What's new

ATOMIC BOMBS DROPED ON AFGHANISTAN AND IRAQ

BATMAN

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Mar 31, 2007
Messages
29,895
Reaction score
-28
Country
Pakistan
Location
Switzerland
U.S. VETERAN REVEALS ATOMIC BOMBS DROPPED ON AFGHANISTAN AND IRAQ


PART I​

GOING NUCLEAR​

Despite a just-released U.S. national intelligence consensus that Iran is not developing nuclear weapons, apocalyptic fundamentalists George Bush and Dick Cheney remain intent on ordering an all-out attack against one of the world's oldest (and best armed) civilizations. As governments and citizenry protest this folly, an overriding question torments many minds: Will the architects of more than one-million civilian corpses in Iraq choose to go “go nuclear” against Iran?

Many believe they will not dare. If the inhibition against killing is one of the strongest human impulses (just ask a returning veteran), the ethical revulsion and international prohibitions against using nuclear weapons seem strong enough to rule out their first aggressive use since America's atomic attack on Nagasaki.

But what if the post-WWII nuclear Rubicon has already been crossed? According to a U.S. Army veteran with extensive boots-on-the-ground connections, the United States Government has dropped five nuclear weapons on Afghanistan and Iraq.

And gotten away with it.

BUNKER BUSTERS​
Shortly after the terror attacks of 9/11, Lt. Colonel Eric Sepp of the USAF Air War College lamented that going after Osama bin Laden's granite redoubts in the Tora Bora region of Afghanistan presented “one of the more difficult operational challenges to confront U.S. military forces.”

While precision-guided weapons doom above-ground buildings (and any civilians inside or nearby), deeply buried bunkers can be used as “an effective sanctuary,” declared the USAF Air War College, “to manufacture and store weapons of mass destruction.” As the Air Force Times pointed out, Osama's “difficult to locate” mountain bunkers “are often beyond the reach of most conventional weapons unable to survive passing through tens of meters of rock and concrete.” [Deeply Buried Facilities Implications for Military Operations USAF Center for Strategy and Technology Air War College May 2000; Air Force Times Apr 14/97]

But it wasn't for lack of trying. In 1972, Melvin Cook, a professor of metallurgy at the University of Utah and an author of works on explosives and Creationism, had sought to undo God's handiwork by developing the ultimate chemical bomb. Professor Cook borrowed aluminized slurries used in mining to fracture, heat and pulverize extremely hard rock. [workingforchange.com Nov 8/01; globalsecurity.org]

Extensively field tested during the Vietnam War, where they raised havoc with the peoples and ecology of Vietnam and Cambodia - and later deployed against terrified Iraqi conscripts and cast-off Soviet armor during the 1991 Gulf war - giant 15,000 pound BLU-82 bombs dubbed “Daisy-Cutters” were next dropped in pallets rolled out the back of C-130 transport planes to seal cave entrances in Tora Bora.

London Daily Mail reporter David Williams witnessed one of those "Daisy Cutter" attacks: "The sound split the air. It was like a thunder clap directly overhead at the height of a ferocious storm. I could see the massive oily black cloud of the explosion as it rolled across the hillside, a mixture of thick smoke, chunks of earth and debris." [CREDO Action Nov 8/01; www.commondreams.org]

“The effect of the BLU-82 is astonishing, and rare film shows a detonation, shock wave and subsequent mushroom cloud very similar to a small nuclear weapon,” writes Paul Rogers in The Mother Of All Bombs. “Journalists who visited areas where the bomb had been dropped reported scenes of extraordinary devastation” from a firestorm that sucked all the oxygen from the air, crushed human organs and incinerated an area the size of five football fields in a single mighty blast. [openDemocracy.net Mar 7/03]

By December 13, 2001 the U.S. Air Force had dropped at least four 17-foot-long "Daisy Cutter" bombs on tunnel complexes and Taliban concentrations in Afghanistan. [globalsecurity.org; commondreams.org]

DIRTY BOMBS​
They also began dropping two-and-a-half-ton GBU-28 "dense metal" penetrators from B-52s and B-1 Stealth bombers. Exploding deep underground, the bomb's explosive energy “coupled” with bedrock under immense pressure from the weight bearing down on it. The resulting seismic shock wave could crush an underground bunker - or the internal organs of anyone caught in the “overpressure” from a blast wave 20-times stronger than the bomb blast itself. [ucsusa.org May/05]

In order to penetrate rock and concrete, each “Great Big Uranium” bomb is shaped like a spear tipped with tons of radioactive Uranium-238 nearly twice as dense as lead. Using nuclear waste left over from making atomic bombs and reactor fuel, the amount of radioactive Depleted Uranium (DU) particles spread by each GBU “dirty bomb” eclipsed any terrorist's fantasy - one-and-a-half metric tons of aerosolized particles capable of causing genetic mutations and death for the next four billion years! [Le Monde March 2002]

The similarities of BLU and GBU detonations to nuclear blasts was not lost on U.S. war planners, who realized that the blast effects and resulting radioactive fallout from conventional bunker-busters could mask the detonation of so-called “low-yield” B61-11 tactical nuclear bombs.

The Bush administration's first U.S. Nuclear Posture Review had already called for fast-track development of new tactical nuclear weapons, a resumption of nuclear tests, and more "flexible, adaptable strike plans" - including "options for variable and reduced yields.” Submitted to Congress on December 31, 2001, the neocon's follow-up CONPLAN 8022 would reverse the decades-old U.S. policy against “first use” of nuclear weapons by authorizing their rapid deployment to destroy 'time-urgent targets' anywhere in the world. [ People's Weekly World Newspaper Mar 16/02]

As the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists jumped the minute hand of their Doomsday Clock forward two minutes to seven minutes to midnight, White House fundamentalists eagerly sought ways to test their new “baby nukes” against real-world targets. Proponents insisted, "Many buried targets could be attacked using a weapon with a much lower yield than would be required with a surface burst." [smh.com.au Sept 7/02]

Those buried nuclear targets were specifically located in Afghanistan and Iraq.

As Dr. Mohammed Daud Miraki of the Afghan DU & Recovery Fund observed, “The White House and US-DOD spoke frequently about the development and use of fission, low-yield and non-fission, seismic bunker- and cave-busters,” “The US Strategic Military Plan and US Nuclear Posture Review expresses intentions to use new classes of weapons in Afghanistan and other states. This program was known to be accelerating its weapons development and experiments in readiness for a possible Iraqi incursion.” [Afghan DU & Recovery Fund]

ILL WINDS​
Soon after commencing aerial bombardment against Afghanistan, Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld told the press “he did not rule out the eventual use of nuclear weapons." [Houston Chronicle Oct 20/01]

Still reeling from the relentlessly televised images of September 11, the American public was told that only nuclear blasts could safely vaporize caches of chemical, nuclear or biological weapons not authorized by Washington, which retained its own banned stockpiles of biological weapons, along with more than five-thousand nuclear warheads. [AP June 11/07]

As I was told by an extremely well-connected Desert Storm veteran, whom I have to call “Hank” during our 15-year collaboration, pursuing al-Qaeda and Taliban fighters across Afghanistan's “wide flat open spaces” is like target shooting. But the “hills that crop out of nowhere” in this desolate region “are craggy and rocky with holes in them that we can't detect. We know they had access to the Russian biologicals. They could have it in the cave. The container could be open…”

For this reason, “in caves 75 to 89 percent of the time, our guys are wearing an NBC (Nuclear, Chemical, Biological) suit as a precaution,” he went on. “You never know what these guys might have in there - Taliban and Al Qaeda. We knew categorically that they had captured a lot of Soviet munitions, so we knew that whatever these guys fielded they captured: last ditch stuff.”

But blowing up chemical-biological munitions is a really bad idea - as Hank and other coalition forces posted downwind of Iraq's detonated CBW stockpiles at Khamisiyah learned to their cost following the first Persian Gulf War. As Benjamin Phelan pointed out in Harper's, “A well-designed granite bunker could with-stand four times the shock produced by [a conventional bunker buster]. If the bunker housed weapons of mass destruction, studies have shown that a canister of, say, mustard gas could be insulated from the heat of the blast by a few meters of earth, and thereby escape being vaporized… In the likely event that a canister is ruptured but not destroyed, the chemical agent… would be blasted up into the air, carried away in the fallout cloud.” [Harper's Dec 1/04]

Another risk, Hank cautioned, “If you nuke something that's already [fissionable], you'll get a cook off you didn't expect.” Even doing “a flash bang” over stockpiled yellow cake, or Depleted Uranium debris “could cause those pieces to reciprocate” by absorbing and then reflecting incoming Alpha, Beta, Delta, Gamma and X-rays from a supposedly low-yield detonation.

Risks are compounded when countries facing America's willingness to use nuclear weapons against them respond by developing their own 4th generation, low-yield nuclear bombs. "The concern is that countries are starting to see these weapons as useable, whereas during the Cold War they were seen as a deterrent," warns Ian Anthony, a nuclear expert at the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. [AP June 11/07]

Recognizing that "low-yield nuclear weapons blur the distinction between nuclear and conventional war,” a 1994 law banned research and development on nuclear weapons of less than 5-kilotons in the United States.

But Bush's 2001 Defense Authorization Bill passed by a Republican Congress overturned these earlier restrictions. Just as “Little Boy” and “Fat Man” were rushed to the Pacific Theater in time to be tested on the starving Japanese citizenry before the emperor's surrender pleas leaked to the press, the nuclear version of the bunker-busting GBU-28 was rushed to Afghanistan to conduct remote field tests before the Taliban surrendered.

POINT TOWARD ENEMY​
The nuclear version of the GBU-28 bunker buster is the B61-11. When American forces targeted Tora Bora in 2001, there were 150 B61-11s in the U.S. arsenal. Featuring nuclear warheads that could be dialed from 0.3 to 340 kilotons - equivalent of 300 to 340,000 tons of radioactive TNT - these new Earth Penetrating Weapons were, according to atomic scientists, capable of "destroying the deepest and most hardened of underground bunkers, which the conventional warheads are not capable of doing." [Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists May/June 1997; Wired Oct 8/01]

“When a bunker buster burrows in, the blast is directed downward,” Hank explained. “It's a lens and it's focused straight down instead of outward.”

Designed to penetrate deep into the earth before detonating, the shaped warhead directs a blast hotter than a thousand suns in a shock-coupled seismic shockwave that shakes several hundred meters of bedrock. “Even a short penetration distance accomplishes this goal of 'coupling' the energy of the explosion to the ground,” notes the Union of Concerned Scientists. ”Penetration of a few meters increases the underground destructive effects by more than a factor of twenty.” [Defense News Mar 2/97; [ucsusa.org May/05]

Stripping away the numbers, Hank summarized the effects of dropping an earth-penetrating nuclear bomb with typical GI directness: “Do an overpressure wave in a cave, everything in there is squished.”

With the resulting hard radiation supposedly sequestered underground, the 1,200-pound B61 was enthusiastically hailed by Bush and his backers as a “relatively safe” atomic bomb that would not kill too many innocent bystanders. [Philadelphia Inquirer Oct 16/00]

Or freak out the world.

PINGING​
Nuclear explosions are also handy for locating buried bunkers. Ground Penetrating Radar can “see” through only about 15 feet of sand. But in a process called “echo-ranging”, oil prospectors hoping to detect underground deposits at depths greater than 300-feet routinely bounce shockwaves from small explosions to reveal underground objects and cavities. Recorded by sensors fitted with precise Global Positioning Satellite locators, reverberating echoes can be computer-plotted to create precise, three-dimensional maps of deeply buried features, similar to a submarine “pinging” a target. [USAF Air War College May 2000]

Except in this case, each “ping” is a nuclear detonation.

“You get a 3-D map of the area,” Hank confirmed. After a nuclear blast “rings the mountains like a bell, you know where the holes are; where the people are.”

FALLOUT​
But the air force was worried. In June 2001, its study on using even the smallest nuclear bombs concluded: “The political repercussions of employing nuclear weapon may be greater than the United States would want to contemplate, and the environmental consequences of potentially spreading a warehouse full of potentially deadly biological or chemical agents would be unacceptable.” [USAF Air War College May 2000]

The political fallout could be as bad as the “large area of lethal fallout" scientists warned would follow " the large amount of radioactive dirt thrown out in the explosion” from a weapon as “small” as 5-kilotons. [Philadelphia Inquirer Oct 16/00]

This dust would be deadly. In Yugoslavia, where 30,000 radioactive uranium projectiles fired by NATO warplanes had released thousands of tons of easily inhaled or ingested microscopic particles, medical doctors were already reporting “multiple unrelated cancers” in families with no previous history of cancer, who lived in highly contaminated areas.

A previously unknown phenomenon, these “very rare and unusual cancers and birth defects have also been reported to be increasing, not only in war torn countries, but also in neighbouring countries from transboundary contamination,” the European Parliament found. [ Global Research July 8/04; American Free Press Aug 27/04; European Parliament Verbatim Report of Proceedings Apr 9/02; Bundesforschungsanstalt für Landwirtschaft Nov 8/05]

The tonnages of radioactive Uranium-238 and toxic heavy metals detonated in hundreds of cruise missiles fired into neighborhoods in Afghanistan and Iraq was never tabulated. But after conducting extensive research on DU weapons, former Naval officer Daniel Fahey declared, “You're talking about something that should be stored as a radioactive waste, and [instead they're] spreading it around other countries. [Mother Jones June 23/99]

Just as veterans of Desert Storm came to call their mysterious maladies “Gulf War Syndrome,” soldiers posted to Bosnia and Kosovo in the 1990s began referring to the “Balkans Syndrome.” By January 2001, more than a quarter of the more than 1,400 Greek troops stationed in Kosovo were demanding to depart due to the increased risk of cancer.

United States law and U.S. Army Regulations AR 700-48 and TB 9-1300-278 require the army to "Clean and Treat" all persons affected and all areas contaminated by the radioactive uranium munitions. But Lt. Col. Mike Milord confirmed that the Pentagon had zero plans to clean up radioactive contamination in Kosovo - or anywhere else . [Vanity Fair Nov/04; Daily Telegraph Jan 15/01]

The ability of Depleted Uranium missiles and shells to burn through the densest concrete and armor made these weapons too useful to give up. DU attacks could also be used to mask the cancers and leukemia incurred downwind of a low-yield nuclear detonation.

If the “Depleted Uranium explanation” somehow failed in the Tora Bora region, Hank told me, “we could blame radiation on the terrorists.”

Why not? The United States of America had already dropped a nuclear bomb on Iraq.
 
.
It is allowed by US senate to use small nuclear bombs (termed as tactical weapons) against enemy.
It means that those can be fired by cannos. they are not accurate and are handled by lower rank soldiers. It also means those could be easily lost, misused and fall in to the hands of terrorists.
I have also learned once that latest those tactical nukes were used in nangahar province, where whole population is suffering from the after effects but kept low profile by controlling media through fair and unfair means.

I wonder if it has any effects on Pakistan side? All soldiers serving on afghan border should get a medical check.
 
.
if this is real, i can say this is shocking and truly disgusting. because of cowardice, nuclear weapons are used to eliminate an enemy without a fight. i'm truly ashamed of such horrible acts. May Allah protect our ummah from these things, Ameen.
 
.
These are nuclear warheads we are talking about, not fire crackers.

You can't drop a nuke and hide it
 
.
these are sub-kiloton yield or low yield (below 5 KT) bombs being dropped in mountainous or desert areas to kill terrorists. its implications are obviously of a much smaller magnitude than a strategic nuke dropped on cities. in fact many countries wont even classify these weapon as nukes.
 
.
these are sub-kiloton yield or low yield (below 5 KT) bombs being dropped in mountainous or desert areas to kill terrorists. its implications are obviously of a much smaller magnitude than a strategic nuke dropped on cities. in fact many countries wont even classify these weapon as nukes.

The use of any nuclear weapon capable of destroying a buried target that is otherwise immune to conventional attack will necessarily produce enormous numbers of civilian casualties.

No earth-burrowing missile can penetrate deep enough into the earth to contain an explosion with a nuclear yield even as small as 1 percent of the 15 kiloton Hiroshima weapon.

The explosion simply blows out a massive crater of radioactive dirt, which rains down on the local region with an especially intense and deadly fallout.
 
.
Quite right AR.

The use of Sub kiloton Nuke can not be hidden...

True that they are using DU shells and bombs for Penetration purposes but using Miniture Atomic weapon for Terrorist eradication is not a solution US will take by far.
 
.
Did the US used tactical nuclear weapons in Afghanistan?

by Alex Kirby​

New reference levels based on recent samples show uranium levels 45 times normal. New bioassay studies identify uranium internal contamination in Spin Gar (Tora Bora) area and the City of Kabul are up to 200 times the level of the unexposed population. Surface water, rice fields and catch-basins adjacent to and surrounding the bombsites have high values of uranium, up to 27 times normal.

A small sample of Afghan civilians have shown "astonishing" levels of uranium in their urine, an independent scientist says.

Critics suspect new weapons were used in Afghanistan.

He said they had the same symptoms as some veterans of the 1991 Gulf war.

But he found no trace of the depleted uranium (DU) some scientists believe is implicated in Gulf War syndrome.

Other researchers suggest new types of radioactive weapons may have been used in Afghanistan.

The scientist is Dr Asaf Durakovic, of the Uranium Medical Research Center (UMRC) based in Washington DC.

Dr Durakovic, a former US army colonel who is now a professor of medicine, said in 2000 he had found "significant" DU levels in two-thirds of the 17 Gulf veterans he had tested.

In May 2002 he sent a team to Afghanistan to interview and examine civilians there.

The UMRC says: "Independent monitoring of the weapon types and delivery systems indicate that radioactive, toxic uranium alloys and hard-target uranium warheads were being used by the coalition forces."

Shock results
It says Nangarhar province was a strategic target zone during the Afghan conflict for the deployment of a new generation of deep-penetrating "cave-busting" and seismic shock warheads.

The UMRC says its team identified several hundred people suffering from illnesses and conditions similar to those of Gulf veterans, probably because they had inhaled uranium dust.

Bomb damage was widespread

To test its hypothesis that some form of uranium weapon had been used, the UMRC sent urine specimens from 17 Afghans for analysis at an independent UK laboratory.

It says: "Without exception, every person donating urine specimens tested positive for uranium internal contamination.

"The results were astounding: the donors presented concentrations of toxic and radioactive uranium isotopes between 100 and 400 times greater than in the Gulf veterans tested in 1999.

"If UMRC's Nangarhar findings are corroborated in other communities across Afghanistan, the country faces a severe public health disaster... Every subsequent generation is at risk."

It says troops who fought in Afghanistan and the staff of aid agencies based in Afghanistan are also at risk.

Scientific acceptance
Dr Durakovic's team used as a control group three Afghans who showed no signs of contamination. They averaged 9.4 nanograms of uranium per litre of urine.

The average for his 17 "randomly-selected" patients was 315.5 nanograms, he said. Some were from Jalalabad, and others from Kabul, Tora Bora, and Mazar-e-Sharif. A 12-year-old boy living near Kabul had 2,031 nanograms.

Troops and aid workers could be at risk The maximum permissible level for members of the public in the US is 12 nanograms per litre, Dr Durakovic said.

A second UMRC visit to Afghanistan in September 2002 found "a potentially much broader area and larger population of contamination". It collected 25 more urine samples, which bore out the findings from the earlier group.

Dr Durakovic said he was "stunned" by the results he had found, which are to be published shortly in several scientific journals.

Identical outcome
He told BBC News Online: "In Afghanistan there were no oil fires, no pesticides, nobody had been vaccinated - all explanations suggested for the Gulf veterans' condition.

"But people had exactly the same symptoms. I'm certainly not saying Afghanistan was a vast experiment with new uranium weapons. But use your common sense."

The UK Defence Ministry says it used no DU weapons in Afghanistan, nor any others containing uranium in any form.

A spokesman for the US Department of Defense told BBC News Online the US had not used DU weapons there. He could not comment on Dr Durakovic's findings of elevated uranium levels in Afghan civilians.


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

Uranium Medical Research Center ( UMRC) at : http://www.umrc.net/index.asp

Quotes from UMRC Field Team's Trip Report

"The UMRC field team was shocked by the breadth of public health impacts coincident with the bombing. Without exception, at every bombsite investigated, people are ill. A significant portion of the civilian population presents symptoms consistent with internal contamination by Uranium."

"They (the bombs) combined significant explosive force with hard-target penetration features. These weapons punched through three or more layers composed of steel reinforced roofs and two or more concrete walls without detonating. They then passed through the concrete floor/foundation slabs, to bury 3 to 4 meters in the earth before exploding."

"People rush to look for survivors and pull out the bodies. Mr. Sahib Daad digs through the remains of their house to rescue his two young sons. They died in his arms as the sun rose over the mountains. Entangled in the remains of the neighbour's house are eight bodies - mother, grandmother and six little girls."
 
.
The average for his 17 "randomly-selected" patients was 315.5 nanograms, he said. Some were from Jalalabad, and others from Kabul, Tora Bora, and Mazar-e-Sharif. A 12-year-old boy living near Kabul had 2,031 nanograms.

Troops and aid workers could be at risk The maximum permissible level for members of the public in the US is 12 nanograms per litre, Dr Durakovic said.
If Afghanis are not exposed to the radiation from weapons than Afghanistan it self is made up of Uranium.
It is a known facts that US has developed small atomic bombs.
Researchers have to established if they were used in recent wars or not.
There is too much research work available on web on this subject..
 
.
Tactical Nuclear Weapons —Stansfield Turner

One experience I had with tactical nuclear planning in the 1970s reflected the attitude that nuclear weapons could be treated as large conventional ones. I was commander-in-chief of NATO’s southern flank, responsible for, among other things, the defence of Italy. One day I asked for a briefing on how, in the event of a general war in Europe, we would stop a Soviet thrust through the Alps at the Brenner Pass into northern Italy. The briefer displayed a photo of the road descending from the Brenner to the northern plain. A dozen or so concrete columns that were about 100 feet high supported the road, which literally clung to the side of the mountain. The briefer explained that we would detonate an atomic demolition charge, a small tactical nuclear weapon, at the base of one of these columns. I asked why we would not use TNT to bring down such a vulnerable structure? There was no answer. We had nuclear weapons and they were the best way to be absolutely sure the Soviets would be prevented from using the road. The overkill and the collateral effects on Italy of radiation and fires were simply not addressed.

The long-standing impulse to use the more powerful weapon leads to finding uses for powerful weapons. Today armchair strategists have cast about for targets suitable for tactical nuclear weapons. The primary one is deeply buried, hardened bunkers that are used for weapon storage or for command posts. Interestingly, we already have lots of nuclear warheads that would demolish these safe havens, but we are talking of designing new, smaller ones. The idea is not to do too much ‘collateral’ damage, through excessive blast effect, radiation, or fires. In short, the conundrum of nuclear weapons in an age when firebombing and carpet-bombing would be unacceptable is that we want these weapons because their size ensures sufficient destructiveness, but we want them downsized enough so that they won’t do too much damage. This is walking a very thin tightrope.

The odds are extremely slim that any president would ever authorise the first use of tactical nuclear weapons. The uncertainties associated with both direct and collateral damages would be daunting. And who could predict what might happen next if a 57-year taboo on the use of nuclear weapons were to be broken? Even beyond that, a president would surely ask, “What alternatives do I have?” One is to employ conventional weapons to destroy ingress and egress points for people, supplies, power, water, air, weapons, etc. A second is to develop conventional weapons that could penetrate all the way to the bunker. The United States is working, for instance, on a multiple warhead conventional weapon where the first warhead opens up a hole and a carefully timed second one burrows in and exploits that. Finally, we need to recognise that just because there is a target out there, we do not necessarily have to be able to destroy it. There will always be a calculus as to whether the importance of the target warrants the risks and uncertainties of unleashing a nuclear weapon.

If I am correct that there will be great reluctance on the part of presidents to unleash tactical nuclear weapons, our developing them and inserting them into war plans could be dangerous. That is, we may be counting on a weapon that will not actually be available when the time comes and we may not have developed the conventional ones that would be used.

An irony in this quest for new, smaller tactical nuclear weapons is that the United States, the most militarily powerful nation in the world, is saying there are circumstances of war in which it will need to resort to nuclear weapons. Surely this legitimises nuclear weapons for weaker nations that might have no other recourse for defending themselves. And it is the United States that is most likely to be deterred from employing military force by the threat of even a small nuclear attack on its soil or its deployed forces.

It must be in the interest of the United States to lead the world away from nuclear catastrophe since it is a more likely target and has more to lose than anyone else. Getting tactical nuclear weapons under control, rather than attesting to their usefulness by building new ones, should be our goal. This excellent book helps us to understand these issues.

Admiral Stansfield Turner, former director of Central Intelligence, is on the faculty of the School of Public Affairs of the University of Maryland. This passage is taken from his forward to the volume titled Tactical Nuclear Weapons: Emergent Threats in an Evolving Security Environment
 
.
4. High Uranium Levels Found in Troops and Civiliansin Top 25 Censored Stories for 2005

URANIUM MEDICAL RESEARCH CENTER, January 2003
Title: “UMRC’s Preliminary Findings from Afghanistan & Operation Enduring Freedom”
and
“Afghan Field Trip #2 Report: Precision Destruction- Indiscriminate Effects”
Author: Tedd Weyman, UMRC Research Team

AWAKENED WOMAN, January 2004
Title: “Scientists Uncover Radioactive Trail in Afghanistan”
Author: Stephanie Hiller

DISSIDENT VOICE, March 2004
Title: “There Are No Words…Radiation in Iraq Equals 250,000 Nagasaki Bombs”
Author: Bob Nichols

NEW YORK DAILY NEWS, April 5,2004
Title: “Poisoned?”
Author: Juan Gonzalez

INFORMATION CLEARING HOUSE, March 2004
Title: “International Criminal Tribune For Afghanistan At Tokyo, The People vs. George Bush”
Author: Professor Ms Niloufer Bhagwat J.

Evaluator: Jennifer Lillig, Ph.D.
Student Researcher: Kenny Crosbie

Civilian populations in Afghanistan and Iraq and occupying troops have been contaminated with astounding levels of radioactive depleted and non-depleted uranium as a result of post-9/11 United States’ use of tons of uranium munitions. Researchers say surrounding countries are bound to feel the effects as well.

In 2003 scientists from the Uranium Medical Research Center (UMRC) studied urine samples of Afghan civilians and found that 100% of the samples taken had levels of non-depleted uranium (NDU) 400% to 2000% higher than normal levels. The UMRC research team studied six sites, two in Kabul and others in the Jalalabad area. The civilians were tested four months after the attacks in Afghanistan by the United States and its allies.

NDU is more radioactive than depleted uranium (DU), which itself is charged with causing many cancers and severe birth defects in the Iraqi population-especially children-over the past ten years. Four million pounds of radioactive uranium was dropped on Iraq in 2003 alone. Uranium dust will be in the bodies of our returning armed forces. Nine soldiers from the 442nd Military Police serving in Iraq were tested for DU contamination in December 2003. Conducted at the request of The News, as the U.S. government considers the cost of $1,000 per affected soldier prohibitive, the test found that four of the nine men were contaminated with high levels of DU, likely caused by inhaling dust from depleted uranium shells fired by U.S. troops. Several of the men had traces of another uranium isotope, U-236, that are produced only in a nuclear reaction process.

Most American weapons (missiles, smart bombs, dumb bombs, bullets, tank shells, cruise missiles, etc.) contain high amounts of radioactive uranium. Depleted or non-depleted, these types of weapons, on detonation, release a radioactive dust which, when inhaled, goes into the body and stays there. It has a half-life of 4.5 billion years. Basically, it’s a permanently available contaminant, distributed in the environment, where dust storms or any water nearby can disperse it. Once ingested, it releases subatomic particles that slice through DNA.

UMRC’s Field Team found several hundred Afghan civilians with acute symptoms of radiation poisoning along with chronic symptoms of internal uranium contamination, including congenital problems in newborns. Local civilians reported large, dense dust clouds and smoke plumes rising from the point of impact, an acrid smell, followed by burning of the nasal passages, throat and upper respiratory tract. Subjects in all locations presented identical symptom profiles and chronologies. The victims reported symptoms including pain in the cervical column, upper shoulders and basal area of the skull, lower back/kidney pain, joint and muscle weakness, sleeping difficulties, headaches, memory problems and disorientation.

At the Uranium Weapons Conference held October 2003 in Hamburg, Germany, independent scientists from around the world testified to a huge increase in birth deformities and cancers wherever NDU and DU had been used. Professor Katsuma Yagasaki, a scientist at the Ryukyus University, Okinawa calculated that the 800 tons of DU used in Afghanistan is the radioactive equivalent of 83,000 Nagasaki bombs. The amount of DU used in Iraq is equivalent to 250,000 Nagasaki bombs.

At the Uranium Weapons Conference, a demonstration by British-trained oncologist Dr. Jawad Al-Ali showed photographs of the kinds of birth deformities and tumors he had observed at the Saddam Teaching Hospital in Basra just before the 2003 war. Cancer rates had increased dramatically over the previous fifteen years. In 1989 there were 11 abnormalities per 100,000 births; in 2001 there were 116 per 100,000-an increase of over a thousand percent. In 1989 34 people died of cancer; in 2001 there were 603 cancer deaths. The 2003 war has increased these figures exponentially.

At a meeting of the International Criminal Tribunal for Afghanistan held December 2003 in Tokyo, the U.S. was indicted for multiple war crimes in Afghanistan, among them the use of DU. Leuren Moret, President of Scientists for Indigenous People and Environmental Commissioner for the City of Berkeley, testified that because radioactive contaminants from uranium weapons travel through air, water, and food sources, the effects of U.S. deployment in Afghanistan will be felt in Iran, Pakistan, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Russia, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, China and India. Countries affected by the use of uranium weapons in Iraq include Saudi Arabia, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Israel, Turkey, and Iran.

UPDATE BY BOB NICHOLS: (Oklahoma City) Throughout the world people are familiar with the “smoking gun” solution so prized by murder mystery writers. Many think that once the smoking gun in any mystery is discovered, it is time for the “bad guys” to give up. Wish it were only so.

The smoking guns are Sgt. Hector Vega, Sgt. Ray Ramos, Sgt. Agustin Matos and Cpl. Anthony Yonnone from New York’s 442nd Guard Unit-they are the first confirmed cases of inhaled uranium oxide exposure from the current Iraq conflict. Dr. Asaf Durokovic, professor of Nuclear Medicine at the Uranium Medical Research Centre Uranium Medical Research Centre conducted the diagnostic tests. The story was released April 3, 2004 in the New York Daily News. There is no treatment and there is no cure. New York City's Hometown Newspaper - NY Daily News

Leuren Moret reports, “In my research on depleted uranium during the past 5 years, the most disturbing information concerns the impact on the unborn children and future generations for both soldiers serving in the depleted uranium wars, and for the civilians who must live in the permanently radioactive contaminated regions. Today, more than 240,000 Gulf War veterans are on permanent medical disability and more than 11,000 are dead. They have been denied testing, medical care, and compensation for depleted uranium exposure and related illnesses since 1991.”

Moret continues “Even worse, they brought it home in their bodies. In some families, the children born before the Gulf War are the only healthy members. Wives and female partners of Gulf War veterans have reported a condition known as burning semen syndrome, and are now internally contaminated from depleted uranium carried in the semen of exposed veterans. Many are reporting reproductive illnesses such as endometriosis. In a U.S. government study, conducted by the Department of Veterans Affairs on post-Gulf War babies, 67% were found to have serious birth defects or serious illnesses. They were born without eyes (anophthalmos), ears, had missing organs, missing legs and arms, fused fingers, thyroid or other organ malformations.”

“LIFE Photoessay:”
LIFE - Your World in Pictures

Moret concludes, “In Iraq it is even worse where babies are born without brains, organs are outside the body, or women give birth to pieces of flesh. In babies born in Iraq in 2002, the incidence of anophthalmos was 250,000 times greater (20 cases in 4,000 births) than the natural occurrence, one in 50 million births. Takashi MORIZUMI’s photos: in Save the War Children record the tragedy in Iraq.”

For more information on the American President’s continuing campaign of contaminating the land, check the World Uranium Weapons Conference, World Uranium Weapons Conference 2003 ,
Check the Uranium Medical Research Center and Dr. Asaf Durakovic at Uranium Medical Research Centre ,
and for updates on the related Nuclear Power Plants see Russell Hoffman’s website at: The Demon Hot Adam .

Write Leuren Moret, Independent Scientist and radiation specialist, City of Berkeley Environmental Commissioner, Past President, Association for Women Geoscientists: leurenmoret@yahoo.com

“Depleted Uranium: The Trojan Horse of Nuclear War” by Leuren Moret, World Affairs Journal, July, 2004. Depleted Uranium: The Trojan Horse of Nuclear War LEUREN MORET / World Affairs – The Journal of International Issues 1jul04

These YahooGroups host discussions about uranium munitions:
du-list@yahoogroups.com
du-watch@yahoogroups.com
pandora-project@yahoogroups.com
nucnews@yahoogroups.com
abolition-caucus@yahoogroups.com
earthfirstalert@yahoogroups.com
Read Bob Nichols at: Dissident Voice .

UPDATE BY TEDD WEYMAN: UMRC found artificial uranium in bomb craters, surrounding watercourses and the bodies of civilians exposed to US Coalition bombing in Afghanistan. Civilians surveyed presented with the classical symptoms of internal contamination by uranium, which began after exposure to the bombing. The presence of artificial uranium in environmental and biological samples indicates that the bunker buster warheads used in Afghanistan are made of uranium.

Uranium is a chemically and radiologically toxic element, clinically proven to be a cause of various types of cancer and congenital malformations (birth defects). Internal contamination of uranium is responsible for variety of systemic and organ system problems, which has never been considered or studied by the Defense Department or Veterans health programs as possible cause of Gulf War Illness. The symptoms of internal contamination by uranium in Iraq and Afghanistan civilians are identical to the symptoms of US and Coalition veterans complaining of Gulf War Illness.

The Pentagon/DoD have interfered with UMRC’s ability to have its studies published by managing, a progressive and persistent misinformation program in the press against UMRC, and through the use of its control of science research grants to refute UMRC’s scientific findings and destroy the reputation of UMRC’s scientific staff, physicians and laboratories. UMRC is the first independent research organization to find Depleted Uranium in the bodies of US, UK and Canadian Gulf War I veterans and has subsequently, following Operation Iraqi Freedom, found Depleted Uranium in the water, soils and atmosphere of Iraq as well as biological samples donated by Iraqi civilians.

The United States and several of its Coalition partners and NATO allies have been deploying in battlefield and experimenting with chemically toxic and radioactive heavy metals in various types of bullets, bombs and warheads since the early 1970s. Uranium powder is taken from the nuclear fuel reprocessing cycle, after it has been mixed with nuclear reactor waste products and spent fuel, to supply the non-fissile weapons’ manufacturing industry.

Uranium is preferred over all other “ballistic” metals (e.g. lead, iron, tungsten) because it offers a set of unique metallurgical properties: it is extremely dense yet ductile metal (not brittle); it is pyrophoric (uranium dust burns spontaneously at room temperature); and, solid metal uranium is autoigniting at 170° F. Uranium metal has a very unusual property not available in any other metal; it is “self-sharpening”, meaning that when it hits a target at high velocities (1 km/sec) it erodes and breaks in such a way as to continuously re-sharpen its point - the leading points of all other warhead metals flatten or mushroom under these conditions. These properties give uranium a superior performance as a penetrating warhead alloy capable of breaching the hardest and thickest armor plating, retaining penetration capabilities at 15 % greater distances and lower speeds than the most common alternative metal, tungsten. Burning uranium is hard to extinguish, and if doused with water, it will explode. Uranium used in specially designed high velocity liquid metal penetrators can bore through 20 feet of super-reinforced concrete bunkers in classified weapons called “shaped charges” and “explosively formed penetrators”. The hard (dense), resilient (ductile) and heavy (sustaining momentum) characteristics of uranium also make its optimal in the warhead of robust earth-penetrating bombs to carry them into buried targets and caves.

The mainstream press in the US and Canada does not show any general interest in the story, let alone an investigative interest. European mainstream press is more interested and follows key developments. The NY Daily News April 5, 2004 has covered Gulf War II results by UMRC’s studies of US veterans. DoD has lied and misled the public and the veterans in an attempt to undermine the significance of the story. There is significant alternative press and internet press coverage. The technique for coverage is to approach the story as a debate between government and independent experts in which public interest is stimulated by polarizing the issues rather than telling the scientific and medical truth. The issues are systematically confused and misinformed by government, UN regulatory agencies (WHO, UNEP, IAEA, CDC, DOE, etc) and defense sector (military and the weapons developers and manufacturers).

UPDATE BY STEPHANIE HILLER: This is a shocking story since it suggests that experimental nuclear bombs were dropped around Kabul at the end of the war Operation Enduring Freedom. (Did they mean enduring radiation?) And what have they dropped on Iraq?

Continued research shows that we have all been irradiated here in the United States, at an enormous cost to the public health. Cancer rates alone show that genetic mutation has been rapidly increasing since the first bomb was tested in Almorgordo, NM in 1945. But the effects of low-level radiation have been systematically hidden from public view!

In April after sick vets from the current war got no help from the Pentagon, the mother of one of the soldiers went to the papers. Juan Gonzalez of the New York Daily News launched an investigation. The News paid for nine men to be tested by Asaf Durakovic. He found that four of them were contaminated with uranium. The News got the attention of New York Senator Hilary Clinton. She held a teleconference- but Durakovic was not allowed to participate!

Amy Goodman interviewed Durakovic later the same month on Democracy Now!- don’t know if it was thanks to my story. AlterNet rejected the story because their source on depleted uranium, John Fahey, did not agree with it.
I don’t know of any mainstream media that has picked up the story, and I don’t find any references to the Gonzalez piece either. The BBC and the Seattle Post Intelligencer covered it before me.

To learn more about uranium weapons search the web! It’s a huge topic. Start with the world Uranium Weapons Conference held last October in Hamburg: The Power Point by Dr. Ali shows the most excruciating consequences of Persian Gulf One—deformed babies. Also, Join WBW! Women for a Better World has begun an information campaign to educate the public about depleted uranium, especially young people who might be called to join the military and their families, regarding the contamination of Central Eurasia. Come to our web site for more information, flyers, and to sign a petition opposing the draft for the same reason.
 
.
i wonder does those states and individuals suffering from radiation lead diseases can take up this matter with any court of justice?
 
.
Back
Top Bottom