Flyby News Home - Flyby News Archives - Casinni NoFlyby - Flyby Links

Flyby  News

"News Fit to Transmit in the Post Cassini Flyby Era"

Bush Obstacle * Nuke-Truth * Rove Factor * CAFTA

05 July 2005

"Believe nothing on the faith of traditions, even though they have been held in honor
for many generations and in diverse places. Do not believe what you yourself have
imagined persuading yourself a god inspires you. Believe nothing on the authority
of your masters or priests. After examination believe that which you yourself
have tested and found to be reasonable and conform your conduct thereto."

-- The Buddha

1) Bush, the Obstacle to a Deal on Global Warming
2) All Levels of Radiation Confirmed to Cause Cancer

- - Senate Defeats Move to Stop Nuclear Bomb Study
- - Bush's Nuclear Nonsense
3) The Rove Factor?
- - US Slaughters Afghan Civilians - Apparently Without Care
4) Fight CAFTA ~ Health and other Freedoms at Risk

Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women.
When it dies there, no constitution,
no law, no court can save it."

Editor's Notes:

Yes it is hot, summer time in the north, but should we forget sixty years from this August 6 and 9, and the US government's dropping atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki? This is the time to support the Hidankyo Nihon organization for this year's Nobel Peace Prize. Now, more than ever, the facts are in -- there is no safe dose for internal radiation exposure; simultaneously, Bush is pushing for Nuclear bunker buster bomb development, while neglecting proper clean-up from the mess of exploded Depleted Uranium munition shells. Note, item 2, confirmation: no safe dose, as stated in a 1999 Letter of Concern by Dr. John W. Gofman.

Item 3 goes along the same lines as the high Bush crimes stated so succinctly in last issue's top quote by Mark Morford. The subsection in this item is a story published by on the recent US admission of causing civilian deaths in Afghanistan. This toted endless war continues; the sad fact is that freedom and security is being lost globally. Yet truth is on the side that perseveres, while time shrinks, truth becomes more and more apparent.

While Blair performs for financing expensive hydrogen fuel cells, a nineteenth Century invention is sitting idly by. The company that I am involved with as a founder, Stirling Advantage, Inc., has designed a 200+kW Stirling engine, which can apply waste heat and gases for cost-effective onsite electrical power generation, which could benefit businesses and the economy, and our environment, too. Learning from our past, and utilizing innovative ideas for a sustainable future only makes sense, in what appears to be a senseless world hastening its own destruction.

"Only two things are infinite,
the universe and human stupidity,
and I'm not sure about the former."

-- Albert Einstein
(1879 - 1955)

1) Bush, the Obstacle to a Deal on Global Warming
by Michael McCarthy
Published on Tuesday, July 5, 2005 by the Independent/UK


Can America prevent the rich countries agreeing what to do about climate change? That's the other vital question at Gleneagles alongside Africa and its poverty and, last night, the omens did not look good.

President George Bush made anything but reassuring noises in a pre-summit television interview with Trevor McDonald, rejecting outright any suggestion that the US might join the Kyoto protocol on global warming, or consider any binding agreements to cut US emissions of greenhouse gases.

But Mr Bush's blunt stance - "I go to the G8 with an agenda that I think is best for our country" - was clearly aimed at opinion back home, and may not prevent Tony Blair putting climate change on top of the G8 agenda. Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary, insisted last night a deal was still possible..

Global warming was not mentioned in the global triumph of goodwill for Africa that was Live8. They did not sing about the warming atmosphere from the stage in Hyde Park, or in Philadelphia, Berlin or Rome. But if the unforgettable coalition of singers and performers could have looked into Africa's future rather than at the haunting images of its past and present, they surely would have done.

For everything that makes Africa hard to inhabit today will be made harder by global warming. Hunger will be made more acute; shortage of clean water will be more degrading; disease will be more painful, crippling and deadly; natural disasters will be more overwhelming. Climate change threatens to vitiate all the efforts to help Africa that the rich world can possibly come up with, all the debt cancellation, the aid increases and the trade liberalization.

Two weeks ago, a group of British aid agencies and environmental groups, from Oxfam to Greenpeace, forcefully pointed out this awkward truth. Their report, Africa - Up In Smoke? insisted the issues of African poverty and climate change are inseparably linked, and the first cannot be solved without dealing with the second. It was a direct challenge to the simple Live8 theme, that if only the economic basis of Africa's future can be sorted by a properly responsible rich world, the continent will come good. It will not, the report said, if we do not tackle the warming atmosphere..

The scientific consensus that climate change is real and happening is now overwhelming. But that is to reckon without the astonishing attempts by the Bush administration in its second term to deny the science. Yesterday, however, there were reports that summit "sherpas" had managed to agree a text all G8 leaders could agree to, which, although not stating that global warming was happening, did state that scientists said it was. On such subtleties are summits sometimes rescued..

In all the righteous, clamorous protest about aid, trade, and debt in Hyde Park, amid the Geldof-inspired, rock'n'roll-fuelled euphoria, it was easy to forget that Africa can be ruined by the atmosphere as well as by economics. But in that luxury golfing hotel on the edge of the Scottish Highlands, it is going to be forcefully remembered.

For a posting of the complete original version, see:
also posted at:

2) All Levels of Radiation Confirmed to Cause Cancer

- - Senate Defeats Move to Stop Nuclear Bomb Study
- - Bush's Nuclear Nonsense

All Levels of Radiation Confirmed to Cause Cancer
From a study at the National Academy of Sciences

The Nuclear Information and Resource Service
June 30, 2005

Diane D'Arrigo, NIRS 202-328-0002
Cindy Folkers, NIRS 202-328-0002

All Levels of Radiation Confirmed to Cause Cancer.

Washington, DC July 30, 2005 The National Academies of Science released an over 700-page report yesterday on the risks from ionizing radiation. The BEIR VII or seventh Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation report on "Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation" reconfirmed the previous knowledge that there is no safe level of exposure to radiation—that even very low doses can cause cancer. Risks from low dose radiation are equal or greater than previously thought. The committee reviewed some additional ways that radiation causes damage to cells.

Among the reports conclusions are:

There is no safe level or threshold of ionizing radiation exposure.

Even exposure to background radiation causes some cancers. Additional exposures cause additional risks.

Radiation causes other health effects such as heart disease and stroke, and further study is needed to predict the doses that result in these non-cancer health effects.

It is possible that children born to parents that have been exposed to radiation could be affected by those exposures.

The "bystander effect" is an additional, newly recognized method by which radiation injures cells that were not directly hit but are in the vicinity of those that were. "Genomic instability" can be caused by exposure to low doses of radiation and according to the report "might contribute significantly to radiation cancer risk." These new mechanisms for radiation damage were not included in the risk estimates reported by the BEIR VII report, but were recommended for further study.

The Linear-No-Threshold model (LNT) for predicting health effects from radiation (dose-response) is retained, meaning that every exposure causes some risk and that risks are generally proportional to dose. The Dose and Dose-Rate Effectiveness Factor or DDREF which had been suggested in the 1990 BEIR V report to be applied at low doses, has been reduced from 2 to 1.5. That means the projected number of health effects at low doses are greater than previously thought. RADIATION RISKIER THAN THOUGHT-- RISKS TO PUBLIC and NUCLEAR WORKERS

The BEIR VII risk numbers indicate that about 1 in 100 members of the public would get cancer if exposed to 100 millirads (1milliGray) per year for a 70-year lifetime. [1] This is essentially the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission's allowable radiation dose for members of the public.

In addition, 1 in about 5 workers [2] would get cancer if exposed to the legally allowable occupational doses [3] over their 50 years in the workforce. These risks are much higher than permitted for other carcinogens.

Specifically, the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission allows members of the public to get 100 millirems or mr (1 milliSievert or mSv) per year of radiation in addition to background. The BEIR VII report (page 500, Table 12-9) estimates that this level will result in approximately 1 (1.142) cancer in every 100 people exposed at 100 mr/yr which includes 1 fatal cancer in every 175 people so exposed (5.7 in 1000).[4]

The risk of getting cancer from radiation (in BEIR VII) is increased by about a third from current government risk figures (FGR13): BEIR VII estimates that 11.42 people will get cancer if 10,000 are each exposed to a rem (1,000 millirems or 10 mSv). The US Environmental Protection Agency Federal Guidance Report 13 estimates that 8.46 people will get cancer if 10,000 are each exposed to a rem.

The Nuclear Information and Resource Service interprets this as further evidence that unnecessary radiation exposures should be avoided.

"This means that the government is not justified in deregulating nuclear power and weapons waste—releasing it to regular trash or "recycling" it into everyday household items as proposed by 5 US federal agencies at the behest of nuclear waste generators hoping to save money," stated Diane D'Arrigo, Radioactive Waste Project Director at Nuclear Information and Resource Service Radioactive (NIRS). "This also means that remediation of radioactive sites should be done to cleaner levels and that nuclear transport standards should be strengthened."

Cindy Folkers, NIRS Energy and Health Project Director stated "These findings confirm that all levels of radiation are harmful. Since nuclear power routinely releases long-lasting radiation into the air, water and soil, we must avoid a new generation of nuclear power to prevent unnecessary exposures."

For the complete article and references, see:

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

- - Senate Defeats Move to Stop Nuclear Bomb Study
Friday 01 July 2005

Washington - Senate Democrats on Friday failed to stop the Energy Department from studying the feasibility of a "bunker buster" nuclear bomb the Bush administration is considering in funds to study the experimental weapon that would penetrate the earth and explode to demolish buried enemy targets.

The funds were included in a bill that would fund Energy Department activities in the fiscal year starting on Oct. 1. A House of Representatives version of the bill does not contain funds to study the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator.

"We're talking about a study. What's the harm in getting the study?" asked Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John Warner, a Virginia Republican.

Democrats said it would send a dangerous signal to other countries that the United States was headed toward development of a new class of nuclear weapons, thus encouraging them to develop their own arsenal.

"What moral authority do we have to ask others to give up their nukes if we're determined to develop a new generation of nuclear weapons of our own?" asked Massachusetts Sen. Edward Kennedy, a Democrat.

Besides the $4 million for the Energy Department study, the administration has asked Congress for $4.5 million to fund Pentagon research into the bunker buster. The Pentagon funding was not included in House legislation and the Senate has not yet considered it.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a California Democrat, cited scientists' beliefs that a bunker buster, if ever used, would spread deadly radiation.

"There is no way you can drive a missile casing deep enough to prevent radioactive spewing," Feinstein said.

The Pentagon has estimated that 70 countries are trying to protect key military assets, such as weapons of mass destruction or command and control facilities, from aerial bombing by hiding them in deep underground bunkers.

The fate of the Energy Department's bunker-buster study will be in the hands of House and Senate negotiators on this funding bill.

Originally posted at:
and also at

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

- - Bush's Nuclear Nonsense
by Mark Hertsgaard,

When Bush goes to the G8 Summit this week, he'll be trying to sell a nuclear power agenda that is all subsidies, no substance.

For the complete article, see:

3) The Rove Factor?

- - US Slaughters Afghan Civilians - Apparently Without Care

The Rove Factor?
By Michael Isikoff


11 July issue

July 11 issue - Its legal appeals exhausted, Time magazine agreed last week to turn over reporter Matthew Cooper's e-mails and computer notes to a special prosecutor investigating the leak of an undercover CIA agent's identity. The case has been the subject of press controversy for two years. Saying "we are not above the law," Time Inc. Editor in Chief Norman Pearlstine decided to comply with a grand-jury subpoena to turn over documents related to the leak. But Cooper (and a New York Times reporter, Judith Miller) is still refusing to testify and faces jail this week.

At issue is the story of a CIA-sponsored trip taken by former ambassador (and White House critic) Joseph Wilson to investigate reports that Iraq was seeking to buy uranium from the African country of Niger. "Some government officials have noted to Time in interviews... that Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, is a CIA official who monitors the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction," said Cooper's July 2003 Time online article.

Now the story may be about to take another turn. The e-mails surrendered by Time Inc., which are largely between Cooper and his editors, show that one of Cooper's sources was White House deputy chief of staff Karl Rove, according to two lawyers who asked not to be identified because they are representing witnesses sympathetic to the White House. Cooper and a Time spokeswoman declined to comment. But in an interview with NEWSWEEK, Rove's lawyer, Robert Luskin, confirmed that Rove had been interviewed by Cooper for the article. It is unclear, however, what passed between Cooper and Rove.

The controversy began three days before the Time piece appeared, when columnist Robert Novak, writing about Wilson's trip, reported that Wilson had been sent at the suggestion of his wife, who was identified by name as a CIA operative. The leak to Novak, apparently intended to discredit Wilson's mission, caused a furor when it turned out that Plame was an undercover agent. It is a crime to knowingly reveal the identity of an undercover CIA official. A special prosecutor was appointed and began subpoenaing reporters to find the source of the leak.

Article Truncated

For the complete article, see:

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

- - US Slaughters Afghan Civilians - Apparently Without Care

U.S. admits civilian deaths in Afghan airstrikes
Published by
7/4/2005 4:00:00 PM GMT

17 Afghan civilians including women and children were killed by last weeks U.S. airstrikes.

Last week's U.S. airstrike in Afghanistan killed 17 villagers, including women and children, a provincial governor said Monday. The U.S. military confirmed some civilians were killed in the attack on what it said was a "known rebel compound".

The bombing occurred in the Kunar province last Friday, three days after an elite U.S. military team disappeared in the mountainous area.

"Seventeen civilians were killed during the bombing, including women and children," Kunar Gov. Asadullah Wafa said after leaving a mosque in the capital, Kabul. He did not say whether any rebels also were believed to be in the compound.

The U.S. military confirmed civilians were killed but didn't say how many.

The attack was "with precision-guided munitions that resulted in the deaths of an unknown number of (rebels) and 'noncombatants'," the military said in a statement.

The statement went on to state that U.S. forces "regret the loss of innocent lives and follow stringent rules of engagement specifically to ensure that noncombatants are safeguarded. However, when enemy forces move their families into the locations where they conduct operations, they put these innocent civilians at risk."

But according to one media source, it's possible that the decision was taken to go ahead despite the likely risk of civilian casualties.

So far more than 500 people, most of them suspected rebels, are now estimated to have lost their lives in bloodshed in the south and east in the past three months.

Violence has been escalating in Afghanistan ahead of parliamentary elections due in September.

A high-ranking Afghan security official in the province, speaking on condition of anonymity, said there had been two separate bombing runs on Chechal village.

He said 25 people had been killed.

Villagers who went to help those killed and injured in the first raid were hit by the second strike, he said.

New offensive

An Afghan official told the BBC U.S. planes started fresh raids on Sunday in the Nangalam valley in the province.

The unnamed official added that Afghan troops on the ground were facing serious resistance.

However a spokesman at the U.S. military headquarters at Bagram near Kabul said he had no information about the operation.

4) Fight CAFTA ~ Health and other Freedoms at Risk

CAFTA stands for Central American Free Trade Agreement. If this "treaty" is signed, the United States (a member of the international World Trade Organization) will be forced to revise our food and nutritional supplement laws according to international standards.

CAFTA was passed the Senate in a 54-to-45 vote on July 1st, 2005. It will be voted on by the House of Representatives when they reconvene on July 11th, 2005.

This may be your final chance to defend your right to choose your own health protocol!

Are these "international standards" beneficial?


But the "international standards" are not only for food. They also include vitamins and minerals!

For information, though legalese,

YOUR LETTERS WILL MAKE A DIFFERENCE. Government officials rate each email, phone call, fax, and letter that they get as representing 13,000 opinions. (They figure that each person who gives an opinion stands for 12,999 others who don't bother to write or call.) So your opinion counts tremendously!


You can find out who your representative is, and contact him or her, at

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

Here is a sample letter, which you can cut and paste once you get to the above site:

Re: Please vote AGAINST CAFTA

Dear Honorable _____________,

Please vote AGAINST CAFTA. If the United States signs this treaty, this will mean disaster for millions of United States citizens such as myself who value the freedom to choose our own health care in the form of nutritional supplements. If the U.S. joins CAFTA, access to such a vital part of my health protocol will no longer be available to me.

I value your sincere fight for real freedom.

Thank You,

[NOTE: The above is from an email, and following reply is from another list serve.]

..The real danger of CAFTA, is the same as NAFTA, as it is something that removes tarrifs on a lot of goods, duplicates extremist intellectual copyright law, and opens local governments to being sued by international corporations if they are not allowed to do their business. The last is the real turns the disaster of corporate personhood in the US...into corporate kingdom for the entire North and Central America. An example of this from NAFTA is a corporation of Mexico wanted to produce MBTA (a highly toxic gas additive) in California. California had outlawed MBTA. The corporation sued California via NAFTA and that dispute gets handled in private by a tribunal process of NAFTA. State and local governments should not be at the mercy of deeply pocketed corporations, we should be allowed to make laws and have everyone, people AND corporations, follow those laws.

:) Its time for people to stand up and demand "Free People not 'Free' Trade". Oppose CAFTA and ask for the repeal of NAFTA!

And, as far as making your voice known to Congress regarding vitamin and dietary supplement issues is a good one. The drum has been beating for a while to put these items, along with herbal medicines, under stricter regulation. So far there has been no regulation that has gotten very far, but that does not mean it will not come again. In the long term trade agreements like CAFTA have the potential to effect this realm, especially if some corporation feels its business is threatened by our regulations of any kind and sues US to make that change.

in cooperation,

The views expressed herein are the writers' own and not necessarily those of Flyby News.
A "Fair Use Policy" that describes Flyby News' use of copyrighted material is posted at
Your feedback for story suggestions and networking Flyby News are welcomed and appreciated.
You can write to the publisher/editor Jonathan Mark via email:

Flyby News is educational and nonviolent in focus, and has supported critical campaigns
for a healthy environment, human rights, justice, peace, and nonviolence,
since the launching of NASA's Cassini space probe in 1997.

=====News Fit to Transmit in the Post Cassini Flyby Era====>

= = = = = = = = = = =

Email address: