"Each time a person stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others. . .they send forth a ripple of hope, and crossing each other from a million different centers of energy and daring, those ripples build a current that can sweep down the mightiest walls of oppression and resistance."Robert F. Kennedy
Using grade school physics of both Newtonian and Nuclear models, does anyone foresee counter currents of sufficient size to minimize/change direction of the huge 'Tsunami' roaring down on us, taking away not only our Freedom, but our Lives? Regardless if our salaries are dependant on us not knowing the inconvenient truths of reality (global warming, corporate rule, stagnant energy science) portrayed by the rare articles in the news media? I know only one - a free science, our window to Reality - that easily resolves the Foundational Problem of Quantum Physics and takes E=MC2 out of Kindergarten

Full Text Individual Post Reading

Thursday, May 31, 2007

Putin: U.S. Pursuing "Imperialist" Policy

Perhaps a tour down the perceptual "illusions, delusions, deceptions and reality" lane may spark interest and action to retrieve and/or redevelop the long past due and suppressed energy systems that are INDISPENSABLE to survival for growing and increasingly complex civilizations: Illusions Delusions Deceptions & reality - The Joker There is an added bonus by-product, that comes with new energy science theory integration, called Wisdom and Approach to Understanding. The new scientific comprehension eliminates the caveman 'club/stick' conflict resolution methods still used in the 21st century. Besides, caveman club/stick methods do not work well with nuclear toys, as they threaten all of humanity


Putin: U.S. Pursuing "Imperialist" Policy
(AP) MOSCOW, May 31, 2007
(AP) President Vladimir Putin said Thursday that Russia's test-firing of new missiles this week was a response to U.S. plans to build missile defense sites across Europe, and suggested Washington is pursuing an imperialist policy that has triggered a new arms race. In a clear reference to the United States, Putin harshly criticized "diktat and imperialism" in global affairs and warned that Russia will keep strengthening its military potential to maintain a global strategic balance. "It wasn't us who initiated a new round of arms race," Putin said when asked about Russia's missile tests this week at a news conference in Moscow. In Washington, White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe indicated that Moscow's tests only underscore the U.S. contention that the missile defense system would not be a threat to Russia. "Russia's strong missile capabilities are no match for our European missile defense plans and will not upset the strategic balance in the region," Johndroe said. Putin described the tests of a new ballistic missile capable of carrying multiple nuclear warheads and a new cruise missile as part of the Russian response to the planned deployment of new U.S. military bases and missile defense sites in ex-Soviet satellites in eastern Europe. He assailed the United States and other NATO members for failing to ratify an amended version of the 1990 Conventional Forces in Europe treaty, which limits the deployment of heavy non-nuclear weapons around the continent. "We have signed and ratified the CFE and are fully implementing it. We have pulled out all our heavy weapons from the European part of Russia to (locations) behind the Ural Mountains and cut our military by 300,000 men," Putin said. "And what about our partners? They are filling Eastern Europe with new weapons. A new base in Bulgaria, another one in Romania, a (missile defense) site in Poland and a radar in the Czech Republic," he said. "What we are supposed to do? We can't just sit back and look at that." Putin and other Russian officials have repeatedly rejected U.S. assurances that the planned missile defense installations are meant to counter a potential threat from nations such as Iran and pose no danger to Russia. He reaffirmed his warning that Russia would opt out of the CFE treaty altogether if NATO nations fail to ratify its amended version. "Either you ratify the treaty and start observing it, or we will opt out of it," Putin said. In remarks directed at Washington, Putin blasted those "who want to dictate their will to all others regardless of international norms and law." "It's dangerous and harmful," he added. "Norms of the international law were replaced with political expediency. We view it as diktat and imperialism." In one of the tests Tuesday, a prototype of Russia's new intercontinental ballistic missile, called the RS-24, was fired from a mobile launcher at the Plesetsk launch site in northwestern Russia and its test warhead landed on target 3,400 miles away on the Kamchatka Peninsula in the far eastern part of the country, officials said. Deploying a new missile capable of carrying multiple nuclear warheads could allow Russia to maintain nuclear parity with the United States despite having to gradually decommission Soviet-built ICBMs. The military also tested a new cruise missile based on the existing short-range Iskander missile. First Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Ivanov, widely seen as a potential Kremlin candidate to succeed Putin, hailed the missile's capability on Thursday. "It can be used at long range with surgical precision, as doctors say" Ivanov said, according to the ITAR-Tass news agency. "Russia needs this weapon to maintain strategic stability." ITAR-Tass said Thursday the new cruise missile, R-500, will have a range of up to 310 miles, the limit under a Soviet-era treaty that banned intermediate-range missiles. Putin and other officials have called the treaty outdated but have not said Russia would opt out of it.

Tuesday, May 29, 2007

NASA: Danger Point Closer Than Thought From Warming


Perhaps a tour down the perceptual "illusions, delusions, deceptions and reality" lane may spark interest and action to retrieve and/or redevelop the long past due and suppressed energy systems that are INDISPENSABLE to survival for growing and increasingly complex civilizations: Illusions Delusions Deceptions & reality - The Joker There is an added bonus by-product, that comes with new energy science theory integration, called Wisdom and Approach to Understanding.

NASA: Danger Point Closer Than Thought From Warming
'Disastrous Effects' of Global Warming Tipping Points Near, According to New Study
By BILL BLAKEMORE
May 29, 2007 —
Even "moderate additional" greenhouse emissions are likely to push Earth past "critical tipping points" with "dangerous consequences for the planet," according to research conducted by NASA and the Columbia University Earth Institute.
With just 10 more years of "business as usual" emissions from the burning of coal, oil and gas, says the NASA/Columbia paper, "it becomes impractical" to avoid "disastrous effects."
The study appears in the journal Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics. Its lead author is James Hansen, director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York.
The forecast effects include "increasingly rapid sea-level rise, increased frequency of droughts and floods, and increased stress on wildlife and plants due to rapidly shifting climate zones," according to the NASA announcement.
Recent Climate Reports Underestimated How Soon
By heralding the new research paper, NASA is endorsing science that places considerably more urgency on the need to reduce emissions to avoid "disastrous effects" of global warming than was evident in the recent reports from the world's scientists coordinated by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
The new NASA release emphasizes the danger of "strong amplifying feedbacks" pushing Earth past "dangerous tipping points."
Scientists have been warning for several years that such tipping points are the greatest threat from manmade global warming  and what makes it potentially catastrophic for civilization.
'Potentially Uncontrollable' Feedback Loops
As the tipping points pass, "there is an acceleration, potentially uncontrollable, of emissions of vast natural stores of greenhouse gas," according to Hansen, who reviewed the study for ABC News today.
Hansen explains that dangerous feedback loops are being tracked in various regions of the planet.
Many studies have reported feedback loops already observed in thawing tundra, seabeds and drying forests.
Hansen also points out that dark  and therefore heat-absorbing  forests are now expanding toward the Arctic, replacing lighter-colored areas such as tundra and snow cover.
The NASA research also reasserts the importance of the disappearing Arctic sea ice and snow, whose reflectivity has helped cool the planet by bouncing warm sunlight straight back into space.
The disappearance of that bright sea ice and snow is uncovering more and more dark water and bare ground  creating another dangerous feedback loop.
These feedbacks all produce more heat, thus all reinforcing each other, leading to evermore thawing  and thus releases of natural greenhouse gases (including CO2 and methane) in a viciously accelerating circle.
450 Parts Per Million
The recent IPCC summaries entertained "scenarios" of CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere ranging from 450 parts per million (ppm) up through 550 ppm and 650 ppm.
This new research says "C02 exceeding 450 ppm is almost surely dangerous."
Hansen told ABC News today he believes the upper limit for avoiding dangerous climate change "could well be much lower" than 450 ppm.
In the NASA announcement, Hansen said, "'business as usual' emissions would be a guarantee of global and regional disaster."
Earth's CO2 concentration is currently 383 ppm, up from 280 ppm at the start of the industrial age.
Studies released earlier this month report human-made emissions now spiraling upward at an accelerating rate much faster than scientists expected only a few years ago.
The NASA release points out that a 1992 treaty was "signed (and ratified) & by the United States and almost all nations of the world," which "has the goal to stabilize atmospheric greenhouse gases 'at a level that prevents dangerous human-made interference with the climate system.' "
NASA says this new study thus helps "define practical implications" of that 1992 treaty  the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.
The study says that "only moderate additional climate forcing (which would mean only moderate additional warming from such emissions) is likely to set in motion the disintegration of the West Antarctic ice sheet"  dubbed WAIS by polar scientists.
Many scientists say a disintegration of WAIS would mean catastrophically rapid sea-level rise.
The NASA/Columbia study is co-written by 48 scientists in the United States and France.

Russia: New Missiles Are Unstoppable

Perhaps a tour down the perceptual "illusions, delusions, deceptions and reality" lane may spark interest and action to retrieve and/or redevelop the long past due and suppressed energy systems that are INDISPENSABLE to survival for growing and increasingly complex civilizations: Illusions Delusions Deceptions & reality - The Joker
There is an added bonus by-product, that comes with new energy science theory integration, called Wisdom and Approach to Understanding. The new scientific comprehension eliminates the caveman 'club/stick' conflict resolution methods still used in the 21st century. Besides, caveman club/stick methods do not work well with nuclear toys, as they threaten all of humanity

Russia: New Missiles Are Unstoppable
MOSCOW, May 29, 2007
(CBS/AP) A senior Russian official said strategic and tactical missiles tested Tuesday can penetrate any missile defense system, Russian news agencies reported. "As of today Russia has new (missiles) that are capable of overcoming any existing or future missile defense systems," ITAR-Tass quoted First Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Ivanov as saying. "So in terms of defense and security Russian can look calmly to the country's future." Ivanov spoke after the Russian Strategic Missile Forces announced the test of a new intercontinental ballistic missile capable of carrying multiple independent warheads. He said Russia had also successfully tested a tactical cruise missile. "Reminiscent of the Cold War arm's race, the Russian missile launch appears to have been intended to send a message opposing the U.S. deployment of missile defense systems in Poland and the Czech Republic," said CBS News foreign affairs analyst Pamela Falk from the United Nations. President Vladimir Putin and Ivanov, a former defense minister seen as a potential candidate to succeed Putin in elections next year, have repeatedly said Russia would continue to improve its nuclear weapons systems and respond to U.S. plans to deploy a missile defense system in Europe. The ICBM, called the RS-24, was fired from a mobile launcher at the Plesetsk launch pad in northwestern Russia. Its test warhead landed on target some 3,400 miles away on the Far Eastern Kamchatka Peninsula, a statement from the Strategic Missile Forces said. The new missile is seen as eventually replacing the aging RS-18s and RS-20s that are the backbone of the country's missile forces, the statement said. Those missiles are known in the West as the SS-19 Stiletto and the SS-18 Satan. Ivanov said the missile was a new version of the Topol-M, first known as the SS-27 in the West, but one that that can carry multiple independent warheads, ITAR-Tass reported. The first Topol-Ms were commissioned in 1997, but deployment has proceeded slower than planned because of a shortage of funds. Existing Topol-M missiles are capable of hitting targets more than 6,000 miles away. The RS-24 "strengthens the capability of the attack groups of the Strategic Missile Forces by surmounting anti-missile defense systems, at the same time strengthening the potential for nuclear deterrence," the statement said. The statement did not specify how many warheads the missile can carry. The new missile would likely be more capable of penetrating missile defense systems than previous models, said Alexander Pikayev, an arms control expert and senior analyst at the Moscow-based Institute for World Economy and International Relations. He said Russia had been working on a version of the Topol-M that could carry multiple warheads, and that its development was probably "inevitable" after the U.S. withdrew from the Soviet-era Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty in 2002, preventing the START-II treaty from coming into force. Pikayev concurred with the missile forces statement that the RS-24 conforms with terms laid down in the START-I treaty, which is in force, and the 2002 Moscow Treaty, which calls for reductions in each country's nuclear arsenal to 1,700-2,000 warheads. Alexander Golts, a respected military analyst with the Yezhenedelny Zhurnal online publication, expressed surprise at the announcement. "It seems to be a brand new missile. It's either a decoy or something that has been developed in complete secrecy," he told The Associated Press. The test comes at a time of increased tension between Russia and the West over missiles and other weapons issues. Russia adamantly opposes U.S. efforts to deploy elements of a missile-defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic. The United States says the system is aimed at blocking possible attacks by countries such as North Korea and Iran, but Russia says the system would destroy the strategic balance of forces in Europe. "We consider it harmful and dangerous to turn Europe into a powder keg," Putin said Tuesday, when asked at a news conference with Portuguese Prime Minister Jose Socrates about the controversy. Russia, meanwhile, called Monday for an emergency conference next month on a key Soviet-era arms control treaty that has been a source of increasing friction between Moscow and NATO. The call for a conference on the Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty follows last month's statement from Putin in which he declared a moratorium on observing Russia's obligations under the treaty. The treaty, which limits the number of aircraft, tanks and other non-nuclear heavy weapons around Europe, was first signed in 1990 and then amended in 1999 to reflect changes since the Soviet breakup. Russia has ratified the amended version, but the United States and other NATO members have refused to do so until Moscow withdraws troops from the former Soviet republics of Moldova and Georgia — an issue Moscow says is unrelated. Putin warned that Russia could dump the treaty altogether if Western nations refuse to ratify its amended version, and the Foreign Ministry said Monday that it lodged a formal request for a conference among treaty signatories in Vienna, Austria, on June 12-15.

Sunday, May 27, 2007

US 'opposes' G8 climate proposals


US 'isolated' - Greenpeace Director John Sauven described the US position as "criminal"
Perhaps a tour down the perceptual "illusions, delusions, deceptions and reality" lane may spark interest and action to retrieve and/or redevelop the long past due and suppressed energy systems that are INDISPENSABLE to survival for growing and increasingly complex civilizations Illusions Delusions Deceptions & reality - The Joker

US 'opposes' G8 climate proposals
The US appears to have rejected draft proposals by Germany for G8 members to agree tough measures in greenhouse gas emissions, leaked documents have shown.




Developing economies are at major risk from climate change



Wide-ranging US amendments to a draft communique prepared ahead of June's G8 in Germany summit cite a "fundamental opposition" to the proposals.
Germany wants all G8 members to agree timetables and targets for major cuts.
Greenpeace, who leaked the document, said it showed UK PM Tony Blair failed to persuade the US to alter its stance.
In the document, US officials make major changes to the communique.
In comments printed in red ink, the US negotiators express disappointment that earlier concerns have not been taken on board.

We have tried to 'tread lightly' but there is only so far we can go given our fundamental opposition to the German position US comments on leaked communique
The changes strike out entire sentences and significantly reduce the certainty with which the statement addresses climate change.
"The US still has serious, fundamental concerns about this draft statement," a red-inked note reads.
"The treatment of climate change runs counter to our overall position and crosses 'multiple red lines' in terms of what we simply cannot agree to," it continues.
"We have tried to 'tread lightly' but there is only so far we can go given our fundamental opposition to the German position."
However, in Washington, senior US lawmakers have written to President Bush expressing their dismay at the administration's position, the AFP news agency reports.
US 'isolated'
Correspondents say the document hints at a looming struggle over the issue of climate change at the G8 summit, to be held on 6-8 June in Heiligendamm, Germany.
Chancellor Angela Merkel wants to use Germany's presidency of the G8 to secure a major climate change deal, including:
Agreement to slow the rise in average temperatures this century to 2C
A cut in global emissions by 50% below 1990 levels by 2050
A rise in energy efficiency in power and transport by 20 percent by 2020.
Greenpeace Director John Sauven described the US position as "criminal".
"The US administration is clearly ignoring the global scientific consensus as well the groundswell of concern about climate change in the United States," he said.
Mrs Merkel should make it clear the US was isolated on the issue among G8 members, he added.
Speaking on 24 May, British Prime Minister Tony Blair suggested the US - could be on the verge of altering its climate policy.
The US has not signed the 2001 Kyoto Protocol, which sets out targets for lowering emissions until 2012.
"I can't think that there's going to be many people running for presidential office next time round in the US who aren't going to have climate change in their programme," said Mr Blair.
"I think it is possible that we will see action - and at least the beginnings of that action at the G8 - I hope so. That's what I'm arguing for."
Story from BBC NEWS:http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/science/nature/6694227.stmPublished: 2007/05/26

Saturday, May 26, 2007

US fears grow over China military


The U.S. defense budget will top $606 billion this year. Time will tell the Gifts we bring to ourselves and our children in the next few years - the major forces at play accelerating and foretelling our destination are in the headlines - science suppression causing the Trouble With Physics and creating the stagnant energy science is an extremely unwise and lethal choice as it also deprives us of the evolutionary wisdom and understanding that accompanies new energy revelations - all requirements for survival Evolution Freedom Survival The Promise of New Energy

US fears grow over China military
BBC: The US has expressed concern over China's growing military might.
A Pentagon report given to Congress says Beijing is spending far more on its military budget than admitted and calls for greater transparency.
The report highlights China's greater ability to mount pre-emptive strikes, citing new submarines, unmanned combat aircraft and sophisticated missiles.
China said in March it was increasing its military spending by 17.8% in 2007 but it still lags far behind the US.
The BBC's James Coomarasamy in Washington says the Pentagon paints a picture of a country whose growing economic and political power is being mirrored in "a comprehensive military transformation".
The annual report says Beijing is moving towards a more pre-emptive defence strategy with the focus on its border areas.

It would be nice to hear first-hand from the Chinese... we wish there were greater transparency, that they would talk more about what their intentions are Robert Gates US Defence Secretary
It suggests that the possibility of US intervention in any crisis in the Taiwan Strait is an important factor in China's military planning.
The report also describes a successful anti-satellite weapon test conducted by the Chinese in January as posing a threat to "all space-faring nations".
As in previous reports, there was strong complaint about a lack of transparency in both China's military spending and its military aims.
"It would be nice to hear first-hand from the Chinese... we wish there were greater transparency, that they would talk more about what their intentions are," US Defence Secretary Robert Gates said on Thursday, prior to the report's release.
Its publication comes at the end of a week when a high level Chinese delegation has been in Washington discussing areas of economic tension - and is a further sign that the levels of trust between Washington and Beijing are currently not very high, our correspondent says.
'Nuclear forces'
The Pentagon report highlights concerns about China's preparations to deploy a mobile, land-based ballistic missile, with a range that reportedly covers the entire United States.
The development of a new fleet of nuclear-powered submarines, equipped with ballistic missiles with a range of more than 8,000km (5,000 miles), is also cited.
Experts say the Jin-class vessels are capable of carrying 12 missiles, with each one armed with three nuclear warheads.
One of these Chinese-built submarines is currently undergoing tests, and five more are planned, says Andrew Yang of the Chinese Council for Advanced Policy Studies in Taiwan.
Previously China had just one nuclear-powered submarine, which was so unreliable it rarely travelled far from its base, Mr Yang said.
He added: "The Americans are concerned about whether a gradual build-up of nuclear forces implies China will change its nuclear policy of no first use."
Natural consequence
Over the last 15 years, China has been engaged in a massive military build-up and modernisation programme.
It plans to allocate 350.9bn yuan ($45.9bn) to its military this year, although some analysts say Beijing spends double or treble this amount.
However, the BBC's defence correspondent Rob Watson says US opinion is divided over the strategic challenge posed by China.
Some see it as an emerging threat that must be countered at every turn - others take a more benign view, seeing China's increased military expenditure as a natural consequence of its growing economic power, our correspondent says.
Story from BBC NEWS:http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/asia-pacific/6691691.stmPublished: 2007/05/25 20:17:12 GMT
CNN
Military pumps up China's influence, Pentagon says
Story Highlights
• Beijing modernizing force, strategy, according to report to Congress• Development "will increase Beijing's options for military coercion," report says• Army gaining capability to fight high-tech adversaries• Successful missile tests of particular concern, Pentagon says
(CNN) -- China's modernizing military will make it a more muscular player in world events, a U.S. Defense Department report says.
China's developing capabilities "will increase Beijing's options for military coercion to press diplomatic advantage, advance interests or resolve disputes," the Pentagon says in its annual report to Congress on China.
The Pentagon says that Beijing remains preoccupied with military contingencies in the Taiwan Strait -- but adds that the Chinese military is also improving its ability to win possible conflicts over resources or territory. (Watch how China has become a modern, high-tech adversary )
To that end, the report says, the Chinese army is transforming itself from a force designed to fight wars of attrition on its own territory to one capable of winning short but intense campaigns against high-tech adversaries.
It says China's military expansion is in part designed to protect its access to raw materials around the world, especially coal and oil supplies. At present, the report says, "China can neither protect its foreign energy supplies, nor the routes on which they travel."
The report notes key developments such as China's testing of an antisatellite missile in January and the greater accuracy and range of its missile forces, including intercontinental ballistic missiles.
"New air- and ground-launched cruise missiles that could perform nuclear missions will similarly improve the survivability and flexibility of China's nuclear forces," it adds.
It also says that China continues to modernize its Navy with better air-defense systems and new submarines, while its offensive air power has been improved with the acquisition of Su-30 strike aircraft and F-10 fighters.
Military spending continues to grow more quickly than the expansion of the economy, with Beijing announcing an increase of nearly 18 percent in its defense budget in March.
Looking at the situation with Taiwan, the report says the balance of forces continues to shift in the mainland's favor, with military exercises and deployments contributing to an atmosphere of intimidation. The report adds that tension could also increase as Taiwan prepares for its next presidential election, planned for March 2008.
Despite the pace of modernization, the report says, the People's Liberation Army remains untested in modern warfare and most of China's leaders lack military experience.
That gives rise to a greater potential for miscalculations, according to the report, which "would be equally catastrophic whether based on advice from operationally

Pentagon Worries About China Weapon Test
Guardian - Friday May 25, 2007 5:31 PM , By ROBERT BURNS, AP Military Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - China is improving its capacity for launching surprise military attacks along its border areas, reflecting its view that preemption is necessary when confronting a more powerful enemy, the Pentagon said Friday.
In its annual report to Congress on Chinese military developments, the Pentagon also said China's recent success at destroying a satellite in low-Earth orbit is a threat to the interests of all space-faring nations and posed dangers to human space flight.
In a section titled ``Is China Developing a Preemptive Strategy?'' the report cited as evidence the fact that the People's Liberation Army has been acquiring long-endurance submarines, unmanned combat aircraft, additional precision-guided air-to-ground missiles, and long-distance military communications systems.
Attempting to capture the essence of China's strategy, the report quoted former supreme leader Deng Xiaoping's guidance, known as the 24-character maxim, which says in part, ``hide our capacities and bide our time; be good at maintaining a low profile.''
``It suggests both a short-term desire to downplay China's capabilities and avoid confrontation, and a long-term strategy to build up China's power to maximize options for the future,'' the Pentagon report said.
Peter Rodman, who until early this year was the Pentagon's top Asia policy official, said in an interview Friday that there is reason for concern that China's long-range aim is to ``revise the existing balance of power in the world, but they are patient and they are just doing this quietly; they think long term.''
Rodman added that because U.S. officials are carefully and closely monitoring China's growing military strength and sophistication, ``We can handle this, we're no slouches ourselves at maintaining our capability.'' Rodman is now a foreign policy fellow at the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank.
The report said China's near-term focus is on preparing for a military crisis in the Taiwan Strait, where it continues to emplace more short-range ballistic missiles.
``However, analysis of China's military acquisitions and strategic thinking suggests Beijing is also generating capabilities for other regional contingencies, such as conflict over resources or territory,'' the report said.
Chinese military training that focuses on no-notice, long-range air strikes ``could also indicate planning for preemptive military options in advance of regional crises,'' the report said.
The Pentagon highlighted its concern about Beijing's anti-satellite test in which a missile was used to destroy one of China's old weather satellites in low-Earth polar orbit; the January test was China's first.
``The test put at risk the assets of all space-faring nations and posed dangers to human space flight due to the creation of an unprecedented amount of debris,'' the report said, adding that this is an important expansion of China's pursuit of weaponry and strategies that are designed to deny U.S. forces access to areas in Asia.
Rodman said the Bush administration knew in advance that China planned to conduct the January test but it chose not to address it with the Chinese because U.S. officials were convinced Beijing would go ahead with it regardless.
The anti-satellite capability demonstrated in the test is only one element of a multidimensional program to develop a capability to deny other nations access to outer space, the Pentagon asserted.
China has purchased UHF-band satellite communications jammers and is developing other technologies and concepts for weapons with anti-satellite missions, the report said. It also is improving its ability to identify and track satellites, ``a prerequisite for effective, precise physical attacks,'' the report added.
The report was presented to Congress on Friday, just days before Defense Secretary Robert Gates travels to Singapore to address an international conference on Asian security issues, where China is likely to be a key topic.
In previewing the report's release, Gates told reporters on Thursday that some of China's new capabilities are of concern to the United States but he did not provide details.
``We wish that there were greater transparency, that they would talk more about what their intentions are, what their strategies are,'' Gates said. ``It would be nice to hear firsthand from the Chinese how they view some of these things.''
China expanding military ability well beyond borders, study says
Peter Spiegel, Los Angeles Times
Saturday, May 26, 2007
(05-26) 04:00 PDT Washington -- China's military buildup remains focused on preventing Taiwan's independence but is expanding to include other regional military goals, including securing the flow of oil from overseas, according to an annual Pentagon study.
The 42-page report, required by Congress, found that Beijing's investment in offensive military capabilities along the Taiwan Strait has continued unabated. It has deployed more than 100 additional short-range missiles in the region over the past year, bringing its total aimed at Taiwan to about 900. China also has 400,000 of its 1.4 million soldiers based in the three military regions opposite Taiwan, the study said.
But Beijing's investment in military modernization -- which might have reached as much as $125 billion last year, according to the Defense Intelligence Agency, or triple the official $45 billion declared by Beijing -- has produced military systems that enable China to project force well beyond its shores.
Of particular concern, the report said, is the increasing ability of the People's Liberation Army to strike at an adversary's forces in the Pacific Ocean, a clear reference to U.S. bases in Asia and American naval forces that constantly patrol the region and that would rush to Taiwan in the event of a Chinese invasion.
"The PLA appears engaged in a sustained effort to develop the capability to interdict, at long ranges, aircraft carrier and expeditionary strike groups that might deploy into the western Pacific," the report stated.
In addition, the report said China is attempting to move its long-range nuclear forces out of vulnerable silos, basing them on more elusive submarines and ground-based mobile launchers.
The report reiterates the Pentagon's concern over China's successful anti-satellite missile test in January, saying it appeared to be part of a broad strategy designed to disable enemy satellites.
The Pentagon repeated its concern that China refuses to explain why it is investing so heavily in new weapons systems, a "lack of transparency" that is forcing the U.S. military to improve air and naval forces as a "hedge" against unknown Chinese designs.
One defense official who worked on the report said China has become more open about its intentions. Former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld accused China in 2005 of being increasingly provocative by hiding the reasons behind its buildup.
Last year, Beijing published a national security white paper generally describing its defense policies and the purpose of its military modernization, the official said on condition of anonymity.
Rumsfeld leveled his charge at an annual gathering of Asian defense ministers in Singapore, a conference that Defense Secretary Robert Gates will attend next week. Gates is expected to exhibit less brinksmanship.
The new report takes particular notice of China's increased need for oil from the Middle East and Africa and notes that the demands of growing energy consumption are beginning to shape the country's military and strategic thinking.
The higher estimates of Chinese spending would make its annual defense spending the world's second highest, but still only a fraction of the U.S. program. Including $170 billion in war spending, the U.S. defense budget will top $606 billion this year.
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/05/26/MNGGNQ20LQ1.DTL
This article appeared on page A - 10 of the San Francisco Chronicle

Wednesday, May 23, 2007

'Pattern of Deception'

Time will tell the Gifts we bring to ourselves and our children in the next few years - the major forces at play accelerating and foretelling our destination are in the headlines - science suppression causing the Trouble With Physics and creating the stagnant energy science is an extremely unwise and lethal choice as it also deprives us of the evolutionary wisdom and understanding that accompanies new energy revelations - all requirements for survival Evolution Freedom Survival The Promise of New Energy

Al Gore: 'I'm Not a Candidate'
New Book Accuses Bush Administration of 'Pattern of Deception'
By TERRY MORAN and MATT STUART
May 21, 2007 —
Former Vice President Al Gore is harshly critical of President Bush in his new book, "The Assault on Reason," in which he claims that "the current White House has engaged in an unprecedented and sustained campaign of mass deception."
In an interview with ABC News, Gore goes one step further on the war in Iraq, calling it "the worst strategic mistake in the whole history of the United States."
However, Gore refuses to place the blame squarely on Bush. "When our country made a decision to invade Iraq, it's too partisan to simply blame that on the current president," he said.
Despite his chapters focusing on "the politics of fear" and "democracy in the balance," Gore insists that "this is not a political book." Rather, he claims, the focus of the book is "the structural problems in the way we make decisions in our country."
'It's Not Like It Used to Be'
Gore also dismisses the notion that this is an "angry" book. But when asked if he agreed with President Carter's assertion that the current administration is "the worst in history," Gore refused to answer. "I've recently begun to fear that I've been losing my objectivity on Bush and Cheney. &You would rather have someone else do that."
Later in the interview, Gore acknowledges that he did feel he would have been a better president than Bush. "Anybody who runs for president, as I did twice, has the impression that they could do the job better than anyone else," he said.
Gore also said that the events in the period following the 2000 election were what led him to "examine what it is about the conversation of democracy that is not working well," and was the point at which he felt "it's not like it used to be here. Facts don't seem to matter as much."
Will He Run?
The book also covers other perceived problems in the United States, criticizing the Bush administration's decision "to lead by inciting fear" rather than courage, and dismissing claims that he himself is fear-mongering on the climate issue.
In the interview, the former vice president also addressed the ever present question of his potential candidacy for president in 2008.
Gore underscored in the interview that he is "not a candidate," and that he is "not looking for a set of circumstances that would open the door for me to get back into politics. I'm really not."
But he does leave some wiggle room for the possibility of running in 2008. "Look, we're a year and half away from this election," he said, "[I] see no need to say, 'OK. I'm not ever going to even think about that in the future.'"

Tuesday, May 22, 2007

Did FDA Know Of Avandia Dangers In 2002?

The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole - Carroll Quigley, President Clinton's history professor at Georgetown University, quoted from his book, Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time. Trust our lives to the ill defined corporate greedy guts model. Profit over Life? Contempt for life? Science suppression spells disaster in countless arenas of our lives - Evolution Freedom Survival The Promise of New Energy


Did FDA Know Of Avandia Dangers In 2002?
Years Ago, Agency Was Warned of a Drug’s Risks
WASHINGTON, May 22, 2007
(CBS/AP) The consumer advocacy organization Public Citizen claims that the Food and Drug Administration knew about problems associated with the diabetes drug Avandia for nearly five years. Avandia is linked to a greater risk of heart attack and possibly death, reported a new scientific analysis published online Monday. Pooled results of dozens of studies revealed a 43 percent higher risk of heart attack and a 64 percent greater risk of cardiovascular death, according to the review published by the New England Journal. Public Citizen sent a letter to the FDA complaining that an internal FDA memo from 2002 indicates that FDA scientists recommended labels for Avandia and Actos, another common diabetes drug, be changed to include a warning that there had been reports of heart failure for patients using the drugs. The group claims that despite the memo, the labels have not been changed. “The failure of the FDA to act on the recommendations made almost five years ago by its Division of Drug Risk Evaluation is yet another case in which the conclusions of scientists who are engaged in post-market drug safety review are not taken seriously enough or addressed soon enough,” said Dr. Sidney Wolfe, director of the Health Research Group at Public Citizen in a news release. “As a result, millions of people — to the detriment of their health — are prescribed drugs whose risks are dangerously understated, instead of being prescribed safer, equally or more effective alternative drugs.” The group has called on the FDA to either ban the drugs or include black-box warnings on their labels. Meanwhile, across the country, people who are taking Avandia are trying to figure out what to do. The American Diabetes Association has fielded 70 calls from patients since Monday's report in the New England Journal of Medicine that Avandia is linked to a significantly higher risk of heart attack and possibly death. Pat Russo is one of them. She has been taking Avandia for three years, but on Tuesday phoned her doctor when she read news reports that it might raise the risk of heart attack. “We're taking a wait-and-see approach,” said the 60-year-old business manager from Pennsylvania. For now, Russo's doctor has advised her to stay on the medicine. And she has a checkup scheduled in a few weeks. Avandia’s maker, British-based GlaxoSmithKline PLC, contends the drug is safe and that more rigorous studies did not confirm a higher heart attack risk. Most experts say the actual risk to any single patient does appear to be small but that more studies are needed. The suggestion of a greater heart risk is especially troubling, though, because two-thirds of diabetics die of heart problems. More than 6 million people worldwide have taken Avandia since it came on the market in 1999 to treat Type 2, the most common form of diabetes and the one linked with obesity. About 1 million Americans are currently taking Avandia, which sells between $90 and $170 for a one-month supply. Its U.S. sales topped $2.2 billion last year. The Gonda Diabetes Center at the University of California, Los Angeles has answered at least 10 calls and individual doctors have received scores of e-mails from patients. Dr. Andrew Drexler, the center's medical director, routinely prescribes Avandia to his patients and has seen their blood sugar levels stabilize. But Drexler said he will be more cautious about prescribing the drug in light of the potential heart risks raised in the New England Journal analysis co-authored by Cleveland cardiologist Dr. Steven Nissen. “There's definitely concern and confusion,” Drexler said. “We need more information.” On Monday, the American Diabetes Association and two influential heart groups jointly released a statement advising diabetics to talk to their doctors before stopping any medication. The Food and Drug Administration issued a safety alert about the potential risks but did not ask for a recall because of ongoing studies that suggest a contradictory effect. That has left some patients like Russo in limbo. High blood sugar in diabetics can lead to heart disease, kidney failure, stroke, blindness and amputation. Diet and exercise are recommended to control blood sugar, but medication is often needed too. Russo also worries that if she quits Avandia, she'll experience blurry vision and fatigue that will hamper her lifestyle. On the other hand, she doesn't want to stay on a drug that could be unsafe. “You set yourself up for a death sentence,” she said.
© MMVII, CBS Interactive Inc

May 24, 2007
Years Ago, Agency Was Warned of a Drug’s Risks
By STEPHANIE SAUL and GARDINER HARRIS
A leading diabetes doctor sent the Food and Drug Administration a letter seven years ago that warned of the heart risks of the drug Avandia. And in the next year, the F.D.A. reprimanded the drug’s maker for playing down safety concerns, according to documents from 2000 and 2001.
The documents, found in a reporter’s search of the F.D.A.’s database, indicate that the agency had been warned of safety concerns with the Type 2 diabetes treatment Avandia, and that the drug’s maker, GlaxoSmithKline, was seeking to minimize Avandia’s risks, before some of the same cardiovascular concerns were brought to public attention on Monday in an article and an editorial in The New England Journal of Medicine.
The F.D.A. has acknowledged that the company alerted the agency to concerns about a cardiovascular risk as early as 2005, based on the company’s analysis.
Glaxo has challenged the significance of the data cited in the medical journal. And, along with the F.D.A., the company has said that it was too soon to draw conclusions that Avandia raises a Type 2 diabetes patient’s risk of heart attacks. But the documents from 2000 and 2001 indicate that concerns about the drug’s safety are by no means new.
The letter in 2000 to the F.D.A. was written by Dr. John B. Buse, chief of endocrinology at the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill, who is about to become the president of the American Diabetes Association. His letter from seven years ago sounded an alarm about Avandia, citing “a worrisome trend in cardiovascular deaths and severe adverse events” among patients using the drug.
In a telephone interview yesterday, Dr. Buse said that his opinion of Avandia had not changed since he wrote that letter. But he added yesterday that regulators should not rush to judgment by withdrawing Avandia from the market. Instead, he said, they should wait for the results of a larger study now being conducted by Glaxo that is meant to study the drug’s cardiovascular risks.
Avandia has been used by an estimated six million people in the United States since the agency approved it 1999. At the time, the company promoted Avandia as a safer alternative to a similar diabetes drug, Rezulin, which was withdrawn from the market in 2000 because it caused serious liver damage in some patients.
A Harvard professor who is a critic of the nation’s drug approval process, Dr. Jerome L. Avorn, yesterday drew parallels between the regulatory histories of Avandia and Rezulin, which had been a popular drug in its day.
With both drugs, “there were signals of a very dangerous side effect that were ignored,” he said. “Then massive marketing created a tremendous uptake of the drug.”
Last year, worldwide sales of Avandia exceeded $3 billion, making it one of Glaxo’s top-selling drugs.
The New England Journal of Medicine article, by the influential Cleveland Clinic heart specialist Dr. Steven E. Nissen, warned that the use of Avandia might significantly increase the risk of heart attacks. The extent of those possible risks had not been previously identified to the public.
Dr. Nissen has said that, according to his analysis, any person with Type 2 diabetes has a 20.2 percent chance of having a heart attack during a seven-year period. But with Avandia, he says, that seven-year risk would increase to 28.9 percent.
Glaxo has challenged the significance of Dr. Nissen’s analysis, which was developed by combining the results of more than 40 studies of the drug. Dr. Nissen has acknowledged that such studies, called meta-analyses, have limitations and are not as valid as controlled clinical trials.
As a result of Dr. Nissen’s article, the F.D.A. issued a safety advisory on Monday, suggesting that patients taking the drug consult their doctors. The agency also said that it planned to hold a meeting of outside advisers to review the drug’s safety. Among the options would be leaving it on the market with an even stronger warning — the drug’s label already alludes to the possibility of heart risks — or blocking its sale.
Even before Dr. Nissen had started working on his paper, Glaxo alerted the agency in 2005 and in 2006 that internal analyses had shown an increased risk of heart attacks. But the company also submitted a study of patients that it said showed Avandia was no riskier than other diabetes drugs. None of this analysis was specifically communicated to the public or doctors, although the company posted it on a Web site.
On Capitol Hill yesterday, agency officials explained their handling of Avandia to more than a dozen House and Senate staff members.
The briefing did little to settle concerns among some in Congress that the F.D.A. had been slow to alert patients about the drug’s potential risks to the heart, according to several staff members who were present and who spoke on condition of anonymity because the briefing was confidential.
Dr. Gerald J. Dal Pan, who leads the F.D.A.’s office of surveillance and epidemiology, told Congressional staff members that some in his office had disagreed with the agency’s actions regarding Avandia’s potential heart risk, several of those present said. Agency safety reviewers had been overruled by those in charge of drug approvals, staff members said.
No senators attended the meeting, but some commented afterward on the F.D.A.’s handling of Avandia.
“It’s unconscionable that F.D.A. found serious medical risks arising with Avandia and raised no red flags,” said Senator Max S. Baucus, Democrat of Montana and chairman of the Senate Finance Committee.
Senator Charles E. Grassley, Republican of Iowa, said that the agency’s inaction and internal dissension was further proof that legislation was needed to separate the agency’s approval and safety-assessment functions. Mr. Grassley had proposed such an amendment to a drug-safety bill that recently passed the Senate, but it lost by one vote.
The House will soon take up its version of F.D.A. legislation. Several staff members said that Mr. Grassley’s amendment has won new life.
In his letter to the agency, dated March 15, 2000, Dr. Buse was highly critical of the drug maker’s marketing of Avandia, accusing the company of “pervasive and systemic” efforts to play down the drug’s risks and overstate its benefits.
The F.D.A. was conducting its own investigation of Avandia marketing and found that company representatives were denying the existence of changes on the drug’s label that the F.D.A. had already ordered, which were meant to flag Avandia’s risks to the heart and liver.
The agency sent the drug maker a warning letter in July 2001, citing misleading statements made by company representatives at a recent meeting of the American Academy of Clinical Endocrinologists, where the agency had sent undercover investigators. The F.D.A’s letter criticized company posters displayed at the meeting, saying they did not carry adequate warnings.
It was the third time that the agency had chastised the company about its promotion of Avandia. Because of the repeated warnings, the agency demanded that the company send out a letter to doctors specifically warning them of the risks. The company subsequently sent out that “Dear Doctor” letter on Sept. 6, 2001.
In statement yesterday, a Glaxo spokeswoman, Mary Anne Rhyne, said that the company had “strongly disagreed” with the allegations in Dr. Buse’s March 2000 letter, “which we found to be unbalanced and unsubstantiated.”
“We took the time to meet and talk with Dr. Buse at length about his concerns,” Ms. Rhyne’s statement continued. “We explained our reasons for why we disagreed with his characterization of the cardiovascular safety profile of Avandia.”
As for the F.D.A.’s July 2001 warning letter, Ms. Rhyne said, “Action was taken at the time to ensure representatives of the company were accurately reflecting the label for the product in any commercial activity.”
Dr. Buse, as one of two incoming presidents of the diabetes association set to take office in September, has been widely quoted in media reports this week on Avandia. In that role, he has struck a neutral tone on the drug and urged patients not to panic. And yesterday, he said that the F.D.A. and doctors should wait for Glaxo’s study of Avandia’s cardiovascular effects.
But as a private doctor, Dr. Buse said that he does not generally prescribe Avandia to patients. He has been an outspoken critic of the drug in medical education meetings, some of them sponsored by Takeda and Eli Lilly, which jointly market a competing drug, Actos.
He was also an investigator in a study comparing Avandia with Actos, sponsored by Eli Lilly, that showed Actos had better effects on cholesterol than Avandia.
Dr. Buse said yesterday that he wrote the letter in 2000 in response to an F.D.A. petition filed by Dr. Sidney Wolfe, a consumer activist, who had asked the agency to place warning labels on Rezulin, Avandia and Actos.
Dr. Wolfe’s Health Research Group, a part of Public Citizen, has long warned patients not to use any of those drugs. At the time, the F.D.A. was considering removing Rezulin from the market, and Dr. Buse objected. Rezulin was made by Parke-Davis, a division of the Warner Lambert Company.
“The way I felt about it, after several years of clinical availability of Rezulin, we kind of understood the problems with it,” he said, “and we didn’t understand the problems of Actos and Avandia.”
Dr. Buse analyzed data submitted to the F.D.A. in support of Actos and Avandia and came to the conclusion that there was a “hint, a whisper” of cardiac-related deaths with Avandia as well as evidence of negative effects on cholesterol.
Referring to Avandia by its generic name, rosiglitazone, and to Rezulin as troglitazone, Dr. Buse wrote in the letter, “I do not believe that rosiglitazone will be proven safer than troglitazone in clinical use under current labeling of the two products.” He added: “In fact, rosiglitazone may be associated with less beneficial cardiac effects or even adverse cardiac outcomes.”
In the 2000 letter, Dr. Buse asked the agency to call for head-to-head studies of all the drugs.
Yesterday, he said, “I would say that in the last several years, there has not been a study that’s made me feel better about this.”

Sunday, May 20, 2007

Polar ocean 'soaking up less CO2'

Time will tell the Gifts we bring to ourselves and our children in the next few years - the major forces at play accelerating and foretelling our destination are in the headlines - science suppression causing the Trouble With Physics and creating the stagnant energy science is an extremely unwise and lethal choice as it also deprives us of the evolutionary wisdom and understanding that accompanies new energy revelations - all requirements for survival Evolution Freedom Survival The Promise of New Energy


Polar ocean 'soaking up less CO2'
By Paul Rincon Science reporter, BBC News
One of Earth's most important absorbers of carbon dioxide (CO2) is failing to soak up as much of the greenhouse gas as it was expected to, scientists say.
The decline of Antarctica's Southern Ocean carbon "sink" - or reservoir - means that atmospheric CO2 levels may be higher in future than predicted.
These carbon sinks are vital as they mop up excess CO2 from the atmosphere, slowing down global warming.
The study, by an international team, is published in the journal Science.
This effect had been predicted by climate scientists, and is taken into account - to some extent - by climate models. But it appears to be happening 40 years ahead of schedule.
The data will help refine models of the Earth's climate, including those upon which the predictions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are based.

Of all the CO2 emitted into the atmosphere, only half of it stays there; the rest goes into carbon sinks.
There are two major natural carbon sinks: the oceans and the land "biosphere". They are equivalent in size, each absorbing a quarter of all CO2 emissions.
The Southern Ocean is thought to account for about 15% of all carbon sinks.
Sink efficiency
It was assumed that, as human activities released more CO2 into the atmosphere, ocean sinks would keep pace, absorbing a comparable percentage of this greenhouse gas.
The breakdown in efficiency of these sinks was an expected outcome, but not until the second half of the 21st Century.
Lead researcher Corinne Le Quere and colleagues collected atmospheric CO2 data from 11 stations in the Southern Ocean and 40 stations across the globe.
Measurements of atmospheric CO2 allowed them to infer how much carbon dioxide was taken up by sinks. The team was then able to see how efficient they were in comparison to one another at absorbing CO2.
"Ever since observations started in 1981, we see that the sinks have not increased [in their absorption of CO2]," Corinne LeQuere told the BBC's Science in Action programme.
"They have remained the same as they were 24 years ago even though the emissions have risen by 40%."
The cause of the decline in the Southern Ocean sink, the researchers explain, is a rise in windiness since 1958.
This increase in Southern Ocean winds has been attributed to two factors.
The first is the depletion of ozone in the upper atmosphere, which changes the temperature of this region.
The second is recent climate change, which warms the tropics more than the Southern Ocean.
Both these processes change atmospheric circulation over the Southern Ocean, resulting in stronger winds.
Churning waters
Oceans store much of their CO2 in deep waters. But, explained Dr Le Quere, "as the winds increase, the water in the ocean mixes more".
The British Antarctic Survey (BAS) scientist added: "The CO2 that would normally be in the deep ocean and would just stay there instead gets brought up to the surface and outgasses to the atmosphere."
The ocean surface becomes saturated with CO2 and cannot take up any more from the atmosphere.
Dr Sus Honjo, from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI) in Massachusetts, US, is working on a separate project to assess the efficiency of the Southern Ocean carbon sink, using a different method.
He said recent developments in technology now made possible very detailed monitoring of marine carbon sinks, with some data available in real time.
"We have been way behind the modellers, who are hungry for numbers. But now we are starting to catch up because of the new tools and instruments available," he told BBC News.
Dr Honjo said recent evidence suggested the north-western Pacific appeared to be another significant CO2 sink.
As CO2 is absorbed by the oceans, it makes them more acidic, harming populations of marine organisms such as coral. The latest study suggests that phenomenon will only get worse over the century.
"The problem is that the extra CO2 from human emissions stays in the surface ocean and does not get removed to deep waters," said Dr Le Quere.
"So the problem gets worse, because the biological organisms affected by ocean acidification live, of course, at the surface where there is sunlight."
mailto:Paul.Rincon-INTERNET@bbc.co.uk
Story from BBC NEWS:http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/science/nature/6665147.stmPublished: 2007/05/17 21:21:28 GMT

THE ATOMIC BAZAAR - The Rise of the Nuclear Poor

Time will tell the Gifts we bring to ourselves and our children in the next few years - the major forces at play accelerating and foretelling our destination are in the headlines - science suppression causing the Trouble With Physics and creating the stagnant energy science is an extremely unwise and lethal choice as it also deprives us of the evolutionary wisdom and understanding that accompanies new energy revelations - all requirements for survival Evolution Freedom Survival The Promise of New Energy

NYT May 20, 2007 The Nuclear Threat By JONATHAN RABAN





THE ATOMIC BAZAAR
The Rise of the Nuclear Poor
.
By William Langewiesche.
179 pp. Farrar, Straus & Giroux. $22.
One need read only the first three pages of “The Atomic Bazaar” to be reminded of William Langewiesche’s formidable talent as a journalist whose cool, precise and economical reporting is harnessed to an invigorating moral and intellectual perspective on the world he describes. In a single paragraph, he lucidly explains the basic physics of the uranium-based atomic bomb that destroyed Hiroshima. Once a professional pilot, and the author of “Inside the Sky,” Langewiesche then leads the reader inside the “pressurized, well-heated” cockpit of the Enola Gay, flying at 31,000 feet in “smooth air,” piloted by the young Colonel Paul Tibbets, and vividly reconstructs the evasive maneuver taken by the B-29 as it banks steeply to minimize the coming shockwaves, while the bomb, named Little Boy, falls for 43 seconds before igniting several miles below, lighting the sky with “the prettiest blues and pinks that Tibbets had ever seen.” Tibbets’s subsequent career, from Air Force general to Internet purveyor of autographed souvenirs of that momentous flight, is adroitly sketched. The bombing of Nagasaki three days after Hiroshima, with a plutonium device, is handled in brisk but sufficient detail. Langewiesche counts the total killed in the two attacks (around 220,000), then delivers his own one-sentence bomb: “The intent was to terrorize a nation to the maximum extent, and there is nothing like nuking civilians to achieve that effect.”
There’s no missing the incendiary effect of the word “terrorize,” slyly linking the American attacks on Japanese cities in 1945 and Al Qaeda’s attacks on Manhattan and the Pentagon in 2001. Terrorism as a means of warfare is not confined to so-called nonstate actors like Mohamed Atta and his colleagues, but is habitually employed by nation states, including the United States. In 1958, Albert Wohlstetter, the cold war strategist (and guru to many current players on the scene, including Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Perle), published an influential article whose title, “The Delicate Balance of Terror,” succinctly characterized the cold war itself. The chief purpose of nuclear weapons is to terrorize: “mutual deterrence” is simply a euphemism for mutual terror.
On our comprehensively terrorized globe, almost everybody, from covert, stateless bands of jihadists to accredited members of the United Nations, believes himself in need of either ready-made atomic bombs or the technology and expertise with which to manufacture them. “The nuclearization of the world,” Langewiesche writes, “has become the human condition, and it cannot be changed.” It is with that grim but realistic assumption in mind that he sets out on a long expedition, from Washington to Holland, Pakistan, Russia, Georgia and Turkey, in order to discover just how hard or easy it now is for a nuclear aspirant, private or national, to gain possession of such weapons or technology.
First, he adopts the mindset of an imaginative and resourceful jihadist in search of a single device, powerful enough to devastate a city’s downtown. The famed black market in Soviet-era “loose nukes” and “suitcase bombs” turns out to be probably a myth, so Langewiesche, in terrorist disguise, has to shop elsewhere. Plutonium won’t work, for reasons that Langewiesche explains with his usual fluent grasp of technical detail; what’s needed are two small but immensely heavy brick-shaped or hemispherical pieces of highly enriched uranium (H.E.U.), huge numbers of which are stored in Russia’s closed nuclear cities in the southern Urals.
He flies to Ekaterinburg (often spelled with an initial Y in atlases) and from there scouts out one such closed city, Ozersk (population 85,000), a relatively prosperous enclave in a hardscrabble landscape of decrepit farms and toxic lakes and rivers. The 50 square miles of Ozersk and its nuclear facility, Mayak, are contained within a continuous double fence of chain-link and barbed wire. The guards who protect this atomic treasury have a reputation for drinking and taking drugs on the job, and for sometimes killing one another in brawls. Moreover, the United States-supplied radiation detectors are usually switched off, because they’re too sensitive for Ozersk’s radioactive environment, where a fish from the lake, carried in a worker’s bag, is enough to trigger a full-scale nuclear alert. All of this is good news for someone planning an armed raid, but Langewiesche rejects that option: the hue and cry raised after the theft would make escape from Russia with the precious bricks of H.E.U., though not impossible, uncomfortably hazardous.
He falls in with a garrulous American technician, who is escorted daily under guard into the nuclear cities but forbidden to live in them — a rich source of human intelligence and just the kind of contact a prospective terrorist would need. The technician describes the ramshackle security arrangements in the facility, how and where H.E.U. is kept and transported from building to building by truck. When he talks of a strange recent flood of money — the supermarket, transformed from Soviet-style bare shelves to a cornucopia of luxury goods, the sudden appearance of large houses with swimming pools, said to be owned by “plant managers” on government salaries — Langeweische scents his opportunity. “A culture of wealth without explanation” signals the “related culture of corruption.” So he imagines an inside job, with $5 million apiece to two workers eager to join the new gravy train.
With his blocks of H.E.U. in hand, as it were (and they have to be kept at least three feet apart), Langewiesche looks for an escape route. Kazakhstan, though temptingly close, is out for political reasons. He explores other likely crossing points, in Georgia (“one of the most corrupt nations on earth”) and at the Turkish border with Iran. Both frontiers are promisingly porous. In Georgia, the United States Department of Homeland Security has built a state-of-the-art port of entry, complete with a new six-lane highway, which smugglers cheerfully bypass, taking paths so well marked that they are almost roads. The Turkish border is controlled not by the government but by Kurdish tribal chiefs. One way or another, it will be no great feat to transport the stolen H.E.U. to Istanbul, where assembling it into a workable bomb will require a machine shop, a nuclear scientist, several technicians and up to four months of work. Then comes the problem of delivering the device to its target, either in a shipping container or aboard a chartered plane with a dedicated, suicidal pilot.
The most alarming thing about “The Atomic Bazaar” is its utter lack of alarmism. At every point, Langewiesche stresses the difficulties that confront the determined nuclear terrorist. Between Ozersk and an explosion in an American city lies an epic string of daunting obstacles. The terrorist would need to be gifted with an extraordinary run of luck. But none of these obstacles are, in themselves, insurmountable and, in the nearly lawless parts of the world described by Langewiesche, luck comes easily to anyone with millions in his pocket.
For nation states, it’s a different matter. The second half of the book is mainly devoted to the career of A. Q. Khan and his successful manufacture of the H.E.U.-based Pakistani bomb. Khan, a metallurgist, not a nuclear scientist, just happened to find employment at a Dutch consortium where uranium is enriched for peaceful purposes in a “cascade” of linked centrifuges, each spinning at a dizzying 70,000 r.p.m. With shocking ease, Khan copied the plans for centrifuges and bought parts for them mostly on the open market in Europe, marvelously unhindered by either nuclear proliferation treaties or export controls.
A vain man, with a taste for extravagant vacations and large houses, as well as an ambition to be known as a lavish philanthropist, Khan then set himself up as the Sears Roebuck-style supplier of packaged bomb-programs to the world. For sums of around $100 million (assembly required) Khan offered his wares to Libya, North Korea, Iran, either Syria or Saudi Arabia and probably other nations. As the result of a British and American interception, in 2003, of a shipload of centrifuge parts bound for Libya, bearing the clear signature of Khan’s operation, he is now under benign house arrest in Islamabad. But, as Langewiesche writes, there is a “likelihood that much of the network he established remains alive worldwide, and that by its very nature — loose, unstructured, technically specialized, determinedly amoral — it is both resilient and mutable and can resume its activities when the opportunity arises, as inevitably it will.” To quote the title and refrain of Tom Lehrer’s unfortunately evergreen 1965 song about nuclear proliferation: “Who’s next? Who’s next? Who’s next?” Lehrer’s prediction was Luxembourg, Monaco and Alabama. He was not far wrong. A Russian nuclear bureaucrat tells Langewiesche: “At some point this change occurred. The great powers were stuck with arsenals they could not use, and nuclear weapons became the weapons of the poor.”
The Atomic Bazaar” is an important book, but not a perfect one. The best nonfiction books, like good novels, have their own organic structure: chapter flows naturally into chapter, the architecture of the whole sustained by a multitude of subtle foreshadowings of what’s to come and subtle echoes of what has gone before. That is not how any book by Langewiesche works. Like its predecessors, “The Atomic Bazaar” comes with the curse of The Atlantic Monthly all too visible on its pages, its chapters like free-standing boxcars, loosely coupled by a large general theme — much as they appeared in separate issues of the magazine between November 2005 and December 2006. Too little work has gone into its translation from journalism to book. Though short, it’s littered with clunky repetitions and recapitulations, as when we’re repeatedly told what H.E.U. is and does, and A. Q. Khan twice falls from public grace. Again and again I found myself scribbling “Been there, done that” in the margins. This is a serious pity, for Langewiesche is such an outstandingly able writer that he owes the world a proper book, and not another piece of bookmaking whose individual parts are splendid but ultimately fail to compose a shapely, aesthetically satisfying and conclusive whole

TAMING THE GIANT CORPORATION

Time will tell the Gifts we bring to ourselves and our children in the next few years - the major forces at play accelerating and foretelling our destination are in the headlines - science suppression causing the Trouble With Physics and creating the stagnant energy science is an extremely unwise and lethal choice as it also deprives us of the evolutionary wisdom and understanding that accompanies new energy revelations - all requirements for survival Evolution Freedom Survival The Promise of New Energy


TAMING THE GIANT CORPORATION:
A National Conference on Corporate Accountability




Presented by Ralph Nader and The Center for Study of Responsive Law
June 8, 9 and 10, 2007 1530 P Street, NW Washington, DC 20005
The multinational corporation is the dominant institution in the global political economy. The toll it inflicts on people and the planet -- high drug prices, sweatshops, global warming, and on and on -- is well documented. But too little attention has been focused on the corporation itself, and the evolving forms of corporate power. "Taming the Giant Corporation" aims to identify, examine and classify the changing manifestations of corporate power. The conference's central, pioneering task is to facilitate discussion, debate and strategic thinking about how to subordinate corporate power to the will and interests of the people. How do we replace the excessive corporate privileges and immunities entrenched in law and the economy? Corporations were originally chartered by the states in the early nineteenth century to be our servants not our masters. How can we displace corporations (e.g., with national health insurance, by keeping information and knowledge in the public domain, or by expanding and strengthening the commons)? What tools and approaches can empower communities to set parameters on corporate activity? What countervailing institutions should be nurtured to offset concentrated corporate power? "Taming the Giant Corporation" will be an opportunity to learn, debate, meet leading advocates and activists, and grapple with the questions that must be answered if we are to strive for a just and livable world.

Bilking the Elderly, With a Corporate Assist

Time will tell the Gifts we bring to ourselves and our children in the next few years - the major forces at play accelerating and foretelling our destination are in the headlines - science suppression causing the Trouble With Physics and creating the stagnant energy science is an extremely unwise and lethal choice as it also deprives us of the evolutionary wisdom and understanding that accompanies new energy revelations - all requirements for survival Evolution Freedom Survival The Promise of New Energy
NYT May 20, 2007
Bilking the Elderly, With a Corporate Assist
By CHARLES DUHIGG
The thieves operated from small offices in Toronto and hangar-size rooms in India. Every night, working from lists of names and phone numbers, they called World War II veterans, retired schoolteachers and thousands of other elderly Americans and posed as government and insurance workers updating their files.
Then, the criminals emptied their victims’ bank accounts.
Richard Guthrie, a 92-year-old Army veteran, was one of those victims. He ended up on scam artists’ lists because his name, like millions of others, was sold by large companies to telemarketing criminals, who then turned to major banks to steal his life’s savings.
Mr. Guthrie, who lives in Iowa, had entered a few sweepstakes that caused his name to appear in a database advertised by infoUSA, one of the largest compilers of consumer information. InfoUSA sold his name, and data on scores of other elderly Americans, to known lawbreakers, regulators say.
InfoUSA advertised lists of “Elderly Opportunity Seekers,” 3.3 million older people “looking for ways to make money,” and “Suffering Seniors,” 4.7 million people with cancer or Alzheimer’s disease. “Oldies but Goodies” contained 500,000 gamblers over 55 years old, for 8.5 cents apiece. One list said: “These people are gullible. They want to believe that their luck can change.”
As Mr. Guthrie sat home alone — surrounded by his Purple Heart medal, photos of eight children and mementos of a wife who was buried nine years earlier — the telephone rang day and night. After criminals tricked him into revealing his banking information, they went to Wachovia, the nation’s fourth-largest bank, and raided his account, according to banking records.
“I loved getting those calls,” Mr. Guthrie said in an interview. “Since my wife passed away, I don’t have many people to talk with. I didn’t even know they were stealing from me until everything was gone.”
Telemarketing fraud, once limited to small-time thieves, has become a global criminal enterprise preying upon millions of elderly and other Americans every year, authorities say. Vast databases of names and personal information, sold to thieves by large publicly traded companies, have put almost anyone within reach of fraudulent telemarketers. And major banks have made it possible for criminals to dip into victims’ accounts without their authorization, according to court records.
The banks and companies that sell such services often confront evidence that they are used for fraud, according to thousands of banking documents, court filings and e-mail messages reviewed by The New York Times.
Although some companies, including Wachovia, have made refunds to victims who have complained, neither that bank nor infoUSA stopped working with criminals even after executives were warned that they were aiding continuing crimes, according to government investigators. Instead, those companies collected millions of dollars in fees from scam artists. (Neither company has been formally accused of wrongdoing by the authorities.)
“Only one kind of customer wants to buy lists of seniors interested in lotteries and sweepstakes: criminals,” said Sgt. Yves Leblanc of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. “If someone advertises a list by saying it contains gullible or elderly people, it’s like putting out a sign saying ‘Thieves welcome here.’ ”
In recent years, despite the creation of a national “do not call” registry, the legitimate telemarketing industry has grown, according to the Direct Marketing Association. Callers pitching insurance plans, subscriptions and precooked meals collected more than $177 billion in 2006, an increase of $4.5 billion since the federal do-not-call restrictions were put in place three years ago.
That growth can be partly attributed to the industry’s renewed focus on the elderly. Older Americans are perfect telemarketing customers, analysts say, because they are often at home, rely on delivery services, and are lonely for the companionship that telephone callers provide. Some researchers estimate that the elderly account for 30 percent of telemarketing sales — another example of how companies and investors are profiting from the growing numbers of Americans in their final years.
While many telemarketing pitches are for legitimate products, the number of scams aimed at older Americans is on the rise, the authorities say. In 2003, the Federal Trade Commission estimated that 11 percent of Americans over age 55 had been victims of consumer fraud. The following year, the Federal Bureau of Investigation shut down one telemarketing ring that stole more than $1 billion, spanned seven countries and resulted in 565 arrests. Since the start of last year, federal agencies have filed lawsuits or injunctions against at least 68 telemarketing companies and individuals accused of stealing more than $622 million.
“Most people have no idea how widespread and sophisticated telemarketing fraud has become,” said James Davis, a Federal Trade Commission lawyer. “It shocks even us.”
Many of the victims are people like Mr. Guthrie, whose name was among the millions that infoUSA sold to companies under investigation for fraud, according to regulators. Scam artists stole more than $100,000 from Mr. Guthrie, his family says. How they took much of it is unclear, because Mr. Guthrie’s memory is faulty and many financial records are incomplete.
What is certain is that a large sum was withdrawn from his account by thieves relying on Wachovia and other banks, according to banking and court records. Though 20 percent of the total amount stolen was recovered, investigators say the rest has gone to schemes too complicated to untangle.
Senior executives at infoUSA were contacted by telephone and e-mail messages at least 30 times. They did not respond.
Wachovia, in a statement, said that it had honored all requests for refunds and that it was cooperating with authorities.
Mr. Guthrie, however, says that thieves should have been prevented from getting access to his funds in the first place.
“I can’t understand why they were allowed inside my account,” said Mr. Guthrie, who lives near Des Moines. “I just chatted with this woman for a few minutes, and the next thing I knew, they took everything I had.”
Sweepstakes a Common Tactic
Investigators suspect that Mr. Guthrie’s name first appeared on a list used by scam artists around 2002, after he filled out a few contest entries that asked about his buying habits and other personal information.
He had lived alone since his wife died. Five of his eight children had moved away from the farm. Mr. Guthrie survived on roughly $800 that he received from Social Security each month. Because painful arthritis kept him home, he spent many mornings organizing the mail, filling out sweepstakes entries and listening to big-band albums as he chatted with telemarketers.
“I really enjoyed those calls,” Mr. Guthrie said. “One gal in particular loved to hear stories about when I was younger.”
Some of those entries and calls, however, were intended solely to create databases of information on millions of elderly Americans. Many sweepstakes were fakes, investigators say, and existed only to ask entrants about shopping habits, religion or other personal details. Databases of such responses can be profitably sold, often via electronic download, through list brokers like Walter Karl Inc., a division of infoUSA.
The list brokering industry has existed for decades, primarily serving legitimate customers like magazine and catalog companies. InfoUSA, one of the nation’s largest list brokers and a publicly held company, matches buyers and sellers of data. The company maintains records on 210 million Americans, according to its Web site. In 2006, it collected more than $430 million from clients like Reader’s Digest, Publishers Clearinghouse and Condé Nast.
But infoUSA has also helped sell lists to companies that were under investigation or had been prosecuted for fraud, according to records collected by the Iowa attorney general. Those records stemmed from a now completed investigation of a suspected telemarketing criminal.
By 2004, Mr. Guthrie’s name was part of a list titled “Astroluck,” which included 19,000 other sweepstakes players, Iowa’s records show. InfoUSA sold the Astroluck list dozens of times, to companies including HMS Direct, which Canadian authorities had sued the previous year for deceptive mailings; Westport Enterprises, the subject of consumer complaints in Kansas, Connecticut and Missouri; and Arlimbow, a European company that Swiss authorities were prosecuting at the time for a lottery scam.
(In 2005, HMS’s director was found not guilty on a technicality. Arlimbow was shut down in 2004. Those companies did not return phone calls. Westport Enterprises said it has resolved all complaints, complies with all laws and engages only in direct-mail solicitations.)
Records also indicate that infoUSA sold thousands of other elderly Americans’ names to Windfall Investments after the F.B.I. had accused the company in 2002 of stealing $600,000 from a California woman.
Between 2001 and 2004, infoUSA also sold lists to World Marketing Service, a company that a judge shut down in 2003 for running a lottery scam; to Atlas Marketing, which a court closed in 2006 for selling $86 million of bogus business opportunities; and to Emerald Marketing Enterprises, a Canadian firm that was investigated multiple times but never charged with wrongdoing.
The investigation of Windfall Investments was closed after its owners could not be located. Representatives of Windfall Investments, World Marketing Services, Atlas Marketing and Emerald Marketing Enterprises could not be located or did not return calls.
The Federal Trade Commission’s rules prohibit list brokers from selling to companies engaged in obvious frauds. In 2004, the agency fined three brokers accused of knowingly, or purposely ignoring, that clients were breaking the law. The Direct Marketing Association, which infoUSA belongs to, requires brokers to screen buyers for suspicious activity.
But internal infoUSA e-mail messages indicate that employees did not abide by those standards. In 2003, two infoUSA employees traded e-mail messages discussing the fact that Nevada authorities were seeking Richard Panas, a frequent infoUSA client, in connection with a lottery scam.
“This kind of behavior does not surprise me, but it adds to my concerns about doing business with these people,” an infoUSA executive wrote to colleagues. Yet, over the next 10 months, infoUSA sold Mr. Panas an additional 155,000 names, even after he pleaded guilty to criminal charges in Nevada and was barred from operating in Iowa.
Mr. Panas did not return calls.
“Red flags should have been waving,” said Steve St. Clair, an Iowa assistant attorney general who oversaw the infoUSA investigation. “But the attitude of these list brokers is that it’s not their responsibility if someone else breaks the law.”
Millions of Americans Are Called
Within months of the sale of the Astroluck list, groups of scam artists in Canada, the Caribbean and elsewhere had the names of Mr. Guthrie and millions of other Americans, authorities say. Such countries are popular among con artists because they are outside the jurisdiction of the United States.
The thieves would call and pose as government workers or pharmacy employees. They would contend that the Social Security Administration’s computers had crashed, or prescription records were incomplete. Payments and pills would be delayed, they warned, unless the older Americans provided their banking information.
Many people hung up. But Mr. Guthrie and hundreds of others gave the callers whatever they asked.
“I was afraid if I didn’t give her my bank information, I wouldn’t have money for my heart medicine,” Mr. Guthrie said.
Criminals can use such banking data to create unsigned checks that withdraw funds from victims’ accounts. Such checks, once widely used by gyms and other businesses that collect monthly fees, are allowed under a provision of the banking code. The difficult part is finding a bank willing to accept them.
In the case of Mr. Guthrie, criminals turned to Wachovia.
Between 2003 and 2005, scam artists submitted at least seven unsigned checks to Wachovia that withdrew funds from Mr. Guthrie’s account, according to banking records. Wachovia accepted those checks and forwarded them to Mr. Guthrie’s bank in Iowa, which in turn sent back $1,603 for distribution to the checks’ creators that submitted them.
Within days, however, Mr. Guthrie’s bank, a branch of Wells Fargo, became concerned and told Wachovia that the checks had not been authorized. At Wells Fargo’s request, Wachovia returned the funds. But it failed to investigate whether Wachovia’s accounts were being used by criminals, according to prosecutors who studied the transactions.
In all, Wachovia accepted $142 million of unsigned checks from companies that made unauthorized withdrawals from thousands of accounts, federal prosecutors say. Wachovia collected millions of dollars in fees from those companies, even as it failed to act on warnings, according to records.
In 2006, after account holders at Citizens Bank were victimized by the same thieves that singled out Mr. Guthrie, an executive wrote to Wachovia that “the purpose of this message is to put your bank on notice of this situation and to ask for your assistance in trying to shut down this scam.”
But Wachovia, which declined to comment on that communication, did not shut down the accounts.
Banking rules required Wachovia to periodically screen companies submitting unsigned checks. Yet there is little evidence Wachovia screened most of the firms that profited from the withdrawals.
In a lawsuit filed last year, the United States attorney in Philadelphia said Wachovia received thousands of warnings that it was processing fraudulent checks, but ignored them. That suit, against the company that printed those unsigned checks, Payment Processing Center, or P.P.C., did not name Wachovia as a defendant, though at least one victim has filed a pending lawsuit against the bank.
During 2005, according to the United States attorney’s lawsuit, 59 percent of the unsigned checks that Wachovia accepted from P.P.C. and forwarded to other banks were ultimately refused by other financial institutions. Wachovia was informed each time a check was returned.
“When between 50 and 60 percent of transactions are returned, that tells you at gut level that something’s not right,” said the United States attorney in Philadelphia, Patrick L. Meehan.
Other banks, when confronted with similar evidence, have closed questionable accounts. But Wachovia continued accepting unsigned checks printed by P.P.C. until the government filed suit in 2006.
Wachovia declined to respond to the accusations in the lawsuit, citing the continuing civil litigation.
Although Wachovia is the largest bank that processed transactions that stole from Mr. Guthrie, at least five other banks accepted 31 unsigned checks that withdrew $9,228 from his account. Nearly every time, Mr. Guthrie’s bank told those financial institutions the checks were fraudulent, and his money was refunded. But few investigated further.
The suit against P.P.C. ended in February. A court-appointed receiver will liquidate the firm and make refunds to consumers. P.P.C.’s owners admitted no wrongdoing.
Wachovia was asked in detail about its relationship with P.P.C., the withdrawals from Mr. Guthrie’s account and the accusations in the United States attorney’s lawsuit. The company declined to comment, except to say: “Wachovia works diligently to detect and end fraudulent use of its accounts. During the time P.P.C. was a customer, Wachovia honored all requests for returns related to the P.P.C. accounts, which in turn protected consumers from loss.”
Prosecutors argue that many elderly accountholders never realized Wachovia had processed checks that withdrew from their accounts, and so never requested refunds. Wachovia declined to respond.
The bank’s statement continued: “Wachovia is cooperating fully with authorities on this matter.”
Some Afraid to Seek Help
By 2005, Mr. Guthrie was in dire straits. When tellers at his bank noticed suspicious transactions, they helped him request refunds. But dozens of unauthorized withdrawals slipped through. Sometimes, he went to the grocery store and discovered that he could not buy food because his account was empty. He didn’t know why. And he was afraid to seek help.
“I didn’t want to say anything that would cause my kids to take over my accounts,” he said. Such concerns play into thieves’ plans, investigators say.
“Criminals focus on the elderly because they know authorities will blame the victims or seniors will worry about their kids throwing them into nursing homes,” said C. Steven Baker, a lawyer with the Federal Trade Commission. “Frequently, the victims are too distracted from dementia or Alzheimer’s to figure out something’s wrong.”
Within a few months, Mr. Guthrie’s children noticed that he was skipping meals and was behind on bills. By then, all of his savings — including the proceeds of selling his farm and money set aside to send great-grandchildren to college — was gone.
State regulators have tried to protect victims like Mr. Guthrie. In 2005, attorneys general of 35 states urged the Federal Reserve to end the unsigned check system.
“Such drafts should be eliminated in favor of electronic funds transfers that can serve the same payment function” but are less susceptible to manipulation, they wrote.
But the Federal Reserve disagreed. It changed its rules to place greater responsibility on banks that first accept unsigned checks, but has permitted their continued use.
Today, just as he feared, Mr. Guthrie’s financial freedom is gone. He gets a weekly $50 allowance to buy food and gasoline. His children now own his home, and his grandson controls his bank account. He must ask permission for large or unusual purchases.
And because he can’t buy anything, many telemarketers have stopped calling.
“It’s lonelier now,” he said at his kitchen table, which is crowded with mail. “I really enjoy when those salespeople call. But when I tell them I can’t buy anything now, they hang up. I miss the good chats we used to have.”