> WW News Service Digest #126 > > 1) Handford Wildfire: Nuclear Disaster? > by [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 2) Boy Scout Bigotry: Supreme Court's Anti-Gay Ruling > by [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 3) Mississippi: Lynching Cover-Up > by [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 4) Houston: Tribute to Fallen Warrior > by [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 5) Vieques Resisters Defy U.S. Bombs > by [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >------------------------- >Via Workers World News Service >Reprinted from the July 13, 2000 >issue of Workers World newspaper >------------------------- > >WILDFIRE THREATENS HANFORD RADIOACTIVE WASTE SITE >IN WASHINGTON STATE: NUCLEAR DISASTER? > >By Elijah Crane > >In the latest natural disaster to threaten nuclear waste >dumps in the United States, a wildfire was ignited by an >auto accident near the Hanford Nuclear Reservation in >Washington state June 27 and raged for more than three >days. > >The blaze destroyed 70 buildings, including 25 homes. By >June 29 the fire had seared 190,000 acres of land, burning >more than 45 percent of Hanford's 560 square miles. > >It was just this May that wildfires threatened the Los >Alamos nuclear facility in New Mexico--the once-secret site >of the Manhattan Project to build the atomic bomb--where >47,000 acres of forest burned to the ground. This included >9,000 acres of lab property where radioactive contaminants >were buried. > >In the case of Los Alamos, fires were set purposely to >clear brush from the area, but the flames quickly grew out >of control. As a result, more than 25,000 people had to >evacuate the area as 200 homes were scorched to ashes. > >Now the Los Alamos area is at further risk of exposure to >toxic waste due to the impending rainy season. Contaminated >radioactive materials are buried at the facility and are >spread throughout the soil. > >Emergency workers have sprayed the mountainsides with >quick-growth seeds in hopes that the vegetation will sprout >before the rains begin. If it blooms in time, the new brush >will serve as a barrier or sponge for the contaminated dirt >and help prevent probable mudslides that threaten to wipe >out a critical bridge and destroy more homes, in addition >to spreading the toxic waste into other areas and water >supplies. > >DEPLETED URANIUM THREAT > >The Hanford Military Reservation--as it was formerly >known--was developed in 1943 as part of the Manhattan >Project. Technicians there helped create the atomic bombs >the United States dropped on Japan during World War II. > >Plutonium was manufactured at the site until 1986. The >facility contains the largest volume of radioactive waste >from nuclear weapons in the U.S. > >Like Los Alamos, the Hanford Nuclear Reservation also >stores its radioactive waste within the earth. Tanks that >hold more than 500,000 gallons of liquid waste are buried >there. > >In the midst of the recent wildfire, more than 1,500 >barrels were discovered underground containing waste of >"unknown origin," according to government officials. Nearly >350 of these barrels were unearthed, while the rest remain >buried. > >No one in any government agency seems to know where the >barrels came from, let alone their contents. Initial tests >reveal that toxins such as barium, lead, polychlorinated >biphenyls (PCBs), and other contaminants are in the >barrels. > >An engineer currently at Oak Ridge says that the barrels >at the Hanford site were burned in the past, sometimes >intentionally, though he did not explain why. He suggests >that uranium chip fires in the past--the type that would >result if the barrels were burned--would spread throughout >the soil. > >"Should a fire occur," he stated, "other materials in the >trench could create airborne particulates to carry DU away >from the immediate area." DU is depleted uranium, a waste >product of the uranium refinement process that is dangerous >to humans, especially when present as airborne particles. > >Government officials from the Department of Energy and the >Health Department, as well as representatives from the >Hanford Nuclear Reservation, continue to assure the media >and public that there is no risk of contamination as a >result of the disaster. However, clean-up workers from the >Environmental Protection Agency are not so quick to assert >this. > >When asked if there are any health threats as a result of >the fire, EPA Project Manager Dave Einan replied, "I >honestly don't know for sure. I don't want to experiment >with it." > >HISTORY OF LEAKY TANKS > >According to a 1989 article about Hanford in Science for >the People magazine, "high-level liquid wastes are known to >have leaked from at least 58 underground tanks at the site, >and much more leakage is expected in another 100 tanks." > >Recent articles about the wildfire acknowledge that the >most lethal waste is contained in 177 tanks buried six feet >underground. These are obviously the same leaky tanks cited >in the 1989 article. And while concerns during the blaze >were focused on the possibility of the tanks igniting, >which did not happen, there remain other causes for alarm. > >U.S. Energy Secretary Bill Richardson tried to reassure >the public, saying, "There does not appear to be any >contamination whatsoever. We are going to monitor this very >carefully." He also said that the fire caused no known air >or soil contamination. > >But the soil was already contaminated from the leaky tanks >filled with lethal radioactive contaminants. And if 45 >percent of Hanford's land was burned, there is a high >likelihood that some portion of the radioactive soil and >vegetation went up in smoke, releasing radioactive elements >into the air. > >As it is, people in the area have a history of chronic >health problems, linked by many local residents to >radioactive contamination. And some environmental watchdog >groups are blaming Hanford for the magnitude and >repercussions of the wildfire based on inadequate emergency >response preparation and procedures. > >The fire also burned across an old radioactive trench and >two dried-up radioactive ponds. > >Federal and state officials still insist that surveys show >no sign of increased radiation levels and no threat. >Nonetheless, the authorities removed classified information >from the site and the facility's 8,000 workers were asked >to stay at home last weekinteresting move if there is >nothing to worry about. > >The U.S. government has a long history of exposing >children, prisoners, service people and the general >population to high levels of radiation through experiments >and weapons construction and then denying the ill effects. > >Nuclear weapons workers from Kentucky to Nevada and >everywhere in between have been afflicted with cancer and >radiation illness from overexposure. The U.S. government >continues to deny this whenever possible. And as recently >as 1990 the U.S. government conducted secret underground >nuclear detonations in this country. > >It took nearly 50 years for many of the secret government >tests to be revealed and there are surely many more truths >yet to be discovered. Likewise, it will probably take many, >many years for the truth to be exposed about the levels of >radioactive toxins released into the air from the Hanford >fire. The health of area residents and workers at the site >will be one sure indication of the severity of >contamination. > >The capitalist profit motive has been the driving force in >the nuclear arms race, even though the projects themselves >are under government control. As with the rest of the >enormous U.S. military-industrial establishment, great >private fortunes have been made in government contracts to >develop nuclear weapons. But the biggest prize, and one >that all capitalists share in--from makers of sneakers to >agribusiness to Hollywood--is the world economic domination >that comes with being the power able to annihilate all life >on earth. > >That domination has made it easy for U.S. corporations to >super-exploit workers abroad. Workers in the U.S. are >paying for this in lost jobs. In the Pacific Northwest, >where Hanford is located, there is a growing consciousness >that world domination for U.S. corporations translates into >lower wages at home--and now the risk of nuclear >contamination. > > - END - > >(Copyleft Workers World Service. Everyone is permitted to >copy and distribute verbatim copies of this document, but >changing it is not allowed. For more information contact >Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011; via e-mail: >[EMAIL PROTECTED] For subscription info send message >to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: http://www.workers.org) > > >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2000 22:34:03 -0400 >Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII >Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT >Subject: [WW] Boy Scout Bigotry: Supreme Court's Anti-Gay Ruling >Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >{------------------------- >Via Workers World News Service >Reprinted from the July 13, 2000 >issue of Workers World newspaper >------------------------- > >HIGH COURT SIDES WITH ANTI-GAY BIGOTS: BOY SCOUT >RULING SHOWS NEED FOR FURTHER STRUGGLE > >By Gery Armsby > >The U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling June 28 that gives >the green light for an all-out ban on gay troop leaders by >the Boy Scouts of America. The 5-4 decision overturned a >unanimous 1999 New Jersey Supreme Court judgment that had >prohibited the BSA's discriminatory policies. > >The case involved James Dale, a gay student activist and >long-time scout member and leader, who the BSA ousted in >1990 after scouting officials learned about his campus >activism. In 1992, after New Jersey had amended public >accommodation laws to prohibit discrimination on the basis >of "sexual orientation," Dale filed a lawsuit against the >BSA. > >The New Jersey Superior Court dismissed Dale's original >lawsuit, saying that the BSA is not a public organization. >Dale sought an appeal. > >While the case was tied up in the New Jersey Appellate >Division for over five years, similar cases in California, >Maryland, Connecticut and elsewhere highlighted the BSA's >discrimination against gays. During this period, more and >more lesbian, gay, bi and trans people and other supporters >rallied around Dale's case. > >Under popular pressure, the Appellate Division ruled that, >due to its congressional charter and its almost unfettered >access to most public facilities, the BSA did fall under >the definition of a "public accommodation" and was subject >to New Jersey non-discrimination laws. Then in 1999 the New >Jersey Supreme Court unanimously affirmed the Appellate >Division's judgment, rejecting the First Amendment claims >of the BSA. > >The 1999 New Jersey decision was enormously significant >for lesbian, gay, bi and trans people, showing that a >genuine movement for equality could exert the necessary >political pressure on the system to defeat discrimination, >even when the anti-gay Boy Scouts were hiding behind the >First Amendment and their American-as-apple-pie image. > >But the BSA appealed the 1999 decision to the U.S. Supreme >Court on the basis of its claim as a "private club" with >First Amendment rights to free expression and association. >A narrow majority of high court justices this time agreed >with the BSA's claim. > >In briefs submitted to the court, the BSA went out of its >way to demonstrate the organization's anti-gay values. In >order to "justify" the exclusion of gay leaders, vague >references such as those in the "Scout Law and Oath" >suggesting members should be "morally straight" and "clean" >were not sufficient. The BSA explicitly documented its >anti-gay policy, digging up obscure memos and transcripts >of executive meetings held in the 1970s. > >The Boy Scouts don't need to prove their anti-gay record >on paper. It's already widely known. Many scout troops are >backed by the Mormon and Roman Catholic churches, both of >which have lent the BSA vocal support in the dispute over >gay leaders. > >Of the two bigots who brutally murdered Matthew Shepard in >Wyoming in 1998, one was an Eagle Scout. > >Thousands of gay scouts and former scouts have attested to >being discriminated against within the organization. >Several gay scouts are reported to have committed suicide. >Clearly, Boy Scout bigotry is no secret. > >The Supreme Court didn't have to side with anti-gay >discrimination. It could have issued a popular judgment >condemning the BSA for its track record of egregious >backwardness. > >Instead, the highest court in the U.S. delivered an >opinion that said, "The fact that an idea may be embraced >and advocated by increasing numbers of people is all the >more reason to protect the First Amendment rights of those >who wish to voice a different view." > >Where can someone like James Dale go for justice if the >court has just declared that it will go out on a limb to >support a reactionary minority's right to discriminate? > >COURT DEFENDS `RIGHT' TO DISCRIMINATE > >Though the Supreme Court found the BSA to be a private >organization with First Amendment entitlements to >discriminate, there still remain several questions. > >If the BSA is a private organization that not only >discriminates against gays but also bans young women from >membership, what should be done about the organization's >privileged use of and access to public lands, public >schools, the military, etc.? > >What about the more than 130,000 scouting troops that >utilize government and municipal personnel as scout leaders >and receive surplus goods and supplies from the military >and other publicly-funded agencies at absolutely no cost >whatsoever? > >What about the BSA's Federal Congressional Charter of >1916, which stipulates that the BSA must "adopt by-laws, >rules, and regulations not inconsistent with the laws of >the United States of America, or any State thereof"? > >What about BSA programs like "Learning for Life," held >around the country in public schools during school hours, >that espouse scouting's religion-centered, discriminatory >values, holding young women and girls as well as gay >students as a captive audience? > >Don't these things warrant another look at the BSA? As far >as "private clubs" go, this one has a lot of public >privilege. > >In recent years, the BSA's policies have resulted in the >loss of some support from the United Way and certain >government sources. In Connecticut, the organization was >taken off a list of causes that public employees could >support through payroll deductions. > >The anti-gay establishment has won this battle. But the >fight to end discrimination against lesbians, gays, >bisexuals and trans people will continue in legal arenas >and in the daily struggles of gay youths and leaders within >organizations like the BSA. > >Most importantly, the fight continues in the streets, >where popular support and solidarity with the struggle for >lesbian, gay, bi and trans equality is ever growing. > > - END - __________________________________ KOMINFORM P.O. Box 66 00841 Helsinki - Finland +358-40-7177941, fax +358-9-7591081 e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.kominf.pp.fi ___________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe/unsubscribe messages mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ___________________________________
