Nukewatch

Working for a nuclear-free future since 1979

  • Issues
    • Direct Action
    • Environmental Justice
    • Nuclear Power
      • Chernobyl
      • Fukushima
    • Nuclear Weapons
    • On The Bright Side
    • Radiation Exposure
    • Radioactive Waste
    • Renewable Energy
    • Uranium Mining
    • US Bombs Out of Germany
  • Quarterly Newsletter
    • Quarterly Newsletter
    • Newsletter Archives
  • Resources
    • Nuclear Heartland Book
    • Fact Sheets
    • Reports, Studies & Publications
      • The New Nuclear Weapons: $1.74 Trillion for H-bomb Profiteers and Fake Cleanups
      • Nuclear Power: Dead In the Water It Poisoned
      • Thorium Fuel’s Advantages as Mythical as Thor
      • Greenpeace on Fukushima 2016
      • Drinking Water at Risk: Toxic Military Wastes Haunt Lake Superior
    • Nukewatch in the News
    • Links
    • Videos
  • About
    • About Nukewatch
    • Contact Us
  • Get Involved
    • Action Alerts!
    • Calendar
  • Donate

December 10, 2016 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

War Crimes Charges Against US Citizens Viewed by ICC

“U.S. Drones Hit Civilians, U.N. Says” 
— New York Times, Sept. 30, 2016

“NATO and government forces are increasingly
responsible for Afghan civilian deaths”
— Washington Post, Nov. 3, 2016

Nukewatch Quarterly Winter 2016-2017

US armed forces and the CIA may have committed war crimes by torturing detainees in Afghanistan and elsewhere, the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) chief prosecutor says in a preliminary report, raising the possibility that US citizens could be indicted.

“Members of US armed forces appear to have subjected at least 61 detained persons to torture, cruel treatment, outrages upon personal dignity on the territory of Afghanistan between 1 May 2003 and 31 December 2014,” according to the November 14th ICC report issued by Chief Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda’s office in The Hague.

The report says that between December 2002 and March 2008, CIA operatives may have subjected at least 27 detainees at its secret prisons in Afghanistan, Poland, Romania and Lithuania to “torture, cruel treatment, [and] outrages upon personal dignity” including rape. Individuals captured by US forces in Afghanistan were transferred to secret CIA prisons, sometimes referred to as “black sites.” Prisoners were chained to ceilings, “chained to walls and forgotten [one of them for 17 days] froze to death on concrete floors, and were waterboarded until they lost consciousness” according to the 2014 Senate Intelligence Committee Report on the torture program.

On Dec. 9, 2005, the State Department’s deputy spokesman Adam Ereli, said the United States would continue to deny the Red Cross access to prisoners it was holding secretly around the world, claiming they were terrorists who were not guaranteed any rights under the Geneva Conventions. The Red Cross complained that its central purpose is to protect the human rights of prisoners, all of whom deserve protection under international humanitarian law—binding treaty laws that include an absolute, unambiguous prohibition against torture under all circumstances.

Over 120 countries are members of the ICC, but the US is not. Although the US refused to join the 2002 Rome Statute that created the ICC and established its authority, US military personnel and CIA agents could still face prosecution because their crimes were allegedly committed within Afghanistan, Poland, Romania and Lithuania, all members of the ICC.

The ICC’s jurisdiction can be invoked when allegations of war crimes are not investigated and prosecuted by the home governments of the accused. The Guardian reported that the “ICC is a court of last resort that takes on cases only when other countries are unable or unwilling to prosecute.” Writing in Foreign Policy magazine last October, David Bosco noted, “The [ICC] prosecutor’s office has repeatedly called attention to alleged abuses of detainees by US personnel between 2003 and 2005 that it believes have not been adequately addressed by the United States.”

“Committed with particular cruelty”

Bensouda’s report about alleged US war crimes says they, “were not the abuses of a few isolated individuals. Rather, they appear to have been committed as part of approved interrogation techniques in an attempt to extract ‘actionable intelligence’ from detainees. The information available suggests that victims were deliberately subjected to physical and psychological violence, and that crimes were allegedly committed with particular cruelty and in a manner that debased the basic human dignity of the victims.”

Reuters noted that the Senate committee released 500 pages of excerpts from its report which found that torture was committed. Official photographs of the abuse are evidently so incriminating that the military, as recently as February 9, 2016, refused to release 1,800 photos never seen by the public.

The Bush/Cheney administration, which authorized and implemented a torture program in Iraq, Afghanistan, secret sites, and the offshore prison at Guantanamo Bay, was fiercely opposed to the ICC, but Afghanistan, Lithuania, Poland and Romania are all members, giving the court jurisdiction over crimes committed within those territories. In 2002, Bush signed into law the American Servicemembers Protection Act which authorizes the use of military force to liberate any American or citizen of a US-allied country being held by the court.

Both President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have boasted in public about waterboarding which was sanctioned, “legalized,” and practiced widely under their command authority. Asked during a televised interview about what he called this “enhanced interrogation technique” Mr. Cheney said, “I’d do it again in a heartbeat.”

During a Republican primary debate Donald Trump said, “I would bring back waterboarding and I’d bring back a hell of a lot worse than waterboarding,” a statement he often repeated. Gen. Michael Hayden, a former director of both the CIA and the NSA, reacted in a televised interview: “If he [Trump] were to order that, once in government, the American armed forces would refuse to act. You are required to not follow an unlawful order. That would be in violation of all the international laws of armed conflict.” President-elect Trump also repeatedly called for targeted assassinations of children and family members of suspected terrorists. Both actions are prohibited by US military service manuals and by international treaty law, crimes ultimately prosecuted by the ICC.

—JL

—Sources: AP; the Guardian, Democracy Now, & Al Jazeera, Nov. 15, 2016; Reuters, Nov. 14, 2016; Foreign Policy, Oct. 31, 2016; “‘Hague Invastion Act’ becomes law,” Human Rights Watch, Aug. 3, 2002

Filed Under: Military Spending, Newsletter Archives, Quarterly Newsletter, Uncategorized, War

September 2, 2016 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Poly-Met’s 500-Year Copper Nickle Pollution

The answer man Donald Trump said August 8 that halting all new federal regulations will create jobs. Notwithstanding the jobs created by implementing new regulations, Trump’s proposal has already been tried by the State of Minnesota, in a retroactive way, with consequences that are predictably toxic to water.

In 2015, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) was forced to abandon its duty to protect state waters from mining runoff after the Legislature passed bills that “essentially exempted taconite mining” operations from complying with the 40-year-old sulfate standard for waters with wild rice — as Mordecai Specktor reports in the August 2016 issue of The Circle.

Paula Maccabee, advocacy director and chief counsel of the non-profit group Water Legacy, interviewed by Specktor, said the 2015 law that instructed the MPCA not to enforce the sulfate pollution standard “was the straw that broke the camel’s back.” Water Legacy then petitioned the US Environmental Protection Agency over the State Legislature’s and the MPCA’s “failure to respect the [US] Clean Water act and to enforce laws limiting mine pollution.”

Maccabee tole me in an email Aug. 8 “We consider the EPA’s protocol and the EPA’s many letters and requests for information from Minnesota agencies to function as replies to WaterLegacy’s petition to remove Minnesota state agencies” from oversight of mining operations.”

EPA staff are still in the process of conducting an in-depth investigation, so they have neither reached conclusions regarding their potential findings nor communicated them either to WaterLegacy or to MPCA. … I expect that both WaterLegacy and the MPCA will be given an opportunity to comment when EPA has reached the point of preparing draft findings resulting from its investigation.

“I believe it is likely that the MN attorney general will respond to EPA’s questions by August 12, since the AG hasn’t requested an additional extension of time.

PolyMet’s early pollution projections admitted that acid mine drainage – which permanently destroys surface water systems — from its proposed sulfide mine near the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness would be a serious problem for over 500 years. Consequently, PolyMet must be legally required to monitor for and clean up acid mine drainage for 500 years.

A 500-year cleanup mandate must also be applied to all future follow-on companies that will replace what’s now called “PolyMet.” Changing the name of mining companies is an age-old method of avoiding legal liability. PolyMet’s promises of clean copper-sulfide mining must be backed up with permanent guarantees for monitoring, and waste disposal, cleanup and reclamation no matter what subsequent PolyMet knockoff companies might be named.
Of course such a mandate has never been imposed on a mine project and would probably kill the proposal if imposed. This is why the embarrassing 500-year pollution warning has been buried by PolyMet and never appeared in the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) Nov. 6, 2015.
Instead, the company and DNR Commissioner Tom Landwehr use the term “indefinitely.” How can PolyMet be forced to prevent pollution “indefinitely”?

This is because PolyMet’s promises are really hot air, and Minnesota’s reputation at a good environmental steward is actually a myth that has never applied to Minnesota mining practices.

• Why has there been no independent water modeling required in the environmental review process? Critics point out that all the data and analysis of how much polluted water could drain from the mine site and the tailings site has come from PolyMet.

• As Water Legacy notes, “Across the country, there is no example where a sulfide mine has been operated and closed without polluting surface and/or groundwater with acid mine drainage, sulfuric acid and/or toxic metals.” Why has PolyMet been allowed to submit a shabbily supported environmental review based on unsubstantiated claims and faulty data?

• The FEIS concludes that it’s “unlikely” acid mine drainage will move north into the pristine Boundary Waters Wilderness, but that if the permanent pollution does flow north (permanently), PolyMet will “fill cracks in the bedrock.” Why is the potential devastation of the Boundary Waters, an otherwise highly-protected national wilderness treasured because of its lack of pollution, allowed to be brushed off with such fatuous gibberish?

I’m sure I’m not the first person to howl at that concept of “filling cracks in the bedrock.” The idea sounds like bovine excrement, or like the unworkable “ice wall” being built in Japan to slow groundwater flowing through Fukushima’s three melted reactors.

Filed Under: Environment, Sulfide Mining, Uncategorized, Weekly Column

July 11, 2016 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Prince Tops Our Anti-Nuclear Playlist

Nukewatch Quarterly Summer 2016
By Kelly Lundeen

LUCK, WI—Four hours had passed in the Nukewatch office on April 21, 2016. I had been concerned with the scandals and disasters of nuclear weapons when I got a barrage of personal text messages. “I heard Prince passed on. Are you all okay?” Within an hour of the news of his death, I had five text messages in my inbox. I thought, “Why is the death of a pop star so important as to take me away from pondering the impending radioactive holocaust?”

The truth is I love Prince’s music and have been dancing to it since I was five, or maybe younger. But, why should I care? In the office the conversation shifted. “What did Prince have to say about nuclear weapons?” As a five-year-old, I was not cognizant that trying to keep up with my older sister—in musical trends and fascination with Prince—that I was also being exposed to the nuclear hysteria captured in the song “1999.”

“Everybody’s got a bomb / We could all die any day/ But before I’ll let that happen / I’ll dance my life away.”

It was all coming together. Prince had more to say about nuclear weapons than may be expected. Another more obviously political and lesser-known Prince song from 1981, “Ronnie, Talk to Russia,” makes a rational appeal to then-President Reagan for diplomacy during the Cold War. In a circus-gospel-rock tune Prince advises:

“Ronnie, talk to Russia before it’s too late / Before they blow up the world… / Dontcha. / Don’t you blow up my world.”

So, came the idea of a list of songs about nuclear weapons and, as it turns out, Nukewatch is not the first to compile such a list. There are far too many songs to include here, but these are some of our favorites—the serious, the depressing and the light-hearted—with an emphasis on the light-hearted. See nukewatchinfo.org for song links!

The Serious “99 Red Balloons,” Nena, 1983

This great 1980s pop song actually had a serious theme more blatantly anti-war in the English version of the song (Nena is German) in which balloons flying over the Berlin Wall (separating the ally-controlled West Germany from the Soviet-controlled East Germany) are taken for missiles provoking a nuclear war.

“Antinuclear,” Miguel Ríos, 1983

A Spanish rock singer wrote a tribute to Norman Mayer called Antinuclear. Mayer was an anti-nuclear protestor who worked to promote a large-scale debate about nuclear disarmament. That was his demand when he threatened to blow up the Washington Monument in 1982. He was killed by police and later found to have no explosives whatsoever. Ríos sang:

“The world wouldn’t listen… [They] made him an anti-nuclear martyr.” (KL translation)

“No More Weapons,” Steel Pulse, 2004

A roots reggae band better known for their anti-racist music directs this message to the former US president:

“There’s no time to beat around the BUSH…We no want no weapons of mass destruction.”

“Point Hope,” Indigo Girls, 2005

This folk song highlights the nuclear war the US government has waged here at home against indigenous people at the Nevada nuclear test site.

“We sit and watch the bombs blow… Them governmen boys had something so damn secret they had to hide it in the desert sand.”

The Ominous “The Priests of the Golden Bull,” Buffy Sainte-Marie, 1992

Cree rock singer Buffy Sainte-Marie tells us who wins and who loses the nuclear war.

“Who brought the Bomb wrapped up in business cards / and stained with steak? / Reservations are the nuclear frontline; uranium poisoning kills / You say silver burns a hole in your pocket / and gold burns a hole in your soul / Well Uranium burns a hole in forever / it just gets out of control.”

“Breathing,” Kate Bush, 1980

This eerie ballad is sung from the perspective of a fetus considering the polluted and radioactive world it will be born into pleading, “Leave me something to breathe! We are all going to die without…breathing.”

The Light-Hearted “Party at Ground Zero,” Fishbone, 1985

Referring to the original meaning of Ground Zero as the site of a nuclear explosion, this ska song may well be played at the Last Party along with “1999.”

“Johnny, go get your gun, for the commies are in our hemisphere today / Ivan, go fly your MIG, for the Yankee imperialists have come to play.”

“Atomic Nightmare,” Talbot Brothers of Bermuda, 1987

While Prince’s reflection on imminent nuclear war was urging for cool heads and dancing, the Talbot Brothers of Bermuda have another response captured in this upbeat calypso tune:

“Oh, you’ll run, run, run like a son of a gun / I don’t know where I’m going to go, but I’m really going to run.”

“Future’s So Bright I Gotta Wear Shades,” Timbuk3, 1986

References to nuclear annihilation were lost when this pop hit became the theme song for the 1980s sitcom “Head of the Class.” Only in the music video do these references become clear as it shows the nuclear flash marking an end to humankind with the synical twist that sunglasses might serve as protection.

“I’m doing all right, getting good grades / The future’s so bright I gotta wear shades.”

“So Long Mom, I’m Off to Drop the Bomb,” Tom Lehrer, 1965

The sarcastic lyrics to this piano tune say it all:

“But though I may roam, / I’ll come back to my home, / Although it may be / A pile of debris. / Remember, mommy, / I’m off to get a commie, / So send me a salami, / And try to smile / somehow.”

Nuclear Sí, Aviador Dro, 1979

A post-apocalyptic world is described in this song from the Spanish electronic band Aviador Dro which translates to “Nuclear, Yes!”

“Nuclear, yes! / Of course / Nuclear, yes! / Why not? / I want to bathe in seas of radiation / With clouds of strontium, cobalt and plutonium / I want to have lead casings / And mutant children riding motorcycles.” (KL translation)

After the last song has played, the only difference between a light-hearted and an ominous song about nuclear weapons is the tune and the tone. At Nukewatch the depressing guides us, while the light-hearted keeps us going. Rock on!

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, On The Bright Side, Quarterly Newsletter, Uncategorized

May 2, 2016 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Medical Isotopes to be Produced in Wisconsin

Nukewatch Quarterly Spring 2016

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission on February 25 granted a construction permit to SHINE Medical Technologies to build a $100 million factory in Janesville, Wisconsin where it will produce Molybdenum-99, or Mo-99, and other radioisotopes. Mo-99 decays to technicium-99m which is used in medical scans for cancer, heart function screening, and other procedures. Based in Monona, Wisconsin and established in 2010, SHINE expects to open the factory in three years and produce over one quarter of the global demand for Mo-99.

SHINE says it uses a “patented, proprietary manufacturing process” for producing the isotopes that does not require a nuclear reactor or highly enriched uranium. SHINE’s website says its process “uses less electricity, generates less waste” than conventional production methods practiced inside CANDU reactors in Canada—the current source of most medical isotopes used in the US.

Technitium-99m is used as a radioactive “tracer” isotope in up to 40 million medical imaging procedures in the US each year. According to SHINE, tc-99m “is administered to some 55,000 Americans every day for the purpose of diagnosing and staging a multitude of diseases, including cancer and heart disease.” It is an imaging agent in bone scans to identify the stage of a cancer, and in stress tests to diagnose heart disease. Other radioisotopes produced by SHINE include iodine-131, iodine-125, and xenon-133 gas.

—Minneapolis StarTribune, Feb. 26, 2016; & <http://shinemed.com/news/shine-medical-receives-regulatory-approval-nuclear-regulatory-commission-to-issue-construction-permit>

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, Quarterly Newsletter, Uncategorized

May 2, 2016 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Who’s Pounding on the Door?

Through the Prism of Nonviolence 
Nukewatch Quarterly Spring 2016
By John Heid

 

…you only leave home
when home won’t let you stay.
no one leaves home unless home chases you
fire under your feet
hot blood in your belly
it’s not something you ever thought of doing
until the blade burnt threats into your neck…
—Excerpted from “Home” by Warsan Shire

The sign beside our front door reads in black and white: “US Border Patrol: Do Not Enter Without A Lawful Search Warrant.” Who knows how effective it really is? After all, the majority of house raids are carried out by Immigration Customs Enforcement (ICE) and most raids happen in the dark of night by its armed, aggressive agents who jackboot their way into homes forcibly removing mothers and children alike in handcuffs. The sign presents a minor legal hurdle, if that. Still, I dusted it off on Christmas morning.

The night before, the White House had announced that raids to deport Central American women and children would begin in January. A few days later, Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson announced: “Our borders are not open to illegal immigration. If you come here illegally, we will send you back consistent with our laws and values.”

Laws and values? Who’s values and what laws sanction nighttime raids on families? The policy and strategy of house raids runs roughshod over the rule of law, let alone ethics. Not since “Operation Return to Sender” in 2006, has such a tidal wave of shock washed over immigrant communities in the US. Around the country, day-laborers vanished from worker centers before New Year’s. English-as-a-second-language classrooms witnessed an abrupt drop in attendance. Grocery stores and streets in Latino/a neighborhoods became ghostly quiet.

Within a week, over 100 people—families and children—were rounded up in Georgia, Texas and North Carolina, and 77 were summarily deported. The Deportation Defense Hotline [1-844-363-1423] of United We Dream received 316 calls reporting ICE activity by mid-January.

On January 4, the Dallas Morning Star reported, “ICE focuses its enforcement resources on individuals who pose a threat to national security, public safety and border security.” Yes, at-risk mothers and their children in the southeastern US are now deemed a threat to national security.

Who are these people that pose such a formidable risk? And why are they fleeing their ancestral lands in the first place? The poet Warsan Shire writes: “No one leaves home unless home is the mouth of a shark.” Why then are these families not recognized as refugees seeking asylum?

Thich Nhat Hahn, the Buddhist monk, poet and refugee, says that we must call things by their true names. It is critical to recognize the circumstances that people are fleeing for what they really are: torture, rape, kidnapping and murder—systemic violence. Only then can we understand the circumstances, if not the root causes, of the forced dislocation the world has witnessed in the last two years. International observers report levels of violence in Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador not seen since the 1980s.

The Obama Administration, which has deported more than two million people in seven years, says its deportation strategy prioritizes those who have come to the US since May of 2014, and have exhausted all formal avenues for legal status here. It is noteworthy that nearly 80 percent of the targeted families do not have attorneys. Most families coming into the US seeking asylum have a limited understanding of their legal obligations, let alone the complicated immigration process. Many have been pressured by government officials into signing documents without access to counsel. The court process that people are hustled through is nicknamed “the rocket docket” because it is so rapid that there is little time for people to find legal assistance and to compile the evidence required to substantiate their asylum request. It is frontier justice on crack.

Casa Mariposa, our community near downtown Tucson, has seen hundreds of women and children come through the front door over the past couple years (see the Fall 2014 Quarterly). The stories we have heard are as painful as they are consistent. People are fleeing direct, personal violence. These families are seeking safety, refuge, asylum. They grieve the loss of their loved ones and their homeland.

The house raids must stop. Entirely. Their use is a stab to the heart of civil society. The tactic reawakens the ghosts of not-so-distant atrocities that still scar the face of humanity. We cannot be silent. Nor can we wait for our government to find its moral compass. While we employ the avenues of education, petition, vigil and legislation, we must also pursue more immediate measures to address the acute severity of this humanitarian crisis. The raids are happening now.

United We Dream is among the humanitarian organizations on the front line in this crisis. Managing Director Cristina Jimenez reports: “We are exposing where Obama’s immigration agents are, what they are doing and we are ensuring that our community knows what to do. The days when immigration agents can conduct their raids in anonymity are over. Everywhere they go they will find a child with a camera and everywhere they go they will find a mother who knows her rights.” This struggle will be a long one. People will not abide injustice lying down.

Old, familiar allies are rising as well. Pastor Allison Harrington of Southside Presbyterian Church in Tucson, where the 1980s Sanctuary movement gained traction, said in response to the raids: “We feel as we are once again living through a nightmare all too familiar to us.” Harrington’s church and other faith communities have resurrected the Sanctuary Movement. Today over 300 churches in more than 30 states are considering sanctuary. These efforts rekindle the memory of a banner that hung in a church sanctuary in the 1980s. It read: “When they come for the innocent without walking over your body, cursed be your life and your religion.” ICE agents will have to walk over some bodies because communities are taking their backs away from the wall and putting them in front of the church doors. At Southside Presbyterian, there’s no need for a sign like the one that hangs on our front porch.

How far would any of us walk to find safety for our children? Where will we stand as our government raids the homes of immigrant families and deports them back to what poet Warsan Shire calls the “mouth of a shark?”

—John Heid lives and works at the Casa Mariposa Community in Tucson, Arizona.

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, Quarterly Newsletter, Through the Prism of Nonviolence, Uncategorized

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • Next Page »

Stay Connected

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Subscribe

Donate

Categories

  • B61 Bombs in Europe
  • Chernobyl
  • Counterfeit Reactor Parts
  • Depleted Uranium
  • Direct Action
  • Environment
  • Environmental Justice
  • Fukushima
  • Lake Superior Barrels
  • Military Spending
  • Newsletter Archives
  • North Korea
  • Nuclear Power
  • Nuclear Weapons
  • Office News
  • On The Bright Side
  • Photo Gallery
  • Protect the Water Close Xcel's Monticello Reactor
  • Quarterly Newsletter
  • Radiation Exposure
  • Radioactive Waste
  • Renewable Energy
  • Social Issues
  • Sulfide Mining
  • Through the Prism of Nonviolence
  • Uncategorized
  • Uranium Mining
  • US Bombs Out of Germany
  • War
  • Weekly Column

Contact Us

(715) 472-4185
nukewatch1@lakeland.ws

Address:
740A Round Lake Road
Luck, Wisconsin 54853
USA

Donate To Nukewatch

News & Information on Nuclear Weapons,
Power, Waste & Nonviolent Resistance

Stay Connected

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

© 2026 · Nukewatch