behaviour," it says.


An empty lake outside the small Australian rural town of Ararat
©AFP/File - William WestOver the past two decades, growing prosperity has tremendously strengthened the capacity to understand and confront the environmental challenges ahead.

Despite this, the global response has been "woefully inadequate," the report said.

The report listed environmental issues by continent and by sector, offering dizzying and often ominous statistics about the future.

Climate is changing faster than at any time in the past 500,000 years.

Global average temperatures rose by 0.74 degrees Celsius (1.33 Fahrenheit) over the past century and are forecast to rise by 1.8 to four C (3.24-7.2 F) by 2100, it said, citing estimates issued this year by the 2007 Nobel Peace co-laureates, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

With more than six billion humans, Earth's population is now so big that "the amount of resources needed to sustain it exceeds what is available," the report warned, adding that the global population is expected to peak at between eight and 9.7 billion by 2050.

"In Africa, land degradation and even desertification are threats; per capita food production has declined by 12 percent since 1981," it said.

The GEO-4 report went on to enumerate other strains on the planet's resources and biodiversity.

Fish consumption has more than tripled over the past 40 years but catches have stagnated or declined for 20 years, it said.

"Of the major vertebrate groups that have been assessed comprehensively, over 30 percent of amphibians, 23 percent of mammals and 12 percent of birds are threatened," it added.

Stressing it was not seeking to present a "dark and gloomy scenario", UNEP took heart in the successes from efforts to combat ozone loss and chemical air pollution.

But it also stressed that failure to address persistent problems could undo years of hard grind.

And it noted: "Some of the progress achieved in reducing pollution in developed countries has been at the expense of the developing world, where industrial production and its impacts are now being exported."

GEO-4 -- the fourth in a series dating back to 1997 -- also looks at how the current trends may unfold and outlines four scenarios to the year 2050: "Markets First", "Policy First", "Security First", "Sustainability First".

After a year that saw the UN General Assembly devote unprecedented attention to climate change and the Nobel Peace Prize awarded to the IPCC and former US vice president Al Gore for raising awareness on the same issue, the report's authors called for radical change.

"For some of the persistent problems, the damage may already be irreversible," they warned.

"The only way to address these harder problems requires moving the environment from the periphery to the core of decision-making: environment for development, not development to the detriment of environment."

source

Wednesday, October 24, 2007

Editing Is Alleged In Climate Testimony

Heavy Editing Is Alleged In Climate Testimony

By H. Josef Hebert
Associated Press
Wednesday, October 24, 2007; Page A10

Testimony that the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention planned to give yesterday to a Senate committee about the impact of climate change on health was significantly edited by the White House, according to two sources familiar with the documents.

Specific scientific references to potential health risks were removed after Julie L. Gerberding submitted a draft of her prepared remarks to the White House Office of Management and Budget for review.



Discussion PolicyDiscussion Policy CLOSEComments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.


Instead, Gerberding's prepared testimony before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee included few details on what effects climate change could have on the spread of disease. Only during questioning did the director of the government's premier disease-monitoring agency describe any specific diseases likely to be affected, again without elaboration.

A CDC official familiar with both versions said Gerberding's draft "was eviscerated," cut from 14 pages to four. The version presented to the Senate committee consisted of six pages.

The official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the review process, said that while it is customary for testimony to be changed in a White House review, these changes were particularly "heavy-handed."

CDC spokesman Tom Skinner sought to play down the White House changes. He called Gerberding's appearance before the Senate panel "very productive" and said she addressed the issues she wanted to during her remarks and when questioned by the senators.

"What needed to be said, as far we're concerned, was said," Skinner said from Atlanta, where the CDC is based. "She certainly communicated with the committee everything she felt was critical to help them appreciate and understand all the issues surrounding climate change and its potential impact on public health."

The OMB had no comment on Gerberding's testimony. Gerberding could not be reached for comment late yesterday.

"We generally don't speculate and comment on anything until it is the final product," said OMB spokesman Sean Kevelighan. He added that OMB reviews take into consideration "whether they . . . line up well with the national priorities of the administration."

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), the committee chairman, said in a statement last night that the Bush administration "should immediately release Dr. Gerberding's full, uncut statement, because the public has a right to know all the facts about the serious threats posed by global warming."

The Bush administration has been accused by government scientists of pressuring them to emphasize the uncertainties of global warming. Earlier this year, climate scientists complained to a House committee that the administration had sought frequently to manage or influence their statements and public appearances.

The White House in the past has said it has sought only to provide a balanced view of the climate issue.

The CDC is part of the Department of Health and Human Services, and its congressional testimony, as is normal with all agencies, is routinely reviewed by OMB.

But Gerberding was said by the CDC officials to have been surprised by the extensive changes.

The deletions directed by the White House included details on how many people might be adversely affected because of increased warming and the scientific basis for some of the CDC's analysis on what kinds of diseases might be spread in a warmer climate and rising sea levels, according to one official who had seen the original version.\

Sunday, October 21, 2007

Afghan poll not as clear

Afghan poll not as clear as it seems
TheStar.com - News - Afghan poll not as clear as it seems

October 21, 2007
Thomas Walkom

Do ordinary Afghans want Canada to stay in Kandahar until the Taliban is defeated?

Initial reports of an Environics survey released Thursday suggest the answer is a strong yes. "Majority of Afghans want foreign troops to stay and fight" was The Globe and Mail's headline.

Analysts argued that the poll results, based on interviews conducted last month in the war-torn country, would bolster Prime Minister Stephen Harper's efforts to keep Canadian troops fighting in Kandahar past February 2009.

But when the poll is examined more carefully (it's available at http://erg.environics.net), its findings become far less definitive. Indeed, it is not clear that they provide solace to any of the politicians now debating Canada's Afghan mission.

First, let us be clear about what the survey did not find. It did not find that a majority of Afghans want foreign troops to stay and fight. It did find that a majority of those polled approved of the "presence of foreign countries" in Afghanistan.

But that term "presence" included everything foreigners are doing in the country, from aid to business to soldiering.

In Kandahar, for instance, India was rated more highly than Canada. But, as the survey notes, India's main contribution there is not troops but goods and entrepreneurs.

On the question of foreign troops, the poll concluded that Afghans are split down the middle – with 52 per cent calling for a full withdrawal within five years versus 43 per cent who want NATO to stay until the Taliban are crushed.

In short, the vast majority of Afghans don't want us to keep fighting in their country until, as Harper puts it, the job is done. Yet neither, it seems, do they favour those, like the New Democrats, who would pull out Canadian troops immediately, or even those, like the Liberals, who would have us end our combat role by 2009.

Elsewhere, the poll results are equally murky. On the one hand, the survey shows that close to three quarters of Afghans do not like the Taliban – thereby strengthening Harper's pro-war argument.

Yet at the same time, 74 per cent say they want their government to negotiate with the Taliban, which is the NDP position.

And more than half say they want to be ruled by a coalition government that includes the Taliban.

Assuming that it is possible to carry out a scientific poll in a country wracked by civil war, what then does this survey tell us?

One, it demonstrates that Afghans do not want to be abandoned by the world again. Hence the overwhelming desire for a continued "foreign presence." Two, while they do not like the Taliban, neither do they demonize them – which is why most would prefer a negotiated end to civil war over continued violence.

Three, they are deeply ambivalent about the presence of foreign troops. They don't want to throw them out. But, at the same time, they are not sure they want them to remain indefinitely. There is a limit to their patience and hospitality.

Finally, the survey provides a rather humbling insight into how Afghans view Canada's military role. The short answer is that they don't. Even in Kandahar, just 2 per cent of those polled knew that Canada was fighting the Taliban. Germany got a bigger mention and it has no troops there.

When Afghans were asked specifically about Canada, most were delightfully complimentary. But first they had to be reminded we were there. One hopes they weren't just being polite.



Thomas Walkom's column appears Thursday and Sunday

Wednesday, October 10, 2007

Al Qaeda Keeps Going


Al-Qaeda: Sort of Like the Energizer Bunny
by Kurt Nimmo
[for complete article links, please see original here.]

For those of you slipping back into normalcy, no longer particularly bothered by “al-Qaeda” or the interminable GWOT, along comes another White House report on national security. “We also must never lose sight of al-Qaeda’s persistent desire for weapons of mass destruction, as the group continues to try to acquire and use chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear material,” the neocons claim, hardly coincidentally at the same time they have “called anew on the Democratic-led Congress to expand the power of US intelligence agencies to eavesdrop on suspected terrorists ‘while protecting the civil liberties of Americans,” that last part added as an obligatory calmative, as anybody even halfway acquainted with the Bill of Rights understands full well that eavesdropping, especially in high-tech NSA vacuum cleaner fashion, is a full court press against the Constitution.


“During a testy media conference call, White House homeland security advisor Fran Townsend rebuffed suggestions that the Iraq war had served only to revive al-Qaeda in the years since the September 11 attacks of 2001,” reports the Herald Sun. “Every time I walk into the press briefing room we go through this, and what I will say to you is there should be no question that there were like-minded Islamic extremists inside Iraq and throughout the region,” she said. “And certainly that there is extremism inside Iraq and throughout the region is not a result of the war in Iraq, it is a fundamental front in the continuing war on terror.”

Of course, this extremism was kept in check by Saddam Hussein, but all of that had to be chucked in favor of “democracy,” a messy process as Donald Rumsfeld was obliged to remind us, and Saddam, or somebody who looked a lot like Saddam, was sent to the gallows, and now “al-Qaeda” is back in spades, or so we are expected to believe, and of course forever in search of suitcase nukes and the like, easily purchased from down-and-out Russian scientists who keep them stockpiled in closets for rainy days.

None of this works, not very well, because people are sick and tired of hearing about “al-Qaeda,” the putative terrorist organization akin to the boy who cried wolf, forever barking but never biting because the wolf has no teeth, heck it is not a stretch to say the wolf does not exist, except in the fervid but all too prosaic imagination of think-tank neocons and the like. In fact, the neocons cannot prove “al-Qaeda” exists at all—and thus my habitual insertion of quotation marks—even though, many moons ago, we were promised a full report and damning evidence, never of course to arrive or even intended to arrive.

On the other hand, in Iraq the phony baloney terrorist group certainly has a presence, although not of the sort we are told. “Leading Iraqi Sunni cleric Harith al-Dhari has urged Iraqis not to join U.S. forces in fighting Al-Qaeda, arguing that by doing so they are siding with the occupier,” reports the Tehran Times. “U.S. military commander Colonel Robert Menti estimates that around 50,000 Iraqis across the country have joined 150 different initiatives aimed at fighting Al-Qaeda… Initiatives range from powerful tribal chiefs banding together to hunt down extremists to local programs in which volunteers with orange sashes and armed with AK-47s tip off police about suspicious activity or round up suspects.” In other words, the U.S. has managed to cobble together a loose coalition against a phantom force, as even the military admits the presence of “al-Qaeda” in-country is niggling. In fact, it is a Pentagon orchestrated black op, as the “al-Qaeda in Iraq” we are daily presented with is far too ludicrous and Brothers Grimm villain-like (with video game intense violence thrown in for good measure) to be taken seriously.

Meanwhile, we are expected to believe the Israeli-intelligence connected SITE Institute “hacked into an Al-Qaeda server and was monitoring it for a year for information on suicide bombers and spy codes,” as apparently the “al-Qaeda” IT guys are stumbling buffoons. “When the server turned up a new Osama bin Laden video ahead of its official release last month, SITE told two members of the Bush administration so that they could prepare for the release,” writes Nick Farrell for the Inquirer. “Although they told them on the condition that their hack remained secret, within an hour the site had been visited by 16 Intelligence Agencies and two telly channels,” obviously catching the “al-Qaeda” geeks by surprise, as usual.

If you believe any of this, I have a bridge for sale.

More likely, the server is owned by Mossad, the CIA, MI-6, or some amalgamation, that is if it existed at all. We are expected to believe SITE, run by the daughter of an executed Israeli spy, is miffed about the betrayal when in fact it was set-up that way, the “al-Qaeda” server doubling as a grab bag for the corporate media, never shy when it comes to propagating thickheaded neocon lies, designed to provide pretext for the “clash of civilizations,” that it to say providing an excuse for a “civilization” with no shortage of weapons of mass destruction to invade small defenseless countries, kill thousands people—in the case of Iraq, well over a million—and wreck their stuff, like water treatment plants and hospitals.

Once again, on the loose serial murderers, politely called “neoconservatives,” are playing the masses, although the masses, by and large, are not paying too much attention, what with Britney losing her kids to K-Fed, etc. Of course, this lack of attention is dangerous indeed, as it may precipitate another “catastrophic catalyzing event… like a new Pearl Harbor,” if only to rally the masses that are, by nature, clueless but most surely allergic to back-to-back two minute hate sessions and much prefer to be left alone to Dance with the Stars and fancy an Extreme Makeover of their own.

It Keeps

Al-Qaeda: Sort of Like the Energizer Bunny
by Kurt Nimmo

[for complete article links, please original here.]

For those of you slipping back into normalcy, no longer particularly bothered by “al-Qaeda” or the interminable GWOT, along comes another White House report on national security. “We also must never lose sight of al-Qaeda’s persistent desire for weapons of mass destruction, as the group continues to try to acquire and use chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear material,” the neocons claim, hardly coincidentally at the same time they have “called anew on the Democratic-led Congress to expand the power of US intelligence agencies to eavesdrop on suspected terrorists ‘while protecting the civil liberties of Americans,” that last part added as an obligatory calmative, as anybody even halfway acquainted with the Bill of Rights understands full well that eavesdropping, especially in high-tech NSA vacuum cleaner fashion, is a full court press against the Constitution.


“During a testy media conference call, White House homeland security advisor Fran Townsend rebuffed suggestions that the Iraq war had served only to revive al-Qaeda in the years since the September 11 attacks of 2001,” reports the Herald Sun. “Every time I walk into the press briefing room we go through this, and what I will say to you is there should be no question that there were like-minded Islamic extremists inside Iraq and throughout the region,” she said. “And certainly that there is extremism inside Iraq and throughout the region is not a result of the war in Iraq, it is a fundamental front in the continuing war on terror.”

Of course, this extremism was kept in check by Saddam Hussein, but all of that had to be chucked in favor of “democracy,” a messy process as Donald Rumsfeld was obliged to remind us, and Saddam, or somebody who looked a lot like Saddam, was sent to the gallows, and now “al-Qaeda” is back in spades, or so we are expected to believe, and of course forever in search of suitcase nukes and the like, easily purchased from down-and-out Russian scientists who keep them stockpiled in closets for rainy days.

None of this works, not very well, because people are sick and tired of hearing about “al-Qaeda,” the putative terrorist organization akin to the boy who cried wolf, forever barking but never biting because the wolf has no teeth, heck it is not a stretch to say the wolf does not exist, except in the fervid but all too prosaic imagination of think-tank neocons and the like. In fact, the neocons cannot prove “al-Qaeda” exists at all—and thus my habitual insertion of quotation marks—even though, many moons ago, we were promised a full report and damning evidence, never of course to arrive or even intended to arrive.

On the other hand, in Iraq the phony baloney terrorist group certainly has a presence, although not of the sort we are told. “Leading Iraqi Sunni cleric Harith al-Dhari has urged Iraqis not to join U.S. forces in fighting Al-Qaeda, arguing that by doing so they are siding with the occupier,” reports the Tehran Times. “U.S. military commander Colonel Robert Menti estimates that around 50,000 Iraqis across the country have joined 150 different initiatives aimed at fighting Al-Qaeda… Initiatives range from powerful tribal chiefs banding together to hunt down extremists to local programs in which volunteers with orange sashes and armed with AK-47s tip off police about suspicious activity or round up suspects.” In other words, the U.S. has managed to cobble together a loose coalition against a phantom force, as even the military admits the presence of “al-Qaeda” in-country is niggling. In fact, it is a Pentagon orchestrated black op, as the “al-Qaeda in Iraq” we are daily presented with is far too ludicrous and Brothers Grimm villain-like (with video game intense violence thrown in for good measure) to be taken seriously.

Meanwhile, we are expected to believe the Israeli-intelligence connected SITE Institute “hacked into an Al-Qaeda server and was monitoring it for a year for information on suicide bombers and spy codes,” as apparently the “al-Qaeda” IT guys are stumbling buffoons. “When the server turned up a new Osama bin Laden video ahead of its official release last month, SITE told two members of the Bush administration so that they could prepare for the release,” writes Nick Farrell for the Inquirer. “Although they told them on the condition that their hack remained secret, within an hour the site had been visited by 16 Intelligence Agencies and two telly channels,” obviously catching the “al-Qaeda” geeks by surprise, as usual.

If you believe any of this, I have a bridge for sale.

More likely, the server is owned by Mossad, the CIA, MI-6, or some amalgamation, that is if it existed at all. We are expected to believe SITE, run by the daughter of an executed Israeli spy, is miffed about the betrayal when in fact it was set-up that way, the “al-Qaeda” server doubling as a grab bag for the corporate media, never shy when it comes to propagating thickheaded neocon lies, designed to provide pretext for the “clash of civilizations,” that it to say providing an excuse for a “civilization” with no shortage of weapons of mass destruction to invade small defenseless countries, kill thousands people—in the case of Iraq, well over a million—and wreck their stuff, like water treatment plants and hospitals.

Once again, on the loose serial murderers, politely called “neoconservatives,” are playing the masses, although the masses, by and large, are not paying too much attention, what with Britney losing her kids to K-Fed, etc. Of course, this lack of attention is dangerous indeed, as it may precipitate another “catastrophic catalyzing event… like a new Pearl Harbor,” if only to rally the masses that are, by nature, clueless but most surely allergic to back-to-back two minute hate sessions and much prefer to be left alone to Dance with the Stars and fancy an Extreme Makeover of their own.

Colombia Mobilization





















Tens of Thousands of Peasants Currently Mobilizing All Over Colombia
Beginning the 10th of October, rural popular organizations will mobilize in particular places in Colombia. Going from their streets and villages, they aim to arrive in the capitals of their departamentos. They seek to launch a repeal of the anti-popular laws recently approved by the Congress; for example, the ill-fated Rural Statute and the reduction of transfers, that place equally in danger the campesinos and all Colombians.

These groups reject TLC (Tratado de Libre Comercio, or Free Trade Agreements) as well as the state politics of annihilation of the peasant economy and of the indigenous people. Furthermore, they propose to heighten the consciousness of the Colombian people concerning the necessity of demanding the resignation of President Uribe and his Vice-President Santos and to fight for a popular, democratic government.

The answer from the régime regarding the call to mobilization has been a brutal repression ever since the detention of four leaders of the ACVC (Asociación Campesina del Valle del río Cimitarra, or Peasant Association of the Cimitarra River Valley). That was preceded by a campaign of black propaganda against the mobilization and the organizations that motivate it, brought to the most serious level, physical threats and attacks. The low point was reached with the execution of the local communal leader of Miranda (Cauca), Carlos Alberto Urbano, and the assassination of Yovanny Pillimue, of the Association of Coffee Producers of East Caucano, acts which the peasant groups have actively denounced.

Tuesday, October 02, 2007

News Dissector: October 3, 2007

NEWS DISSECTOR October 2, 2007

Anita Hill Responds to Clarence Thomas on 60 Minutes

This I would like to see:

Iran's Ferdowi University yesterday invited President Bush to travel to Iran
and "speak on campus about a range of issues, including the Holocaust, terrorism, human rights and U.S. foreign policy." The invitation "asked Bush to answer questions from students and professors 'just the same way' that Ahmadinejad took questions 'despite all the insults directed at him.'"


SUPPORT FOR THE BURMESE JUNTA
DID ISRAEL BOMB SYRIA; WILL IT BOMB IRAN?
ANITA HILL ON 60 MINUTES' LOVE FEST WITH CLARENCE THOMAS

There is an image I can't get out of my mind. It's the image of Burmese soldiers smahing the heads of protesting monks against the wall in their monsestary. I keep seeing saffron running red. The last uprising in Burma was in 1988. Its been 17 years since Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi was elected prime minister of Burma. She remains in house arrest. We can't allow this issue to recede again into the background. See new video of beatings on CNN.Com

IPS: GENERALS DON"T LISTEN IN BURMA

BANGKOK, Oct 2 (IPS) - Few foreigners are as qualified to talk about the mind and the manner of Burma's dictatorship as Razali Ismail, a Malaysian diplomat who served five years as special United Nations envoy charged with facilitating political reform in that military-ruled country.

''When you are talking to the military chief there it is not a dialogue that you indulge in. In fact, you cannot expect to have a dialogue with him,'' Razali, who has traded diplomacy for a career in business, told IPS during a telephone interview from Kuala Lumpur.

Attempts by foreign envoys to discuss domestic politics with Senior Gen. Than Shwe, Burma's strongman, are treated with a measure of contempt, as if it is ''an internal issue,'' he added. ''In his mind, there is a sense of intrusiveness.''

What is more, the years he spent engaged with the Burmese junta confirmed that progress marches at a retarded pace. ''It is a very slow process dealing with an authoritarian government,'' he said, reflecting on what he achieved since he began his U.N. mission in 2000.

TO DOG IS "BULL DOG"

AP: "The old soldier who leads Myanmar is called "the bulldog" — for good reason.
Pro-democracy demonstrators by the thousands may be willing to sacrifice themselves in the streets but stand little chance of success unless they — or other forces — can oust a jowly, high school dropout with delusions of royal grandeur from his post of virtually absolute power.

Senior Gen. Than Shwe has shown no willingness to step down as head of the ruling junta, compromise with protesters, or listen to international calls for reform in Myanmar, also known as Burma.

After snubbing special U.N. envoy Ibrahim Gambari for three days, Than Shwe finally met him Tuesday. That came only after his foreign minister told the United Nations that change "cannot be imposed from outside."

"The very fate of Burma is linked to Than Shwe, whose manic, xenophobic and superstitious character bode ill for a country that needs to pull itself into the 21st century and into the international community of democratic nations," says the Irrawaddy, a Thailand-based news magazine that maintains a "Than Shwe Watch" column.

COMPANIES IN BURMA

George Monbiot writes in the Guardian:

I have stumbled across one western firm which most Burma campaigners appear to have missed. It is run by one of the world's most famous sportsmen, the golfer Gary Player. Player has made much of his ethical credentials. Next month he will host the Nelson Mandela Invitational golf tournament, whose purpose is "to make a difference in the lives of children". One of his websites shows a painting of Mr Player bathed in radiant light and surrounded by smiling children. Nelson Mandela stands behind him, lit by the same faint halo.

Golf, to most of us, looks like a harmless if mysterious activity, but in Burma it is a powerful symbol of oppression. Some of the country's courses have been built on land seized from peasant farmers, who were evicted without compensation. Golf is the sport of the generals, who conduct much of their business on the links.

Player's website shows him, in 2002, launching the "grand opening" of the golf course he designed, which turned "a 650-acre rice paddy into The Pride of Myanmar. The golfer's paradise that stands in Myanmar today is said to be living proof that miracles do happen."

I asked his company the following questions. Who owned the land on which the course was constructed? How many people were evicted in order to build it? Was forced labour used in its construction? As Player's company is based in Florida, did the design of this course break US sanctions? His media spokesman told me "The Gary Player Group has decided not to comment on any questions regarding Myanmar-Burma." It seems to me that there is a strong case for asking Nelson Mandela to remove his name from Mr Player's tournament.

Even more disturbing to me is the silence of India, Burma's trading partner, which was home to Mahatma Gandhi, the non-violent apostle who no doubt would be in the streets with the monks if he was alive.

Finally, to see an example of an American link with the junta watch Milena Kaneva's powerful film TOTAL DENIAL, shown last year at the Human Rights Watch Film Festival and now updated. It tells the story of a group of gutsy Burmese peasants who sued two major oil companies building a oil pipeline through their country and benefiting from Junta enforced Slave Labor. The lawsuit was heard in California and the court ruled against UNOCAL, now Chevron. It's a gripping and well told story. See totaldenial.com for more info.

BLACKWATER CHIEF: "WE ACTED APPROPRIATELY AT ALL TIMES

WASHINGTON - Blackwater chairman Erik Prince vigorously defended his private security company on Tuesday, rejecting charges that his staff acted like a bunch of cowboys immune to legal prosecution while protecting State Department personnel in Iraq and Afghanistan.

CNN says, "The State Department's initial report of last month's incident in which Blackwater guards were accused of killing Iraqi civilians was written by a Blackwater contractor working in the embassy security detail, according to government and industry sources."

Jeremy Scayhill who wrote a book on Blackwater testified to Congress also, He charged: This problem is more pervasive than recognized:

While the headlines of the past week have been focused on the fatal shootings, this was by no means an isolated incident. Nor is this simply about a rogue company or rogue operators. This is about a system= of unaccountable and out of control private forces that have turned Iraq into a wild west from the very beginning of the occupation, often with the stamp of legitimacy of the US government.

NYT: Korean Leaders Meet in Pyongyang

Roh Moo-hyun is only the second South Korean president to visit since the two Koreas were divided.

And meanwhile RTE Reports" North Korea seeks removal from blacklist

North Korea has claimed the US is considering taking it off its list of
terrorism-sponsoring states. North Korean envoy Kim Kye-Gwan made the announcement as he left Beijing during a recess in six-nation nuclear disarmament talks.

VIA BILL BOWLES: ISRAEL ADMITS ATTACKING SYRIA

It was supposedly called "OPERATION ORCHARD" and allegedly involved an Israel attack on Syria but the whole story is mired in the muck of so much misinfiormation. Allegedly North Korea was supplying Syria with nuclear materials. But were they. So far Syria has been silent, although Israel's Benjamin Netanyahu said the following,

'Last week opposition leader Benjamin Netanyahu chipped away at that wall [of silence], saying Israel did in fact attack targets in Syrian territory. His top adviser, Mossad veteran Uzi Arad, told NEWSWEEK: "I do know what happened, and when it comes out it will stun everyone."' — 'Whispers of War', Newsweek, Sunday, 23 September 2007

"Stun everyone?" Not Joseph Cirincione, senior fellow and director for nuclear policy at the Center for American Progress, author of Bomb Scare: The History and Future of Nuclear Weapons, whosees it this way:

…This story is nonsense. The Washington Post story should have been headlined "White House Officials Try to Push North Korea-Syria Connection." This is a political story, not a threat story. The mainstream media seems to have learned nothing from the run-up to war in Iraq. It is a sad commentary on how selective leaks from administration officials who have repeatedly misled the press are still treated as if they were absolute truth.

Once again, this appears to be the work of a small group of officials leaking cherry-picked, unvetted "intelligence" to key reporters in order to promote a preexisting political agenda. If this sounds like the run-up to the war in Iraq, it should. This time it appears aimed at derailing the U.S.-North Korean agreement that administration hardliners think is appeasement. Some Israelis want to thwart any dialogue between the U.S. and Syria…

And the NYT immediately jumped on the wagon and kinda "ping-ponged" themselves into phantasy heavens with catchy stories about "possible nuclear links between North Korea and Syria". It was more or less some kind of a wishing well trying to revoke some "déjà vues" about how the Iraq adventure started.

BUT IS THERE GOING TO BE AN ATTACK ON IRAN?

Yes, No Maybe are the three possible answers. I have shared some of the yes articles but there are no ones as well. INI's Bill Bowles has been digging around and musing on the subject,

'Despite the unending stream of stories across the months announcing that an attack on Iran is on the way, I've had my doubts, but you'd be foolish to bet that an attack on Iran won't happen.' — 'Will the US Really Bomb Iran?' A. Cockburn says no.

Others are saying that a planned visit to Iran by Putin will assure there will be numbing. Bill Bowles sees this as "softening up the public for a possible war if all else fails to achieve their objective, and secondly, they are designed to put pressure on the various political leaders of the competitors that the imperium means business.

What is important to note is that there are two realities here, one essentially for public consumption whose code words are 'war on terror', 'Islamo-fascism', nuclear weapons, 'human rights' or whatever, and the other is what goes on behind the scenes, where the real deals are done or not done.


Comment on this post...


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

Market Returns To Reality, Drops Because of Housing Crisis

After the Dow hit 14, 000 on Monday in a big rally, the stock market dropped yesterday as reality returned and new report showed how grim the housing situation is. Morgan Stanley axed 600 people.

MarketWatch reports oil prices up, up and away:

Oil prices of at least $100 a barrel are expected to become the norm as early as next year, as conventional supplies continue to decline and consumption in the developing world rises, CIBC chief economist Jeff Rubin said Tuesday.

"We're in a world of triple-digit oil prices for the foreseeable future," Rubin said at the CIBC 2nd Annual Industrials Conference. "Whether it's $100 or $140 a barrel … is up to debate, but the bottom line is we're in the bottom of the ninth inning of the hydrocarbon age."

THE FIRE THIS TIME

Could that also be part of the explanation for other serious trends—the weakening of the dollar, and growing inflation with oil prices poised to go through the roof. Its called a "FIRE" ECONOMY. Thats an economy which ends up burning up. Don't forget that business cycles are part of it, always have been, always will be. And that means that when there are big ups, downs are sure to follow. We have seen it before and we will see it again.

Clearly there are a lot of smart people in the financial sector working overtime to stabilize the situation, and manage the crisis. There is a "plunge protection" unit in the US Treasury. But the markets tend to be more irrational with investors often becoming speculators and following a herd instinct. Its like blackbirds—when one lands, they all land.

Markets are believed to self-"correct" but that doesn't always happen which is why there is so much volatility. When an important sector like housing is in trouble, consumer confidence is down. When consumer confidence is in trouble….Just follow the chain.

Some experts say it will all come down. I hope not because the rich are well positioned to survive but the rest of us are not. I keep reading pessimistic scenarios as the national debt keeps going up and the savings rate down. That is a prescription for very scary scenarious. Check these articles out,

THE "GREATER" DEPRESSION UPDATE

David M. Levitt and Bryan Keogh for Bloomberg

The world economy "is probably at its scariest point since the Depression'' as fallout from the U.S. subprime mortgage crisis crimps access to credit, said Ethan Penner, a pioneer of the $600 billion commercial mortgage backed securities market in the early 1990s." We're probably at the closest point to a big meltdown, a depression type meltdown than we have been in our lives,'' said Penner, 46, now a principal at real estate fund management firm Lubert-Adler Partners LP in Philadelphia, during a speech at a Real Estate Media Inc. conference in New York.

The U.S. housing market is an "unmitigated disaster" and will take at least another 18 months to recover, as the U.S. Federal Reserve and European Central Bank respond to turmoil in credit markets, Penner said. As foreclosures rise, lenders will try to sell the properties they acquire at depressed prices, dragging the market down further, he said.

"I'll tell you how it's going to end: It's going to end with a depression, and not just a depression; not just another Great Depression; it's going to be the Greater Depression."

GET READY FOR WEIMAR-REPUBLIC STYLE INFLATION

Comment on this post...


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

Anita Hill Responds to Clarence Thomas Intv on 60 Minutes

ANITA HILL RESPONDS TO CLARENCE THOMAS ON 60 MINUTES

60 Minutes did not bother to get Anita Hill to respond to its loving and book-selling two segment profile last Sunday in which the Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas was treated with kid gloves. Part of the report touched on the charges raised by his former employee, attorney Anita Hill, but with no new interview with her or any ctitics. Now Hill has responded—but not as yet before a national TV audience.
(Thanks to Firefly for sending this.)

On Oct. 11, 1991, I testified about my experience as an employee of Clarence Thomas's at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

I stand by my testimony. Justice Thomas has every right to present himself as he wishes in his new memoir, "My Grandfather's Son." He may even be entitled to feel abused by the confirmation process that led to his appointment to the Supreme Court.

But I will not stand by silently and allow him, in his anger, to reinvent me.

In the portion of his book that addresses my role in the Senate hearing into his nomination, Justice Thomas offers a litany of unsubstantiated representations and outright smears that Republican senators made about me when I testified before the Judiciary Committee — that I was a "combative left-winger" who was "touchy" and prone to overreacting to "slights." A number of independent authors have shown those attacks to be baseless. What's more, their reports draw on the experiences of others who were familiar with Mr. Thomas's behavior, and who came forward after the hearings. It's no longer my word against his.

Justice Thomas's characterization of me is also hobbled by blatant
inconsistencies. He claims, for instance, that I was a mediocre employee who had a job in the federal government only because he had "given it" to me. He ignores the reality: I was fully qualified to work in the government, having graduated from Yale Law School (his alma mater, which he calls one of the finest in the country), and passed the District of Columbia Bar exam, one of the toughest in the nation.

In 1981, when Mr. Thomas approached me about working for him, I was an associate in good standing at a Washington law firm. In 1991, the partner in charge of associate development informed Mr. Thomas's mentor, Senator John Danforth of Missouri, that any assertions to the contrary were untrue. Yet, Mr. Thomas insists that I was "asked to leave" the firm.

It's worth noting, too, that Mr. Thomas hired me not once, but twice while he was in the Reagan administration — first at the Department of Education and then at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. After two years of working directly for him, I left Washington and returned home to Oklahoma to begin my teaching career.

In a particularly nasty blow, Justice Thomas attacked my religious
conviction, telling "60 Minutes" this weekend, "She was not the demure, religious, conservative person that they portrayed." Perhaps he conveniently forgot that he wrote a letter of recommendation for me to work at the law school at Oral Roberts University, in Tulsa. I remained at that evangelical Christian university for three years, until the law school was sold to Liberty University, in Lynchburg, Va., another Christian college. Along with other faculty members, I was asked to consider a position there, but I decided to remain near my family in Oklahoma.

Regrettably, since 1991, I have repeatedly seen this kind of character attack on women and men who complain of harassment and discrimination in the workplace. In efforts to assail their accusers' credibility, detractors routinely diminish people's professional contributions. Often the accused is a supervisor, in a position to describe the complaining employee's work as "mediocre" or the employee as incompetent. Those accused of inappropriate behavior also often portray the individuals who complain as bizarre caricatures of themselves — oversensitive, even fanatical, and often immoral — even though they enjoy good and productive working relationships with their colleagues.

Finally, when attacks on the accusers' credibility fail, those accused of workplace improprieties downgrade the level of harm that may have occurred. When sensing that others will believe their accusers' versions of events, Individuals confronted with their own bad behavior try to reduce legitimate concerns to the level of mere words or "slights" that should be dismissed without discussion.

Fortunately, we have made progress since 1991. Today, when employees complaint of abuse in the workplace, investigators and judges are more likely
to examine all the evidence and less likely to simply accept as true the word of those in power. But that could change. Our legal system will suffer if a sitting justice's vitriolic pursuit of personal vindication discourages others from standing up for their rights.

The question of whether Clarence Thomas belongs on the Supreme Court is no longer on the table — it was settled by the Senate back in 1991. But questions remain about how we will resolve the kinds of issues my testimony exposed. My belief is that in the past 16 years we have come closer to making the resolution of these issues an honest search for the truth, which, after all, is at the core of all legal inquiry. My hope is that Justice Thomas's latest fusillade will not divert us from that path.

Anita Hill, a professor of social policy, law and women's studies at
Brandeis University, is a visiting scholar at the Newhouse Center for the Humanities at Wellesley College.

NYT: SPEAKING OF SEXUAL HARRASSMENT

Jury Awards $11.6 Million to Former Knicks Executive

A jury ruled today that Knicks Coach Isiah Thomas sexually harassed a former team executive and that Madison Square Garden fired her in retaliation for her complaints.

Maybe Hill should have sued.

ASIAN EDITORS EXPRESS CONCERNS

NEW DELHI: While welcoming the modernization that has come as a result of globalization and competition, editors from Asian countries are apprehensive about the freedoms they enjoy in an era where a few conglomerates and media magnates are trying to take over the entire media space.

Speaking at a discussion after the presentation of a paper at a meet over the weekend, the editors also wondered if the standards had improved with a larger number of newspapers virtually turning into tabloids.

RE THE POLICE IN PHOENIX

I reported on that story of the woman who died in custody in an Arizona Airport. The police there are being criticized sharply in the NY press. Mark Crispin Miller shared this letter he received:

Just a basic Google search turns up a significant amount of information about how the two major Phoenix area law enforcement agencies view inmate rights and the treatment of citizens during arrests. And the Maricopa County Sheriff's Department is beyond belief — they returned to the use of chain gangs and brag about feeding inmates on 45 cents per day! There is apparently a very disturbing culture in place at both these Phoenix area police agencies.

While Phoenix Police denied the use of a Taser on Mrs. Gotbaum a 2004 article on the Phoenix Police Department indicated that during that year it had purchased enough of the newer model X-26 Taser units to equip virtually all of its officers. And other
articles per Google indicated that Phoenix PD also had one of the highest usage of Taser units in the nation.

Jeff Adams
Berkeley, CA

FOR MORE ON THE US AND SAUDIA ARABIA SEE THE INVENTIVE OPENING VIDEO FOR "THE KINGDOM"

Check out my piece on Fox News and Bill O'Reilly today and also the weekly newsletter I write on credit and loan issues on the stopthesqueeze.org website.

Share your comments by writing, dissector@mediachannel.org

Lovinsky Pierre-Antoine was kidnapped on August 12

October 2, 2007

Half-Hour for Haiti: Join the Big Push For Debt Relief for Haiti!

Update: Sorry we missed September’s Half-Hour alerts. As many of you know, human rights activist Lovinsky Pierre-Antoine was kidnapped on August 12. We held off on alerts because the kidnapping initially appeared to be for economic reasons, and we were advised that action alerts could be counterproductive. But Lovinsky has now been missing for seven weeks, and Lovinsky’s family and his organization, the September 30th Foundation, have been raising the public profile of the case. We are working on an alert for Lovinsky that we will send out towards the end of the week. For more information about Lovinsky, his disappearance, and taking action to save Lovinsky's life, see our website, www.HaitiJustice.org.

In the meantime, we need to carry on Lovinsky’s work, including the cancellation of Haiti’s multilateral debt, which will divert $57 million this year from Haiti’s elected government to wealthy banks that were established to fight poverty.

Thanks to everyone who fought for debt cancellation this summer by engaging their representatives during the August Congressional recess.

This week is the next big push. The Jubilee USA Network is sponsoring the Cancel Debt Fast from September 6 to October 18. Rev. David Duncombe of White Salmon, Washington, is spending the whole time on Capitol Hill, fasting and persuading members of Congress to pass the Jubilee Act, which would cancel unjust debt for Haiti and 66 other countries. For updates on the fast events, see Jubilee USA’s Blog the Debt.

This week is Haiti Week for the Cancel Debt Fast. On Thursday, Jubilee USA, Partners in Health, TransAfrica Forum, the Center for Economic and Policy Research , Haiti Reborn, and the Institute for Justice & Democracy in Haiti are sponsoring a Congressional briefing on H. Res. 241, the Haiti Debt Cancellation Resolution, with the help of Rep. Maxine Waters (Thursday 10/4, 3:30 PM, Rayburn 2105). The panelists will explain the impact of the diversion of resources to pay Haiti’s debt, to the healthcare system and the overall economy. They will also explain why it is important to pass H.Res. 241, as well as the Jubilee Act: the Haiti Debt Relief Act was introduced earlier and is further along in obtaining co-sponsors. Haiti also deserves special treatment because it lags behind other countries, because it was excluded from earlier debt relief efforts for political reasons.

Colonial Echoes in Burma

China is having to deal with calls to influence a close ally, the Myanmar strongmen, to stop their repression -- which reminds of the Tiananmen massacre of 1989, and distracts the Chinese Party leaders from preparations for the 17th Party Congress.



Colonial Jousting in Myanmar
by Peter Kwong


The unfolding events in Myanmar have been distracting Chinese Communist Party leaders from a most urgent business: planning for the 17th Party Congress, which is to convene in two weeks. This would normally be a critical period of tense last minute factional jockeying for appointments of next generation top-tier leaders. But as the world helplessly watches the military crackdown in Yangon, China’s elders instead find themselves under pressure by western nations to do something about stopping suppression in Myanmar, China’s close ally.


Already stung by human rights activists’ calls for the boycott of next year’s Olympic Games in Beijing on account of their failure to pressure Sudanese government -- another close ally -- to end the massacre in Darfur, Chinese leaders are eager to oblige. A bloody finale in Myanmar could turn into a complete public relations disaster.


But here is their quandary: How can they tell Burmese generals not to fend off a popular revolt, when they themselves were the perpetrators of the 1989 Tiananmen Massacre when facing a similar people’s movement? And, if the monks of Yangon were to overthrow Burmese hard-fisted government through peaceful protests, how to prevent the contagion from effecting Chinese people? After all, the cry for democracy that led to the last wave of people’s movements in Asia during the 1980s and brought down authoritarian regimes in South Korea and the Philippines was what had inspired the Chinese students to organize the fateful Tiananmen Square protests.


It is no surprise then that Chinese media have hardly covered the events in Myanmar. Chinese Yahoo and Google have both joined in the suppression of the news. A few bloggers have managed to confuse the censors by manipulating key words. “Since the Burmese are demonstrating just like our 19(8)(9), we should support them,” wrote one, in a message that pretty much sums up the mood in China’s blogosphere, while the mainstream media outlets focus on the ceremonies held nationwide to commemorate the birth of Confucius.


In a move to appease international pressure, Chinese government has abandoned its standard “non-interference in internal affairs” defense to urge that “all parties in Myanmar exercise restraint through negotiation and peaceful means in order to restore stability.” One wonders what restraint they want the peacefully demonstrating monks to exercise? And what do they mean by stability? It was the catchphrase of the Chinese Communist Party during and after its bloody crackdown on protesters in 1989. Currently, as China prepares for the Party Congress, “stability” in Beijing means a lockdown: News media have been warned to stay away from sensitive issues; individual petitioners from the provinces are being stopped from coming to Beijing with their grievances; university scholars and think-tank experts have been told not to speak to the media. Internet police have not only closed tens of thousands of interactive websites that allow visitors to post opinions, but also the internet data centers (IDCs) that host them, and even Internet Service Providers. This is the “stability” that Chinese government and Communist Party need to successfully stage the 17th Congress whose theme is the “construction of a harmonious society.”


When it comes to Myanmar, however, the Chinese government is primarily mindful that undue pressure on the military junta could jeopardize its access to Myanmar’s rich natural gas deposits (the world’s tenth largest) and timber. Its present access is the result of a long cultivated relationship with Myanmar’s military rulers. China’s interests in Myanmar are geopolitical as well. China is building a $2 billion oil pipeline from Myanmar’s coast on the Bay of Bengal to Yunnan Province in southwest China. The pipeline will allow oil from the Middle East to reach China without having to pass through the Malacca Strait. Chinese projects in Myanmar are part of a larger national economic plan to make Yunan Province the regional center of trade and commerce for entire Southeast Asia, embracing the ex-socialist states of Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam.


The downfall of Myanmar’s military junta could only be acceptable to the Chinese if its successor regime were friendly. Under Aung San Suu Kyi, the Oxford graduated rightful winner of Burma’s democratic election annulled in 1990, the Chinese believe that the country would be leaning toward the United States, Japan, Australia and Britain -- the nations that were cut from access to Burma’s rich resources by the military coup in 1988. Myanmar is in fact a target of intense international competition for its natural resources. India, too, has been courting the regime’s favor and has likewise shied away from condemning the Yangon regime.


What we are witnessing is the old 19th century game of colonial competition veiled in the 21st century pro-democracy rhetoric. In this game, however, China is at a disadvantage -- wanting to maintain influence in Myanmar, while not offending the supporters of its people’s aspirations for democracy. There’s a Chinese proverb that sums up this predicament: “Chewing on a bitter lotus root, not daring to complain.”




Peter Kwong, a professor of Asian American studies at Hunter College, is co-author of Chinese America: The Untold Story of America's Oldest New Community.


Copyright © 2007 Peter Kwong


----------------
Released: 03 October 2007
Word Count: 817
----------------


For rights and permissions, contact:


rights@agenceglobal.com, 1.336.686.9002 or 1.212.731.0757


Agence Global
www.agenceglobal.com
1.212.731.0757 (main)
1.336.286.6606 (billing)
1.336.686.9002 (rights & permissions)


Agence Global is the exclusive syndication agency for The Nation, Le Monde diplomatique, as well as expert commentary by Richard Bulliet, Mark Hertsgaard, Rami G. Khouri, Peter Kwong,Tom Porteous, Patrick Seale and Immanuel Wallerstein.


To be removed from this advisory list, add another editor to this list, or redirect this message to another editor, please reply or send e-mail to: advisory@agenceglobal.com


-------------------
Released: 03 October 2007
Word Count: 817
Rights & Permissions Contact: Agence Global, 1.336.686.9002, rights@agenceglobal.com
-------------------

American War Resister Arrested in Canada

WAR RESISTERS SUPPORT CAMPAIGN
www.resisters.ca
416 598 1222

October 2, 2007
WAR RESISTER ARRESTED IN NELSON, B.C.
"We will deport him soon," say Nelson Police

War Resister Robin Long has been arrested by the Nelson B.C. Police who intend to take him to Vancouver and hand him over to the US authorities at the border nearby. He was seized as he walked along a street. He is now detained in the local jail. Robin was not allowed to receive visits from friends; however he was able to call his spouse. She says that he is calm and hopeful that he will soon be released.

Robin Long comes from Boise, Idaho. He joined the U.S. Army but soon found that its demands were in conflict with his principles. He left the Army and came to Canada in 2005, where he met his spouse, Renee. They have a Canadian born son aged 15 months. Anyone who has met Robin knows him to be a man of peace, with a strong concern for the environment and to the land.

The Nelson Police also arrested war resister Kyle Snyder last winter and held him until they were informed that there was no charge against him. It appears that the Nelson Police Force has made arresting US war resisters a top priority. We call on the citizens of Nelson to hold their police accountable for these actions.

The War Resisters Support Campaign is urging all or friends and supporters to CALL THE NELSON POLICE AT 250-354-3919 AND TELL THEM TO RELEASE ROBIN LONG. We urge you as well to contact your local Member of Parliament and ask her or him to help release Robin.

Robin has done nothing wrong. The charges against him are technical immigration matters which arose because he did not receive a letter sent to him, and thus did not know that he had been called in for an appointment at Canada Immigration in Thunder Bay, Ontario. Naturally if he had received the letter he would have complied with it, as he has done with all previous requests and demands.

Currently two other war resisters, Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey, are appealing to the Supreme Court of Canada against the negative decision of the Immigration and Refugee Board. As with Robin, the IRB refused to allow them to raise the issue of the illegality of the US invasion of Iraq, thus making it impossible for them to bring forward a major reason for their decision to seek refuge in Canada.

Robin Long's lawyer, Jeffry House says: "It is totally up to the Supreme Court to decide on this. It is not fair that people should be removed as if the Supreme Court had ruled on this. No US war resister should be removed until the Supreme Court decides."

War Resisters Support Campaign
Vancouver