What is Happening in America?

Are we headed back to the Middle Ages?

Depleted-Uranium (DU)

Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)

 

“DU is Harmless”

 

 

3 Nov. 2007

 

 

Table of Contents

 

British Authorities Call DU Safe. 17

NATO and SFOR Call DU Safe. 18

UN Agencies Complicit in Cover-Up. 19

Media are Complicit in Cover-up. 23

British Radiation Monitoring Agency Owned by Halliburton. 24

Halliburton Given Contract to “Clean up” DU Damage to Kuwait 25

Intimidation of DU Activists 26

 

 

U.S. Authorities Call DU Safe

 

False Allegations Regarding Depleted Uranium

 

Rumors of adverse health effects proved inaccurate

 

There is a great deal of misinformation and unwarranted fears about depleted uranium (DU), which U.S. armed forces use in several types of ammunition to take advantage of its unsurpassed ability to penetrate armored vehicles.

 

Depleted uranium is a derivative of natural uranium, a very common element in our environment. Many people don't realize that our environment contains small amounts of natural uranium, which we breathe, eat, and drink every day.

 

U-235 and U-234 are the highly radioactive isotopes in natural uranium, extracted to make nuclear fuel or enriched weapons-grade uranium. Depleted uranium is what is left over after much of these highly radioactive isotopes have been removed. Depleted uranium is actually 40% less radioactive than the natural uranium in the environment around us, and much less radioactive than fuel-grade or weapons-grade uranium. Unfortunately, most people confuse depleted uranium with these dangerous substances.

 

The Health Effects of Depleted Uranium

 

In April 2001, the World Health Organization report Depleted Uranium: Sources, Exposure, and Health Effects, stated: "no increase of leukemia or other cancers has been established following exposure to uranium or depleted uranium." (chapter 13, p. 132)

 

A March 2001 European Commission report concluded, "exposure to DU could not produce any detectable effect on human health under realistic assumptions of the doses that would be received." (p. 11)

 

A January 2001 NATO study found that, "based on the data today, no link has been established between depleted uranium and any forms of cancer."

 

In 1999, a RAND Corporation study on depleted uranium concluded: "no evidence is documented in the literature of cancer or any other negative health effect related to the radiation received from exposure to natural uranium, whether inhaled or ingested, even in very high doses." (chapter 2, pp. 36-37)

 

Perhaps the most dramatic illustration of the lack of a link between depleted uranium and cancer is the case of 20 Gulf War veterans who were struck by shrapnel from depleted uranium shells that hit the armored vehicles in which they were riding. Some have shrapnel pieces up to 20 mm long still embedded in their bodies. The veterans have very high levels of uranium in their urine samples, but not one has developed leukemia, bone cancer, lung cancer, or any kidney abnormalities, despite the fact that they are walking around with depleted uranium inside their bodies. In addition, none of the children born to any of these men has any reported birth defects. A study of these veterans, "Elevated Urine Uranium Excretion by Soldiers with Retained Uranium Shrapnel," published in the November 1999 issue of Health Physics concluded, "there is no evidence of adverse clinical outcomes associated with uranium exposure at this time in any of these individuals."

 

Accusations that depleted uranium has caused cancer in Iraqi newborns are groundless. In fact, Iraq's use of chemical weapons -- known cancer-causing agents -- is a much more likely cause of the cancers and birth defects blamed on depleted uranium.

 

Independent studies have shown large increases in cancers and birth defects where the Iraqi regime has used chemical weapons. According to Dr. Fouad Baban, Chairman of the Department of Medicine of Suleymania University in northern Iraq, "congenital abnormality rates" in Halabja, where the Iraqi regime killed 5,000 Kurds with chemical weapons in 1988, are "four to five times greater than in the post-atomic populations of Hiroshima and Nagasaki." Dr. Baban says, "rare and aggressive cancers in adults and children are found at levels far higher than anywhere in the world."

 

For accurate, authoritative information on depleted uranium, see information from:

 

• The United Nation's International Atomic Energy Agency

• The U.S. Department of Defense's Health Deployment Directorate

• The UK Ministry of Defence

 

(“Identifying Misinformation,” International Information Programs, USINFO.STAT.GOV, http://usinfo.state.gov/media/Archive/2005/Jan/24-107572.html, downloaded 15 Aug. 2007.)

 

"Soldiers may be incidentally exposed to DU from dust and smoke on the battlefield. The Army Surgeon General has determined that it is unlikely that these soldiers will receive a significant internal DU exposure. Medical follow-up is not warranted for soldiers who experience incidental exposure from dust or smoke. [...] Since DU weapons are openly available on the world arms market, DU weapons will be used in future conflicts. The number of DU patients on future battlefields probably will be significantly higher because other countries will use systems containing DU. [...] DU is a low-level radioactive waste, and, therefore, must be disposed of in a licensed repository. [...] No international law, treaty, regulation, or custom requires the United States to remediate the Persian Gulf war battlefields."

 

- Report by the US Army Environmental Policy Institute: 'Health and Consequences of Depleted Uranium use in the US army', June 1995.(Ross B. Mirkarimi, “Extreme Birth Deformities,” Environmental and Human Health Impacts of the Gulf Region with Special Reference to Iraq, May 1992, downloaded from http://bitterfact.tripod.com/iraq/iraq_babies.html, 5 Sept. 2007.)

 

Since shortly after Gulf War I, soldiers and civilians have been questioning the safety of [DU weapons and tank shells] which are made of radioactive material. The more questions raised, the more the military-industrial complex has hauled out studies showing the safety of DU munitions. One CEO called DU the "skim milk" of uranium in an article penned for my local paper. An Air Force officer is even stalking the internet, trying to intimidate anyone who suggests DU is anything but benign. (Craig Etcheson, Ph.D., “Depleted Uranium: Pernicious Killer Keeps on Killing,” t r u t h o u t, 19 February 2007.  Craig Etchison, Ph.D, is from the Center for Nonviolent Alternatives, Fort Ashby, W.Va.)

 

The official line, or obfuscation, is that uranium is only minimally radioactive. While this is true, it is chemically toxic in minute trace amounts, because uranium ions are actually attracted to bond with DNA, where they can wreak havoc with cells – especially the cells of developing fetuses.  (Dave Lindorff, “DU, the Ticking Nuke in Bush’s White House War Room,” San Francisco Bay View, 25 Jan. 2006, downloaded from http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2006/DU-Bush-War25jan06.htm, 26 Aug. 2007.)

 

GREG HUNTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: The U.S. army insists its own testing of Iraq veterans shows no direct link between DU and illness or birth defects in humans.

COL. MARK MELANSON, WALTER REED ARMY MEDICAL CENTER: The radioactivity from depleted uranium is localized within the site of impact and it's not posed a significant immediate health hazard.

HUNTER: The World Health Organization and the Institute of Medicine seem to agree. They found no direct evidence linking DU to birth defects or cancer in humans, but a Pentagon sponsored study by the armed forces radio biology institute showed the combined effect of DU's heavy metal and its radioactivity can damage DNA and may cause genetic defects and tumors in animals and human stem cells. The military has warned about the potential dangers of breathing in DU- contaminated dust, like in this instructional video produced for the U.S. military in 1995.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Heavy metal poisoning may occur, which can cause damage to internal organs and tissue.

HUNTER: That same video talks about radioactive particles that could be trapped in the lungs and possible water and soil contamination. The army's leading expert on DU hazard awareness training concedes these are all possibilities, but U.S. troops going over to Iraq never saw this tape.

MELANSON: There were lots of errors and conflicting messages in that training video, so it was not finalized and distributed to the troops.

HUNTER: Instead, the army's official training video, used since 2000, describes DU contamination this way.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: These emissions are well below U.S. safety standards and do not pose a hazard to soldiers working with or around DU munitions.

HUNTER: The new video does tell soldiers to wear gloves and masks, especially inside DU-damaged vehicles or within 50 meters of fires that may involve DU. The problem is some soldiers like Gerard Matthew, say they never saw it.

 

HUNTER: The new video does tell soldiers to wear gloves and masks, especially inside DU-damaged vehicles or within 50 meters of fires that may involve DU. The problem is some soldiers like Gerard Matthew, say they never saw it. Dr. Asaf Durakovic studied the effects of DU on veterans of the first Gulf war for the U.S. military. He was alarmed by his findings. Now a private researcher, he also tested recent Gulf war vets, including Gerard Matthew whom Durakovic says has dangerously high levels of DU in his body.

DR. ASAF DURAKOVIC, URANIUM MEDICAL RESEARCH CTR: Inhalation of uranium dust is harmful.

HUNTER: Even in small amounts?

DURAKOVIC: Even in the amount of one atom.

HUNTER: Durakovic says those small atoms emit radiation for the rest of a soldier's life. Can't that hurt a soldier in the long run?

DR. MICHAEL KIRKPATRICK, DOD HEALTH AFFAIRS: It would come then to the dose, the total dose in their body and those particles are very, very small.(Transcript of CNN's "American Morning," 5 Feb. 2007, downloaded from
http://home.earthlink.net/~nomoredu/cnntranscript.html, 12 Sept. 2007.)

 

Critics of DU have noted that the Army's view of its dangers has changed over time.

 

Before the 1991 Persian Gulf War, a 1990 Army report noted that depleted uranium is "linked to cancer when exposures are internal, [and] chemical toxicity causing kidney damage." (Juan Gonzalez, “Poisoned? Shocking report reveals local troops may be victims of America's high-tech weapons,” New York Daily News, 3 April 2004, downloaded from http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/180333p-156685c.html, 16 Sept. 2007.)

 

In the Gulf War, Army brass did not warn soldiers about any risks from exploding DU shells. An unknown number of G.I.s were exposed by shrapnel, inhalation or handling battlefield debris.

 

Some veterans groups blame DU contamination as a factor in Gulf War syndrome, the term for a host of ailments that afflicted thousands of vets from that war.

 

Under pressure from veterans groups, the Pentagon commissioned several new studies. One of those, published in 2000, concluded that DU, as a heavy metal, "could pose a chemical hazard" but that Gulf War veterans "did not experience intakes high enough to affect their health."

 

Pentagon spokesman Michael Kilpatrick said Army followup studies of 70 DU-contaminated Gulf War veterans have not shown serious health effects.

 

"For any heavy metal, there is no such thing as safe," Kilpatrick said. "There is an issue of chemical toxicity, and for DU it is raised as radiological toxicity as well."

 

But he said "the overwhelming conclusion" from studies of those who work with uranium "show it has not produced any increase in cancers."

 

Several European studies, however, have linked DU to chromosome damage and birth defects in mice. Many scientists say we still don't know enough about the long-range effects of low-level radiation on the body to say any amount is safe.

 

Britain's national science academy, the Royal Society, has called for identifying where DU was used and is urging a cleanup of all contaminated areas.

 

"A large number of American soldiers [in Iraq] may have had significant exposure to uranium oxide dust," said Dr. Thomas Fasey, a pathologist at Mount Sinai Medical Center and an expert on depleted uranium. "And the health impact is worrisome for the future."

 

As for the soldiers of the 442nd, they're sick, frustrated and confused. They say when they arrived in Iraq no one warned them about depleted uranium and no one gave them dust masks. (Juan Gonzalez, “Poisoned? Shocking report reveals local troops may be victims of America's high-tech weapons,” New York Daily News, 3 April 2004, downloaded from http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/180333p-156685c.html, 16 Sept. 2007.)

 

WASHINGTON (AP) -- A presidential panel looking into Gulf War illnesses said Friday that it can't pinpoint causes of the ailments and recommended further studies into whether there are genetic reasons for why some troops got sick when others did not.

 

In an interim report, the Special Oversight Board on Gulf War Illness ruled out one suspected cause -- exposure to depleted uranium used in U.S. munitions. The panel agreed with independent studies that found no evidence for the uranium link.

 

The board, headed by former Sen. Warren Rudman, R-N.H., issued a series of recommendations designed to keep better track of those with diagnosed and undiagnosed Gulf War illnesses, make clearer information available to the public and lead to better federal coordination.

 

While the Defense Department ``has conducted a credible investigation into the causes of Gulf War illnesses,'' the board ``has not been shy about pointing out areas needing further improvement,'' Rudman said.

 

For instance, the report suggested that the Pentagon office on Gulf War illnesses had engaged in ``mission creep,'' expanding its responsibilities and publishing ``information papers'' that didn't relate directly to Gulf War illnesses.

 

The board also suggested declassifying certain intelligence reports on the war that might bear on the illnesses.

 

In a series of what it called ``observations,'' the panel said:

 

-- More extensive study into whether genetic predisposition to certain illnesses may explain why some Gulf War veterans with similar exposures are ill while others are not.

 

-- The government should try to correlate signs and symptoms of Gulf War illnesses with ``an age- and gender-matched general population sample.''

-- For future wars, the Pentagon should consider fitting soldiers with electronic identification badges so that satellites can track and record battlefield movements.

 

The report sought to settle the debate over the danger of depleted uranium, which coats U.S. artillery shells and bombs designed to penetrate tank armor. On impact, the shells create an airborne dust.

 

Some veterans groups have suggested hundreds of thousands of the men and women who served in the Gulf War had come in contact with depleted uranium. Some claimed to suffer from unexplained illnesses or increased cancer rates.

 

But studies by the Pentagon and Rand Corp., an independent research organization that specializes in military affairs, failed to find a link between depleted uranium and these illnesses, suggesting radiation levels in the substance are relatively low.

 

``The board agrees with the conclusion that the available evidence does not support claims that depleted uranium is causing the undiagnosed illnesses some Gulf War veterans are experiencing,'' the report said.

 

One veterans' group, the National Gulf War Resource Center, denounced the panel's findings on depleted uranium as ``incomplete whitewash and failure.'' The panel ignored research suggesting that the material ``settles in the bone, brain, kidney, lung, liver and testicles,'' the group said.

 

The panel was also criticized for not reaching any conclusions on whether contaminants from oil well fires in Kuwait contributed to the illnesses. The panel said it would deal with that issue in its final report.

 

As many as 30,000 veterans of the war have complained of mysterious maladies, including fatigue, joint pain and memory loss, that they claim are related to their service in the Gulf.

 

A final report is due in May. (Tom Raum, No Link Between Ammo, Gulf Illness, Associated Press, August 27, 1999, downloaded from http://search.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WAPO/19990827/V000144-082799-idx.html, 12 Sept. 2007.)

 

No link found to Gulf War illnesses

 

A presidential oversight board said Friday there is no evidence to link undiagnosed Gulf War illnesses to exposure to depleted uranium ammunition - a conclusion that drew immediate fire from the nation's largest advocacy group for veterans of the 1991 desert war.

 

In an interim report released Friday, the Presidential Special Oversight Board on Gulf War Illness said it agreed with earlier studies by the Pentagon and the Rand Corp., which failed to find a link between exposure to depleted uranium - a radioactive and toxic metal - and ailments that doctors cannot diagnose among veterans.

 

The ammunition was used for the first time in combat by the United States in the Gulf War, but American soldiers were not warned that exposure to its dust and debris could be harmful.

 

"The board agrees with the conclusion that the available evidence does not support claims that depleted uranium is causing the undiagnosed illnesses some Gulf War veterans are experiencing," the report said.

 

The findings were harshly criticized by Paul Sullivan, executive director of the National Gulf War Resource Center, a Washington, D.C., group that has led the fight for medical care and compensation for ailing veterans and their families.

 

"This report is yet another in a long series of disappointing government whitewashes," Sullivan said. "Until independent medical research is launched, veterans will not receive answers as to why we are ill, and tens of thousands will be denied proper medical care. The board's work is unacceptable and incomplete."

 

More than 100,000 Gulf War veterans are sick, and about 30,000 have ailments that doctors cannot diagnose, he said.

Report is a "moral outrage'

 

Sullivan said the panel's failure to recommend independent research into the effects of exposure to the radioactive and toxic waste created by depleted uranium explosions was a "moral outrage."

 

He said the board failed to note that the Pentagon violated its own regulations during the war by failing to test troops after they fought on battlefields contaminated with depleted uranium or climbed on tanks blown up with the ammunition.

 

Sullivan said the board also failed to mention a recent Department of Defense report, which concluded that depleted uranium settles in the bones, brain, kidney, lung, liver and testicles.

 

He said about 400,000 troops may have entered contaminated areas, or lived in those areas for up to two months.

 

Overall, the board found that the Defense Department "has conducted a credible investigation into the causes of Gulf War illnesses," said former Sen. Warren Rudman, R-N.H., chairman of the panel.

 

Still, Rudman said, "The board has not been shy about pointing out areas needing further improvement."

 

The presidential panel issued a series of recommendations designed to keep better track of those with diagnosed and undiagnosed Gulf War illnesses and to make more information available to the public.

 

Report's other recommendations

 

Among suggestions of the interim report:

 

*The government should consider attempting to correlate signs and symptoms of Gulf War illnesses with "an age- and gender-matched general population sample."

 

*The Pentagon should study the feasibility of using electronic identification badges on military personnel in conjunction with fixes from the Global Positioning System, a satellite-based navigation system, "for battlefield location of the individual."

 

*A more extensive study should be conducted into whether genetic predisposition to certain illnesses may explain why some Gulf War veterans with similar exposures are ill while others are not.. Kathleen Sullivan, Uranium ammo cleared in study,” San Francsico Examiner, 27 Aug. 1999, downloaded from http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/examiner/archive/1999/08/27/NEWS7373.dtl, 12 Sept. 2007.)

 

According to the Pentagon, tactical nuclear weapons are "safe for civilians". Their use has been authorized by the US Senate. (See Michel Chossudovsky, http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO405A.html) (Michel Chossudovsky, “Planned US-Israeli Attack on iran,” Globalresearch.ca, a May 2005, downloaded from http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO505A.html, 26 August 2007.)

 

I suspect the military-industrial complex will stonewall admitting the effects of DU for as long as possible to avoid accepting responsibility, not to mention liability, for their reckless actions. When John Hanchette, a founding editor of USA Today tried to publish stories about DU, he received a phone call from the Pentagon asking him to desist. He was later replaced at USA Today. The World Health Organization's chief expert on radiation and health had his report on DU suppressed. Dr. Asaf Durakovic, then a colonel in the U.S. Army, was asked to lie about the risks of DU to humans. So the stonewalling will continue, even as cancers rage among our soldiers and Iraqi civilians, even as our soldiers die, or commit suicide to escape the horrific pain, even as birth defects proliferate across Iraq and among our veterans. (Craig Etcheson, Ph.D., Center for Non-Violent Alternatives, Fort Ashby, W.Va., “Depleted Uranium: Pernicious Killer Keeps on Killing,” t r u t h o u t, 19 February 2007.)

 

The new nuclear doctrine turns concepts and realities upside down. It not only denies the devastating impacts of nuclear weapons, it states, in no uncertain terms, that nuclear weapons are "safe" and their use in the battlefield will ensure "minimal collateral damage and reduce the probability of escalation". The issue of radioactive fallout is barely acknowledged with regard to tactical nuclear weapons. These various guiding principles which describe nukes as "safe for civilians" constitute a consensus within the military, which is then fed into the military manuals, providing relevant "green light" criteria to geographical commanders in the war theater. (Michel Chossudovsky, “Is the Bush Administration Planning a Nuclear Holocaust?” Globalresearch.ca, 22 Feb. 2006, downloaded from http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20060222&articleId=2032, 26 Aug. 2007.)

 

Since the Gulf War, Washington launched a "cover-up" on the health impacts of DU toxic radiation known as the "Gulf War Syndrome", with the tacit endorsement of its NATO partners. (Michel Chossudovsky, “Low Intensity Nuclear War,” Transnational Foundation for Peace and Future Research, 2001, downloaded from http://www.jacksonprogressive.com/issues/kosovo/chossudovsky_lowintensity.html, 26 Aug. 2007.)

 

"DEPLETED URANIUM SCARE" - Claimed by President George W. Bush on the official White House website:

 

"During the Gulf War, coalition forces used armor-piercing ammunition made from depleted uranium, which is ideal for the purpose because of its great density. In recent years, the Iraqi regime has made substantial efforts to promote the false claim that the depleted uranium rounds fired by coalition forces have caused cancers and birth defects in Iraq. Iraq has distributed horrifying pictures of children with birth defects and linked them to depleted uranium. The campaign has two major propaganda assets:"

 

"Uranium is a name that has frightening associations in the mind of the average person, which makes the lie relatively easy to sell; and Iraq could take advantage of an established international network of antinuclear activists who had already launched their own campaign against depleted uranium."

 

"But scientists working for the World Health Organization, the UN Environmental Programme, and the European Union could find no health effects linked to exposure to depleted uranium." (Leuren Moret, “Depleted Uranium: the Trojan Horse of Nuclear War,” World Affairs: The Journal of International Issues, 1 July 2004, downloaded from http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2004/DU-Trojan-Horse1jul04.htm, 26 Aug. 2007.)

 

The US says it has no plans to remove the debris left over from depleted uranium (DU) weapons it is using in Iraq.

 

It says no clean-up is needed, because research shows DU has no long-term effects.

 

It says a 1990 study suggesting health risks to local people and veterans is out of date. (Alex Kirby, “US Rejects Iraq DU Clean-up,” BBC News, 14 April 2003, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/2946715.stm, downloaded 29 Aug. 2007.)

 

Both the US and the UK acknowledge the dust can be dangerous if inhaled, though they say the danger is short-lived, localised, and much more likely to lead to chemical poisoning than to irradiation.

 

But a study prepared for the US Army in July 1990, a month before Iraq invaded Kuwait, says: "The health risks associated with internal and external DU exposure during combat conditions are certainly far less than other combat-related risks.

 

"Following combat, however, the condition of the battlefield and the long-term health risks to natives and combat veterans may become issues in the acceptability of the continued use of DU."

 

A Pentagon spokesman, Lieutenant-Colonel David Lapan, told BBC News Online: "Since then there've been a number of studies - by the UK's Royal Society and the World Health Organisation, for example - into the health risks of DU, or the lack of them.

 

"It's fair to say the 1990 study has been overtaken by them. One thing we've found in these various studies is that there are no long-term effects from DU.

"And given that, I don't believe we have any plans for a DU clean-up in Iraq." (Alex Kirby, “US Rejects Iraq DU Clean-up,” BBC News, 14 April 2003, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/2946715.stm, downloaded 29 Aug. 2007.)

 

There has been and continues to be a concern regarding the impact of DU on the environment. Therefore, if no-one makes a case for the effectiveness of DU on the battlefield, DU rounds may become politically unacceptable and thus be deleted from the arsenal. I believe we should keep this sensitive issue in mind when action reports are written. (Lt. Col. M.V. Ziehmn, Los Alamos National Laboratory memorandum, March 1st 1991  downloaded from http://bitterfact.tripod.com/iraq/iraq_babies.html#photos, 5 Sept. 2007.)

 

Soldiers may be incidentally exposed to DU from dust and smoke on the battlefield. The Army Surgeon General has determined that it is unlikely that these soldiers will receive a significant internal DU exposure. Medical follow-up is not warranted for soldiers who experience incidental exposure from dust or smoke. [...] Since DU weapons are openly available on the world arms market, DU weapons will be used in future conflicts. The number of DU patients on future battlefields probably will be significantly higher because other countries will use systems containing DU. [...] DU is a low-level radioactive waste, and, therefore, must be disposed of in a licensed repository. [...] No international law, treaty, regulation, or custom requires the United States to remediate the Persian Gulf war battlefields. (Report by the US Army Environmental Policy Institute: Health and Consequences of Depleted Uranium use in the US Army, June 1995, downloaded from http://bitterfact.tripod.com/iraq/iraq_babies.html#photos, 5 Sept. 2007.)

 

The Pentagon's response to such charges is denial, denial, denial. And the American media is its moral co-conspirator. (Robert C. Koehler, “Depleted Uranium (DU): Silent Genocide,” Tribune Media Services, 25 March 2004, downloaded from http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2004/DU-Silent-Genocide25mar04.htm, 29 Aug. 2007.)

 

The Department of Energy and the Department of Defense of course continue to deny that DU has any harmful effects.  (Walter A. Davis, “Of Pynchon, Thanatos and Depleted Uranium: Weapons of Mass Destruction Found in Iraq,” Counterpunch, October 9/10, 2004, downloaded from http://www.counterpunch.org/davis10092004.html. 12 Sept. 2007.)

 

GREG HUNTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: The U.S. army insists its own testing of Iraq veterans shows no direct link between DU and illness or birth defects in humans.

COL. MARK MELANSON, WALTER REED ARMY MEDICAL CENTER: The radioactivity from depleted uranium is localized within the site of impact and it's not posed a significant immediate health hazard.




GREG HUNTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT:

The Army tells CNN its policy is to get every soldier training in depleted uranium and hazard protection. It also has an updated instructional video, produced in 2000.

We asked why these soldiers say not only did they not see the video, but they knew nothing about D.U. before going to Iraq.

COL. MARK MELANSON, WALTER REED ARMY MEDICAL CENTER: I'm not able to give you any statistics on who received training and who didn't receive training. I can just talk about the training that was provided and what the policy is. (Transcript of CNN's "American Morning," 5 Feb. 2007, downloaded from
http://home.earthlink.net/~nomoredu/cnntranscript.html, 12 Sept. 2007.)

 

The State Department and Pentagon have barred UN and other outside testers from looking into DU contamination in Iraq.

 

The official line, or obfuscation, is that uranium is only minimally radioactive. While this is true, it is chemically toxic in minute trace amounts, because uranium ions are actually attracted to bond with DNA, where they can wreak havoc with cells – especially the cells of developing fetuses. (Dave Lindorff, “DU, the Ticking Nuke in Bush’s White House War Room,” San Francisco Bay View, 25 Jan. 2006, downloaded from http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2006/DU-Bush-War25jan06.htm, 26 Aug. 2007.)

 

In the 1991 Gulf War Allied forces admit to using 300+ tons of depleted uranium. These are strongly suspected by independent researchers of a being a prime factor in the epidemic of birth defects, leukaemias and cancers in Iraq over the last 10 years with tens of thousands of victims. Over 200,000 US and allied troops were exposed to DU contaminated battlefields.

 

The US Government, supported by some 40 countries including the UK, voted to cancel a WHO study into the effects of DU on civilians in Iraq in November 2001. There have been no thorough studies of the health effects of DU contamination in civilian populations by NATO countries or WHO. Women and children are more susceptible to the hazards of low level radiation than fit soldiers. Studies by doctors in Iraq are limited by minimal medical resources, none sufficient for detailed medical analysis of uranium contamination.

(Dai Williams, Hazards of Uranium Weapons in the Proposed War on Iraq, 22 Sept. 2002.)

 

The Gulf War Illness is a cumulative affect of exposure to depleted uranium, chemical, biological, vaccines, petrochemical agents and parasite diseases such as Leash Meniasis.

 

Few people are aware that the Gulf War was yet another example of the Department of Defense’s intentional exposure of its own troops to its own deadly weapons.

 

From 1984 through 1989 the U.S. government with full knowledge of the CDC and the Department of Commerce sold and transferred to Iraq 4 billion dollars worth of deadly chemical agents… deadly biological agents, such as anthrax, clostridium botchulinum, and West Nile Fever Virus. As a result of the first Gulf War hundreds of thousands of our military are now sick and many have died. The official figure of those who served in Operation Desert Shield and Storm is 697,000. The Department of Defense has now declared nearly 250,000 of those troops as permanently disabled. The official position of the Department of Defense is that there are no classified or unclassified documents that exist to prove that chemicals and biologicals were used in the first Gulf War, but in only a one hundred hour war when less than one hundred and fifty troops died, how do we explain the morbidity and mortality rate of nearly 450,000 of our servicemen and women? (Power Hour, Beyond Treason, video, 2005.)

 

Several countries that have purchased or developed Uranium weapons, including the US and UK, have already repressed prompt and comprehensive health and environmental research by UN agencies (UNEP, WHO). Target information and access necessary for monitoring the worst contaminated areas was delayed for 16 months by NATO in the Balkans.

 

Access for Uranium monitoring in Afghanistan has been delayed for 10 months. If large Uranium weapons were used casualties caught in the explosion plume may have died soon after. Taliban doctors reported several undiagnosed deaths within 2-3 days of bombing incidents that they suspected were due to chemical or uranium weapons. (Reuters 29 October 2001, see DU weapons report page 35).

 

Allied Governments may already be well aware of the hazards of Uranium weapons. The Bulgarian contribution to the ISAF force in Afghanistan included a team of 20 radiation decontamination personnel. (Bulgarian News 9 January 2002, http://www.news.bg).

 

In 2000 rising death rates among Spanish and Italian Balkans veterans from lymphomas and leukaemias caused alarm and led to a health survey of Balkans veterans in several NATO countries. Results published by the US DoD in October 2001 (DU report page 116) indicated no significant DU-related health problems. The UK has not surveyed its Balkans veterans.

 

Fortunately most NATO troops may not have been at risk in the Balkans except those deployed to most heavily bombed regions. The use of hard target bombs and missiles was most intense in the western region, where Italian and Spanish troops were assigned, and in Serbia.

 

When low level radiation epidemiologist Chris Busby re-analysed the Italian statistics he found they had used invalid reference groups. His corrected analysis indicated 11 times the expected rate of Leukaemias and Lymphomas. Health statistics for Spanish and Portuguese veterans cs may need similar recalculation. They were also deployed in western Kosovo in 1999.

 

Allied governments may already be aware of unusual health problems for troops assigned to Afghanistan. Initial influenza type symptoms were reported by US troops soon after service in the Gulf War in 1991. Significant Uranium exposure may lead to an increase in birth defects or miscarriages for veterans families and civilians 9+ months after the bombing started i.e. from now onwards. Special forces troops assigned to inspect heavily bombed targets are at highest risk unless they had full NBC protection. Cancer rates may increase progressively over 5-10 years - based on experience in Iraq since 1991 and a WHO survey of low level radiation exposure in Russia following the Chernobyl nuclear power station fire. (Dai Williams, Hazards of Uranium Weapons in the Proposed War on Iraq, 22 Sept. 2002.)

 

While NATO had until recently denied using DU shells in the 1999 war against Yugoslavia, it now admits that although it did use DU ammunition, the shells "have negligible radioactivity and [a]ny resulting debris posing any significant risk dissipates soon after the impact." (4) While casually denying "any connection between illness and exposure to depleted uranium", the Pentagon nonetheless concedes --in an ambiguous statement-- that "the main danger posed by depleted uranium occurs if it is inhaled." (5)

 

And who inhales the radioactive dust, which has spread across the Land?

The shrouded statements from European governments convey the uncomfortable illusion that only peacekeepers "might be at risk", --i.e. radioactive particles are only inhaled by military personnel and expatriate civilians, as if nobody else in the Balkans were affected. The impacts on local civilians are not mentioned. (Michel Chossudovsky, “Low Intensity Nuclear War,” Transnational Foundation for Peace and Future Research, 2001, downloaded from http://www.jacksonprogressive.com/issues/kosovo/chossudovsky_lowintensity.html, 26 Aug. 2007.)

 

Endnotes

 

(4) Agence France Presse, 4 January 20001.

 

(5) United Press International, 5 January 2001.

 

To maintain the cover-up, NATO is now prepared to reveal a small fraction of the truth. The military Alliance --in liaison with NATO member governments-- wants at all cost to maintain the focus on "peacekeepers" and keep local civilians out of the picture, because if the entire truth gets out, then people might start asking questions such as "how is it that the Kosovar Albanians, the people we were supposed to rescue are now the victims?" In both Bosnia and Kosovo, the UN has been careful not to record cancer cases among civilians. The narrow focus on "peacekeepers" is part of the cover-up. It distracts public opinion from the broader issue of civilian victims. (Michel Chossudovsky, “Low Intensity Nuclear War,” Transnational Foundation for Peace and Future Research, 2001, downloaded from http://www.jacksonprogressive.com/issues/kosovo/chossudovsky_lowintensity.html, 26 Aug. 2007.)

 

While the military continues to deny the connection of depleted uranium to sicknesses plaguing returning servicemen and women, a newly mandated study stemming from legislation signed by President Bush in October is just getting under way.

OPPOSITION


The new study, which began in March, follows several that have been completed by the military into depleted uranium, a byproduct left when enriched uranium is separated out for use in nuclear power and atomic weapons. The Department of Energy gives it to arms makers, where its extreme density is valuable in the manufacture of armor and casings.


Despite a 1996 U.N. resolution opposing its use because of discovery of health problems after the first Gulf War, the military studies have concluded there was no evidence that exposure to the metal caused illnesses.

To the military, the effectiveness of weapons and armor made with depleted uranium outweighs any residual effects. Their bottom line: Depleted uranium saves soldiers’ lives in combat. (Audrey Parente, “Update: Soldier Health Scare Back in News,” Longview, Texas, Journal-News, 15 April 2007.)

 

Robert Holloway, president of Nevada Technical Associates Inc., a firm that specializes in radiation safety training, disputes any concern over depleted uranium.

"I have no financial interest in promoting depleted uranium," Holloway wrote in an e-mail to The News-Journal. "There really is no substitute for depending on the judgment of professionals in this field."

Holloway and others who believe depleted uranium is safe to use say the best authority in the scientific community would be individuals connected to the Health Physics Society.


Doug Craig of Ponce Inlet, a retired radiation biophysics scientist, is such a person. He doesn’t believe low doses of radiation from depleted uranium are a problem.


"Uranium occurs in a lot of places," Craig said, "and man has been exposed to low concentrations of uranium for a long time." (Audrey Parente, “Update: Soldier Health Scare Back in News,” Longview, Texas, Journal-News, 15 April 2007.)

 

For years the US government described the Gulf War Syndrome as a post traumatic stress disorder. It was labelled as a psychological problem or simply as mysterious unrelated ailments much in the same way as health problems of Vietnam veterans suffering from Agent Orange poisoning. (Admiral Vishnu Bhagwat, “Silent WMDs – Effects of Depleted Uranium,” International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW), New Delhi, 29 Feb., 1-2 March 2004, downloaded from http://traprockpeace.org/bhagwat_du_29feb04.pdf, 12 Sept. 2007.)

 

The Pentagon says studies of the group with the highest DU exposure show their levels are "still well below occupational exposure limits".

 

But it acknowledges that, of all the US troops sent to the Gulf, it has tested just 36 for DU contamination. (Alex Kirby, “Depleted Uranium: the Lingering Poison,” BBC News, 7 June 1999, downloaded from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/362484.stm, 3 Nov. 2007.)

 

British Authorities Call DU Safe

 

Western forces stationed in the region have recently been advised not to drink the local water or eat locally produced food. Yet the British MoD continues to deny any potential risks, stating: "We have not seen any peer-reviewed epidemiological research data to support these claims [that DU is dangerous.] [...] There are no plans to remove DU-based ammunition from service." (Source: Two letters to me from Simon Wren, Overseas Secretariat, Ministry of Defence, Whitehall, London - 20th May 1999, and 22nd March 2000) (Ross B. Mirkarimi, “Extreme Birth Deformities,” Environmental and Human Health Impacts of the Gulf Region with Special Reference to Iraq, May 1992, downloaded from http://bitterfact.tripod.com/iraq/iraq_babies.html, 5 Sept. 2007.)

 

The Armed Forces Minister, Doug Henderson, says only a small number of British Gulf veterans believe DU has made them ill.

 

His door is open to scientists and doctors, he says. But he says he has no evidence that the dust left after a DU round has exploded can travel very far from the vehicle it has hit.

 

And he believes you would have to absorb unfeasibly large amounts of the dust to suffer any harm.

 

Yet a Canadian epidemiologist, Dr Rosalie Bertell, told the programme that DU had been detected 42km from its source in a factory accident in New York state.

 

Doug Henderson believes there is no case for a systematic programme to test UK service personnel for DU poisoning. (Alex Kirby, “Depleted Uranium: the Lingering Poison,” BBC News, 7 June 1999, downloaded from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/362484.stm, 3 Nov. 2007.)

 

NATO and SFOR Call DU Safe

 

Although the "Balkan Syndrome" scandal has been headline news in Bosnia and Herzegovina for several days now, no government official has even mentioned this highly disturbing issue.

One gets the impression that responsible Bosnian politicians fear to make hasty statements and risk worsening relations with the NATO forces that are helping to maintain peace in the country.

Italian defense minister Sergio Mattarela visited Sarajevo in order to observe the security situation in Bosnia and initiate an investigation into the causes of death of a number of Italian soldiers.  NATO ammunition containing depleted uranium has been linked with the case.  "To you, to your families, and to all Italians we owe the full truth about the deaths of several soldiers who were stationed in Bosnia and Kosovo," said the minister to Italian SFOR soldiers.  During his meetings with top Bosnian officials, Mattarela promised help in investigations into the dangers of depleted uranium, but he also asked for permission to perform undisturbed investigation on Bosnian territory.

 

SFOR representatives held a press conference in Sarajevo at which they denied any connection between deaths of soldiers and their use of the controversial ammunition.  According to a NATO spokesman in Sarajevo, depleted uranium is not dangerously radioactive and NATO does not believe that it in any way causes cancer.  But when asked by journalists why NATO soldiers stationed in the region were increasingly becoming ill with cancer, the spokesman declined to answer.  

 

This scandal has caused a mild disturbance among the citizens of Sarajevo, since in 1995 Serbian positions around the city were bombarded by NATO airplanes.  A significant portion of the attack sites are located on what is now Bosnian territory.  However, the quantity of bombs was not all that high, which has led some people to claim that the dead soldiers were victims of some secret NATO experiments and not of DU radiation.

The Ministry of Health of Bosnia and Herzegovina issued a statement saying that since the war in Bosnia, there has been an increase in cancer-related illness, but that cancer rates are not higher than the European average.  In 1998 and for several years before that, cancer rates were 152 per 100,000 people.  In 1999 it was 230 cancer patients per 100,000.  This shows that the increase in cancer rates has occurred only recently, which adds fuel to the speculations that "Balkan Syndrome" was not related to uranium weapons but to NATO experiments conducted in Kosovo and carried into Bosnia through transfers of soldiers, equipment and ammunition.

There is information from Bosnia's Serb Republic that the incidence of cancer is on the rise there as well.  Local politicians for now are refraining from serious accusations against NATO, but unofficially there is a whole avalanche of insults against the alliance.  From the very beginning, there were accusations that NATO did not intervene in Kosovo from democratic motives but to test its equipment and weapons.

However, although sensational in Europe, "Balkan Syndrome" is nothing new to the Bosnian public.  Research on so-called collateral war damage began in 1996.  The war in this country left more than only cemeteries in meadows and city parks, mass graves and thousands of permanently disabled. (Radenko Udovicic  Bosnia and Herzegovina: TESTING RANGE,” Network of Independent Journalists, 16 Jan. 2001, downloaded from http://www.idee.org/nij207.htm#1, 12 Sept. 2007.)

 

UN Agencies Complicit in Cover-Up

 

The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the World Health Organization (WHO) have tacitly accepted NATO-Pentagon assumptions concerning the health impacts of depleted uranium. When UNEP conducted its first assessment of DU radiation in Kosovo in 1999, NATO refused to provide the mission with maps indicating the locations of "affected areas" (points of impact where DU shells had fallen).

 

On the pretext that "there was insufficient data available to comprehensively address the issue of the impacts of depleted uranium ordnance," UNEP produced an inconclusive and noncommittal "desk study" which was appended to the 1999 Balkans Task Force Report (BTF) on the environmental impacts of the War. (13) UNEP's desk study pointed to the "possible use of DU" thereby implying that it was still unsure as to whether DU shells had actually been used.

 

UNEP's evasiveness -claiming lack of sufficient data-- contributed, in the wake of the bombings, to temporarily dissipating public concern. More generally, the UNEP-UNCHS Balkans Task Force report tends to downplay the seriousness of the environmental catastrophe triggered by NATO. Amply documented, the catastrophe was the deliberate result of military planning. (14)

 

NATO maps (indicating where DU shells had been targeted) were not required for UNEP and the WHO to conduct an investigation on the health impacts of depleted uranium radiation. A study of this nature --inevitably requiring a team of medical specialists in pedriatics and cancer working in liaison with experts on toxic radiation-- was never carried out. In fact, UNEP's stated "scientific" assumption precluded from the outset a meaningful assessment of the health impacts. According to UNEP:

 

"the effects of DU are mainly localized in the places DU has been used and the affected areas are likely to be small". (15) See the 1999 desk study, op. cit.)

 

This proposition (which is presented without scientific proof) is shared by UNEP's sister organization, the WHO:

 

"You would have to be very close to a damaged tank and be there within seconds of it being hit. These soldiers were very unlikely to have been exposed.'' (16)

 

These statements by UN bodies (quoted by NATO and the Pentagon to justify the use of DU weapons) are part and parcel of the camouflage. They convey the illusion that the health risks to peacekeepers and local civilians can easily be dealt with by cordoning off and "cleaning up" the "targeted areas."

 

The WHO has warned, in this regard, that depleted uranium could affect children playing in these areas "because children tend to pick up pieces of dirt or put their toys in their mouth." (17) What the WHO fails to acknowledge is that the radioactive dust has already spread beyond the affected areas, implying that children throughout Kosovo are at risk.

 

This tacit complicity of specialized agencies of the UN is yet another symptom of the deterioration of the United Nations system, which now plays an underhand role in covering up NATO war crimes. Since the Gulf War, the WHO has been instrumental in blocking a meaningful investigation of the health impacts of depleted uranium radiation on Iraqi children, claiming "it had no data to conduct an indepth investigation" (18)

 

UNEP AND NATO WORKING HAND IN GLOVE

 

Amidst the public outcry and mounting evidence of cancer among Balkans military personnel, UNEP conducted a second assessment in November 2000 which included field measurements of beta and gamma particle radiations in 11 so-called "affected areas" of Kosovo. (19)

 

Despite NATO's earlier refusal to collaborate with UNEP, the two organizations are currently working hand in glove. The composition of the mission was established in consultation with NATO. The representative from Greenpeace (involved in the 1999 study) had been dumped. NATO maps were readily available; the investigation was to focus narrowly on the collection of soil, water samples, etc. in 11 selected sites ("affected areas") out of a total of some 72 sites within Kosovo (see NATO map below, at http://balkans.unep.ch/du/targetmap.html).

 

The broader health issues were not part of the mission's terms of reference. The two medical researchers dispatched by the WHO in 1999 (as part of the desk study mission) had been replaced with experts from the US Army Center for Health Promotion and Preventive Medicine (see http://chppm-www.apgea.army.mil/default.htm) and AC Laboratorium Spiez (ACLS), a division of the Swiss Defense Procurement Agency.

 

AC Laboratorium Spiez (ACLS) has actively collaborated in chemical weapons inspections in Iraq. Under the disguise of Swiss neutrality, ACLS constitutes an informal mouthpiece for NATO. ACLS has been on contract with NATO's "Partnership for Peace" financed by the Swiss government's contribution to the PfP. (20)

 

Although the November mission was still under UNEP auspices, the Swiss government was funding most of fieldwork with ACLS --a division of the Swiss military-- playing a central role. The mission --integrated by representatives linked to the Military establishment-- was working on the premise (amply reviewed on ACLS's web page) that DU radioactive dust does not (under any circumstances) travel beyond the "point of release." (21)

 

The results of the report to be published in March 2001 are a foregone conclusion. They focus on radiation levels in the immediate vicinity of the target sites . According to the mission's "back to office report" (January 2001):

"[A]lready at this stage the Team can conclude that at some of the DU locations, the radiation level is slightly higher above normal at very limited spots. It would therefore be an unnecessary risk to the population to be in direct contact with any remnants of DU ammunition or with the spots where these have been found." (22) (Michel Chossudovsky, “Low Intensity Nuclear War,” Transnational Foundation for Peace and Future Research, 2001, downloaded from http://www.jacksonprogressive.com/issues/kosovo/chossudovsky_lowintensity.html, 26 Aug. 2007.)

 

Endnotes

 

(13) See UNEP/UNCHS Balkans Task Force Final Report "The Kosovo Conflict -Consequences for the Environment & Human Settlements" at http://balkans.unep.ch/fry/fry.html; see the "desk study" on "The Potential Effects on Human Health and the Environment of the Possible Use of Depleted Uranium (DU)" at http://balkans.unep.ch/du/du.html; see also "UN considers New Data on Depleted Uranium in Kosovo", UNEP, Geneva, 20 September 2000.

 

(14) See Michel Chossudovsky, “NATO Willfully Triggered an Environmental Disaster,” at www.emperors-clothes.com.

 

(15) See the 1999 UNEP "desk study", op. cit.

 

(16) According to a toxicologist at the International Agency for Research on Cancer which is a division of the WHO, Associated Press, January 5 2001.

 

(17) According to WHO specialist, quoted in the Boston Globe, January 10, 2001.

 

(18) Boston Globe, June 27 2000, statement of Mark Parkin, an expert with the International Agency for Research on Cancer.

 

(19) See UNEP Press Release at http://balkans.unep.ch/du/missions.html).

 

(20) See AC Laboratorium Spiez (ACLS) website at http://www.vbs.admin.ch/internet/gr/acls/e/index.htm).

 

(21) Ibid

 

(22) See UNEP Press Release at http://balkans.unep.ch/du/missions.html; see also UNEP, "Advisory Note on Current work on DU by UNEP" at. http://balkans.unep.ch/press/press010111.html.

 

The UN says the existing data suggest it is "highly unlikely" DU could be linked to any of the health problems reported.

 

But it recommends collecting DU fragments, covering contaminated points with asphalt or clean soil, and keeping records of contaminated sites.

(Alex Kirby, “US Rejects Iraq DU Clean-up,” BBC News, 14 April 2003, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/2946715.stm, downloaded 29 Aug. 2007.)

 

Media are Complicit in Cover-up

 

At present, the evidence suggests that there is little to worry about unless the metal [DU] is actually inside a person. However, the absolute risks are unknown and it may take decades of monitoring before we know how bad the problems are.

 

As it stands, smoking cigarettes will kill you far more quickly than being exposed to depleted uranium.   (Alok Jha, “Depleted Uranium,” Guardian, 25 Apr. 2003, downloaded from http://www.guardian.co.uk/uranium/story/0,,943633,00.html, 12 Sept. 2007.)

 

STEVE O’BRIEN:  A few moments ago we heard Greg Hunter's investigation on depleted uranium and the danger it may pose for U.S. troops in Iraq. Chief medical correspondent Dr. Sanjay Gupta joins us from Atlanta on more with the medical side of this mystery.

Sanjay, good morning. So first things first, what are the symptoms of D.U. poisoning?

DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: There's sort of short-term symptoms and longer-term symptoms, and, you know, this is a difficult thing. The jury is still out among many researchers in terms of what's causing when and at what time.

But if you look at some of the early things, you can get things like nausea and vomiting as your G.I. tract sort of reacts to the depleted uranium. Also, kidney problems potentially and skin lesions.

There have been some case reports that it could possibly cause irritability and behavioral changes, as well, but that's not really nailed down.

Longer term, it can get a little bit more complicated. You might develop things like an immune system damage. So you could actually suppress your white blood cells, those sort of -- those fighting cells of infection.

Lung cancer potentially as well, although, again, it's somewhat controversial studies. And potentially birth defects in the offspring of people who were exposed to depleted uranium, as well.

Alina, I should say -- I think as Greg pointed out as well, the depleted uranium and its potential link to Gulf War syndrome is one of the most controversial things probably that exists in medicine. A lot of people sort of focused on it. Probably not enough studies as of yet, still.

CHO: All right. So what about treatment? Is there any treatment for this?

GUPTA: Well, not really. I mean, first of all, it's very hard to know, for example, if someone has actually been exposed. You can test it in the blood. You can actually get some blood tests that will tell if you have higher levels of the particular isotope associated with depleted uranium, but for the most part you've got to let the thing sort of run out its course.

It can cause damage to cells, and if those cells actually turn into tumor cells, for example, you obviously have to treat the cancer or remove the tumor, but it's hard to treat symptoms of depleted uranium poisoning overall. (Transcript of CNN's "American Morning," 5 Feb. 2007, downloaded from
http://home.earthlink.net/~nomoredu/cnntranscript.html, 12 Sept. 2007.)

 

British Radiation Monitoring Agency Owned by Halliburton

 

Out of concern for the public, the official British government air monitoring facility, known as the Atomic Weapons Establishment (AWE), at Aldermaston, was established years ago to measure radioactive emissions from British nuclear power plants and atomic weapons facilities.

 

The British government facility (AWE) was taken over 3 years ago by Halliburton, which refused at first to release air monitoring data to Dr. Busby, as required by law. (Leuren Moret, “The Queen’s Death Star: Depleted Uranium Measured in British Atmosphere from Battlefields in the Middle East,” Mindfully.org, 26 Feb. 2006, downloaded from http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2006/DU-Europe-Moret26feb06.htm, 30 Aug. 2007.)

 

Aldermaston is one of many nuclear facilities throughout Europe that regularly monitor atmospheric radiation levels, transported by atmospheric sand and dust storms, or air currents, from radiation sources in North Africa, the Middle East and Central Asia.

 

After the "Shock and Awe" campaign in Iraq in 2003, very fine particles of depleted uranium were captured with larger sand and dust particles in filters in Britain.

 

These particles traveled in 7-9 days from Iraqi battlefields as far as 2400 miles away.

 

The radiation measured in the atmosphere quadrupled within a few weeks after the beginning of the 2003 campaign, and at one of the 5 monitoring locations, the levels twice required an official alert to the British Environment Agency.

 

In addition to depleted uranium data gathered in previous studies on Kosovo and Bosnia by Dr. Busby, the Aldermaston air monitoring data provided a continuous record of depleted uranium levels in Britain from the other recent wars.

 

Extensive video news footage of the 2003 Iraq war, including Fallujah in 2004, provided irrefutable documented evidence that the US has unethically and illegally used depleted uranium munitions on cities and other civilian populations.

 

These military actions are in direct violation of not only the international conventions, but also violate US military law because the US is a signatory to The Hague and Geneva Conventions and the 1925 Geneva Gas Protocol. (Leuren Moret, “The Queen’s Death Star: Depleted Uranium Measured in British Atmosphere from Battlefields in the Middle East,” Mindfully.org, 26 Feb. 2006, downloaded from http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2006/DU-Europe-Moret26feb06.htm, 30 Aug. 2007.)

 

Halliburton Given Contract to “Clean up” DU Damage to Kuwait

 

In 1992, Major Doug Rokke, the Director of the U.S. Army Depleted Uranium Cleanup Project after Gulf War I, was ordered by a U.S. Army General officer to write a no-bid contract "Depleted Uranium, Contaminated Equipment, and Facilities Recovery Plan Outline" for the procedures for cleaning up Kuwait, including depleted uranium, for Kellogg, Brown and Root (KBR), a subsidiary of Halliburton.

 

The contract/proposal was passed through Madeleine Albright, the Secretary of State, to the Emirate of Kuwait, who considered the terms and then hired KBR for the cleanup. (Leuren Moret, “The Queen’s Death Star: Depleted Uranium Measured in British Atmosphere from Battlefields in the Middle East,” Mindfully.org, 26 Feb. 2006, downloaded from http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2006/DU-Europe-Moret26feb06.htm, 30 Aug. 2007.)

 

 

Intimidation of DU Activists

 

An Air Force officer is even stalking the internet, trying to intimidate anyone who suggests DU is anything but benign. (Craig Etcheson, Ph.D., “Depleted Uranium: Pernicious Killer Keeps on Killing,” t r u t h o u t, 19 February 2007.  Craig Etchison, Ph.D, is from the Center for Nonviolent Alternatives, Fort Ashby, W.Va.)

 

From: rhelbig@california.com
To: anonymous1122@hotmail.com
Subject: Depleted Uranium
Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2007 17:34:08 -0700
 
I see where you still "publish" material in which you claim that Leuren Moret and Douglas Lind Rokke are "radiation experts" .. neither one of them is an expert in anything pertaining to DU -- they both are just slick self-promoters .. are you a slick self-promoter too. Your latest about Bush being DU contaminated is pure rubbish .. there is no DU contamination much farther than a few yards from each wrecked tank. You are the one poisoning the world with their lies. I presume that you really have no scientific education or experience at all. If you do, explain why you believe the trash that Moret and Rokke have posted. Do you also think that government agents have kidnapped your kid, Moret makes that claim, or forced your car off the road, Rokke has.

Roger W Helbig

 

 

Create a Free Website