BRING THE BOYS BACK HOME!
Bring the boys back home: Because you’re using them.
Bring the boys back home: Because you’re abusing them.
Bring the boys back home: Because you’re lying to them.
Bring the boys back home: Because you’re murdering them.
Bring the boys back home: Because you’re poisoning them.
Bring the boys back home: Because they’re fighting YOUR wars not theirs!
Bring the boys back home: Because you’re profiting from their death.
Bring the boys back home: Because they’re just killing for your profit.
Bring the boys back home: Because you couldn’t give a fcuk about them!
Bring the boys back home: Because we need them to destroy YOU not Arabs!
Bring the boys back home: Because they know not what they do nor why.
Bring the boys back home: THEN let’s see you make your profits and your globalisation work!
BRITISH TROOPS: If only they understood the "game". The Grand Chessboard within which they are used.
BRING THE BOYS BACK HOME: BECAUSE THEY DON’T KNOW U R ANIALLY DEPLETED CUNTS WHO DESTROY THEIR WORLD SO THEY HAVE NOTHING LEFT BUT TO BE PAID TO KILL.
YOUR “ANTHEM”: “THEY HATE US BECAUSE WE’RE FREE”.
YES INDEED. BUT WHO ARE FREE? US? NO, ONLY YOU! AND IT IS YOU THEY HAVE ALWAYS HATED NOT US, BECAUSE WE HATE YOU TOO!
AND HERE’S JUST ONE REASON WHY:
The use of DEPLETED URANIUM worldwide which you have never tested and never had the intention to. Nuclear poisoning of not only the Arab world but Yugoslavia, Bosnia, Serbia but also the UK and Europe as a whole.
DEPLETED URANIUM IS PYROPHORIC AND YOU’VE POISONED OUR AIR!
YOU BASTARDS!
CLIMATE CHANGE? GIVE ME A BREAK YOU PSYCHOPATHIC MORONS!
Depleted Uranium Ammunition
HL Deb 22 January 1998 vol 584 cc1607-101607
§ 3.16 p.m.
§The Countess of Mar asked Her Majesty’s Government:
§ Where, and under what conditions, depleted uranium ammunition is being manufactured in the United Kingdom.
§The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Lord Gilbert)
My Lords, the 120 millimetre ammunition for the Challenger 2 main battle tank has a depleted uranium component, which is being manufactured at Royal Ordnance plc’s specialist materials facility at Featherstone, near Wolverhampton; the ammunition is then assembled into complete rounds at the Royal 1608 Ordnance factory Birtley. Responsibility for conditions of manufacture and compliance with legislation on radiological site licensing rests with Royal Ordnance plc, which is owned by British Aerospace plc.
§The Countess of Mar
My Lords, I thank the Minister for his Answer. Does the noble Lord accept that depleted uranium has a half-life of 4.5 billion years; that because of its highly pyrophoric nature on impact it produces uranium dioxide dust which can be carried several miles in the wind; and that that dust is both chemically toxic and radioactive and is implicated in a number of cancers, including lung cancer and leukaemia, kidney problems and birth defects? Therefore, is the Minister satisfied with the safety of the community in Scotland where, I understand, test firing is carried out into the ground and into the Solway Firth from the Dundrennan army base near Kirkcudbright?
§Lord Gilbert
My Lords, far be it from me to challenge the remarks or the mastery of statistics of the noble Countess, Lady Mar. All I can say is that we have no knowledge whatever of any danger to the civilian population living in the neighbourhood of that particular test range, just as we have absolutely no knowledge of any dangers sustained by Her Majesty’s Forces in the Gulf when DU was used in the conflict.
[And do you know WHY they have "no knowledge"? Because they have NEVER conducted any tests into the issue! Do you know why? Because it's not THEM who go to war for one thing, it's Kissinger's "dumb and stupid animals used in foreign policy" and, let me add, used for profit! While your arms and legs get blown off, you're also being poisoned but hey, your families like you to join the Forces - you're a hero! Ignore the fact you're being murdered by your very "own", "My son's a hero". Well, that's "love" for ya!]
§Lord Jenkins of Putney
My Lords, is my noble friend the Minister aware of the fact that the use of depleted uranium has killed and maimed thousands of Iraqis, hundreds of American troops and an unknown number of British troops as a result of its use in the Gulf War? Therefore, will the Government do two things? First, will they investigate the possibility that this weapon is already bannable under the chemical weapons convention? Secondly, if it is not banned, will the Government consider doing so because it is ultimately a chemical weapon and should be banned under existing legislation? If that is not so, then there ought to be legislation to ban it.
§Lord Gilbert
My Lords, not for the first time I am not sure that I can share all the premises in my noble friend’s questions. In 1993 the defence radiological protection service concluded that there was no indication of harmful over-exposure of British troops to DU in the Gulf. Tests were made on some Gulf veterans who were concerned that they might have inhaled depleted uranium dust and that that might have had an adverse effect upon them, but none was found to have experienced detectable contamination. Similarly, as far as we know, no British troops sustained injuries from DU ammunition.
§Lord Mackie of Benshie
My Lords, can the Minister tell the House what is good about depleted uranium ammunition?
§Lord Gilbert
Yes, my Lords; it is extremely hard and is the only ammunition that is capable of penetrating the armour of the latest main battle tanks.
§Lord Burnham
My Lords, I have a simplistic question for the Minister; namely, what is the definition of depleted uranium with particular reference to the degree of toxicity?
§Lord Gilbert
My Lords, the noble Lord asks a highly technical question. Indeed, I should be in great 1609 difficulty if I try to answer it and give technical definitions of what constitutes depleted uranium. However, I shall be happy to get the noble Lord a technical answer and will ensure that it is put into the record.
§Lord Parry
My Lords, on a simpler level, can the Minister reassure the House as to whether civilian carriers of the shells were warned of possible dangers, whereas the military users of them, often in contained tank space, were not?
§Lord Gilbert
My Lords, I have no recollection as to whether or not specific warnings were given to Her Majesty’s personnel at the time of the Gulf War, but we continue to have an inventory of depleted uranium ammunition. I am sure that those responsible for handling it are well aware of the risks, if any, to which they might be exposed. Our view is—it was the view of previous administrations—that those are very small indeed.
[But, as you shall see, while their "view" is as stated, it is that because they literally have no idea. They have not tested and they don't care to! But it is an "open secret" that DU is poisoning both the "enemy" AND our own.]
§Lord Kennet
My Lords, I am sure that the House is aware that neither the noble Lord nor I can go too far into radio chemistry. Can the Minister confirm that depleted uranium is about 60 per cent. as radioactive as undepleted uranium? Since there is nothing to do with depleted uranium except to make it into bullets, about a billion pounds’ weight of depleted uranium is in store in the United States. If that is so, what is the corresponding figure in this country?
[ Actually wrong. DU is used in civil applications also particularly as counterweights]
§Lord Gilbert
My Lords, I think that I should bring an encyclopedia with me to answer some of my noble friend’s questions. Not for the first time my noble friend defeats me with his statistics
This material is not made into bullets in the normal sense of the word. It is put into the front end of tank shells. The only exception is the Royal Navy which has some depleted uranium ammunition for the Phalanx close-in weapons system.
Earl Howe
My Lords, have the Government any assessment of the potential environmental effects of depleted uranium contamination on the battlefield? If so, what conclusions have they reached?
§Lord Gilbert
My Lords, I am not aware of whether our predecessors made any assessment. Certainly this Government have not been invited to do so. It is rather out of date for us now to make such an assessment.
[Out of date? This was 1998. Out of date? They CONTINUED to use the stuff and continue to this day! Too late for gulf war vets but not for Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya and whoever is next! The point is that they just don't give a fcuk!]
However, the only specific source of concern is that in some circumstances we believe that the radiation can be slightly increased when one of the shells hits the armour of an opposing tank.
[That's just funny! "slightly increased". It's like saying "take an umbrella, there is a slight chance of rain today!]
§Lord Ironside
My Lords, are there any proposals for using depleted uranium—of which there is quite a lot in the world—to replace lead shot in shotguns? Would that alter the ballistics of the gun and create safety problems?
[Is this guy fcuking serious?]
§Lord Gilbert
My Lords, I am not normally familiar with the habits of the hunting-shooting fraternity. 1610 I should have thought that noble Lords opposite would know far more about its intentions than I would. But I have heard nothing of the kind.
§The Countess of Mar
My Lords, is the Minister aware that there is evidence that the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority was asked to go to the battlefields in Iraq and Kuwait to estimate the problems that might result from the depleted uranium left there after the war? Is the noble Lord aware that it was estimated that there might be some 500,000 deaths of civilians and soldiers; and that some 300 to 800 pounds of depleted uranium had been left in the Gulf?
I have put down a number of Questions for Written Answer on the subject, to which I have had no Answer. Will the noble Lord answer them and publish the answers in Hansard?
§Lord Gilbert
My Lords, I cannot reply off the top of my head to the quite extraordinary statistics that the noble Countess produced; but I should be very surprised if 500,000 people were killed from any causes during the Gulf War.
[That's a brush off and a "No" then is it?]
Radiation
HC Deb 06 December 1999 vol 340 cc439-43W
Mr. Livsey
To ask the Secretary of State for Health if his Department will commission research into the health effects of(a) ingested and (b) inhaled uranium as a result of exposure to ammunition containing depleted uranium. [100842]
§Yvette Cooper
The Department has not commissioned any research into the effects of exposure to depleted uranium and has no plans to do so.
["It's not something we really give much thought to. After all, it isn't us or our children going out there or being poisoned and I think my ovaries and my husband's testicles are working ok! So what's the big deal?"]
So let’s consider George Robertson’s “I’m no gonnae tell ye that man!”
Depleted Uranium Weapons
HC Deb 01 July 1999 vol 334 c247W247W
§Mr. Corbyn
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is the total stock of depleted uranium weaponry held by the UK. [88889]
§Mr. George Robertson
I am withholding the detailed information under exemption la of the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information relating to defence, security and international relations. Depleted uranium-based ammunition is used because it offers better performance than other alternatives and, therefore, gives our Armed Forces greater operational capability.
§Mr. Corbyn
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many depleted uranium weapons are held by British forces based in Albania, Macedonia and Kosovo. [88963]
§Mr. George Robertson
I am withholding this information under exemption 1 of the Code of Practice to Government Information relating to defence, security and international relations.
§Mr. Cotter
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will estimate how much depleted uranium was dropped on(a) Kosovo and (b) Serbia in the course of recent NATO action. [89067]
§Mr. George Robertson
The UK did not use depleted uranium (DU) ammunition during the air campaign over Kosovo and Serbia. The United States is the only member of the Alliance to have said that it used DU ammunition. I am not in a position to estimate the amount used.
[Were our forces in the region? Ah yes they were. So WE didn't use it therefore our guys can't be affected by it. Is that the suggestion here Georgie? You fcuking TURD!]
So let’s move on to some blatant lies shall we? This is the “Oops we need to keep better track of what we say” section. (I had similar experience of this sort of thing during a court case in Singapore – it’s when I recognised the judicial system is corrupt, arrogant and couldn’t give a damn about outright perjury. It’s not “justice”, it’s THEIR “justice”):
Weapons Testing (Scotland)
HC Deb 29 March 1999 vol 328 c483W483W
§Mr. Dalyell
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what testing of depleted uranium weapons has taken place in Southern Scotland. [77356]
§Mr. Doug Henderson
[holding answer 18 March 1999]: Since the test-firing of depleted uranium (DU) based ammunition was approved in 1979 all testing of such ammunition in southern Scotland has been conducted at Kirkcudbright and West Freugh (near Stanraer). The trials at West Freugh, which took place in 1988 and 1990, tested Vulcan Phalanx ammunition and were very limited in nature, with only 200 small calibre rounds (around 20kg) being fired. The testing of 120mm DU-based ammunition for the Challenger main battle tank, which takes place at Kirkcudbright, started in 1982. Since the end of the Challenger tank development programme in 1997 this testing has been significantly reduced and currently only a small number of rounds are fired each year to check manufacturing quality.
Just 2 years later (and bear in mind Spellar refers to the Gulf War, therefore, he is speaking in terms of years/decades not just “now” 2001)
Depleted Uranium
HC Deb 24 January 2001 vol 361 cc577-8W577W
§Mr. Duncan Smith
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if depleted uranium rounds are routinely carried by Challenger tanks on operations and training exercises. [146899]
§Mr. Spellar
[holding answer 23 January 2001]Depleted uranium rounds are not carried by Challenger tanks on exercise and are moved to a theatre of operations only if the circumstances suggest that they may be needed. For example, each Challenger 1 carried DU ammunition when deployed to the Gulf in 1990–01. DU ammunition is not currently held in the Balkans, but could be flown out at short notice should the situation warrant it.
[ It's not "While we did so before we don't do it now", it is a statement suggesting it has never been done. He's either incompetent, ill-advised or a liar. I know which I choose]
Depleted Uranium Ammunition
HC Deb 02 July 1993 vol 227 cc639-40W639W
§Mr. Foulkes
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether depleted uranium ammunition continues to be test fired at Eskmeals and Kirkcudbright ranges.
§Mr. Aitken
Yes.
§Mr. Foulkes
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his answer of 14 June,Official Report, column 474, for what reason air samples are not taken at Kirkcudbright range to check for depleted uranium radioactivity; if he will consider the taking of such samples; and if he will make a statement.
§Mr. Aitken
Air samples are not necessary at Kirkcudbright because the depleted uranium penetrators are not fired against a hard target. There is, therefore, no significant dispersion of radioactive material into the air.
[So they just fire them into the air and, I guess, they drop in the ocean and, if they're lucky, they catch a fish! No need to cook in a microwave then huh? Meanwhile, Eskmeals in Cumbria? I'd guess they must be fired at a hard target there!]
Oh yes! They are! How about that!
“The Eskmeals site offers weapon and equipment proving trials. This included test firing of projectiles made up in part of depleted uranium, and the use of ‘hard targets’ for testing the effectiveness of armour plating containing depleted uranium. The firing programme using depleted uranium projectiles is currently suspended, but there are no plans to close the site”
Depleted Uranium Ammunition
HC Deb 08 March 1979 vol 963 cc777-8W777W
§Mr. Woodall
asked the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the use of depleted uranium ammunition in the United Kingdom.
§Mr. Mulley
A research and development and proof firing programme of anti-armour ammunition with depleted uranium penetrators will take place at Ministry of Defence ranges in the United Kingdom, starting at the Proof and Experimental Establishment, Eskmeals, Cumbria, in 1980. The high density and778W metallurgical properties of this material appear to make it particularly suitable for use in anti-armour ammunition which we are constantly seeking to improve in response to the preponderance of Warsaw Pact tanks on the Central Front and improvements being made to them. The United States Air Force will also store ammunition containing depleted uranium alloy—known as staballoy in the United States—for its A-10 aircraft in this country. Depleted uranium is already being handled and worked safely in this country for a variety of civil applications, and ammunition containing it is in no sense a nuclear or radiological weapon. [ha....ha. They're hilarious aren't they? And these people are considered "cream of the crop" intelligence wise?]
Test firings will only be used for research and development purposes. There is no intention either by the USAF or the British Army to use depleted uranium for training purposes in the United Kingdom in peacetime.
[Big massive lie there then because they ARE used in training as we have already seen. I guess they changed their mind then.]
Depleted Uranium
HC Deb 19 June 2000 vol 352 c27W27W
§Mr. Alasdair Morgan
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) how many depleted uranium shells have been fired at hard targets in the Solway Firth from DERA’s Kirkcudbright ranges; and what quantity of depleted uranium was used in each of the last five years; [125717]
(2) if he will estimate the amount of depleted uranium particulate dust that has been released as a result of test firings of depleted uranium shells from DERA’s Kirkcudbright ranges on hard targets in the Solway Firth in the last five years. [125718]
§Mr. Spellar
Although the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency (DERA) conducts the depleted uranium (DU) firings at Kirkcudbright, ownership of the range, since 1 April 1997, has rested with the Army.
There have been no deliberate firings of DU at hard targets at Kirkcudbright and, therefore, in the normal course of events there is no release of particulate dust. However, there have been three occasions in the last five years when shells have misfired and hit either the ground or the target gantry. A small amount of DU dust will have entered the atmosphere as a result of these events. Remedial action has been taken in each case and the contamination removed to the satisfaction of the regulatory bodies, the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency(SEPA) and Dumfries and Galloway Council. Air samplers which have been running since 1997 have not detected any particulate DU in the atmosphere above background levels.
[Oh PLEASE explain why there would be ANY "background level" of depleted uranium in the atmosphere? Perhaps because the military actions taking place in Kosovo and Iraq etc etc cause there to be? Because, as I understand it, Uranium (depleted or otherwise) is a VERY HEAVY ELEMENT and needs to be MINED]
A total number of DU shells fired at the range in each of the past five years is as follows:
•1995: 280
•1996: 147
•1997: 749
•1998: 134
•1999: 111
Depleted Uranium
HL Deb 10 July 2003 vol 651 c55WA55WA
§Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer asked Her Majesty’s Government:
What guidance is given by the Government to the Environment Agency, the Health and Safety Executive and local authorities with regard to sites where depleted uranium is used in the manufacture of ordnance or for any other purpose in the United Kingdom; and when that guidance was last updated and how. [HL3215]
§The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Lord Whitty)
Depleted uranium is no longer used in the manufacture of ordnance. The regulators are fully aware of the issues that need to be addressed in the regulation of the storage or disposal of depleted uranium. The Government do not presently see a need for guidance on this issue.
[Another bare faced lie.]
Depleted Uranium Munitions
HC Deb 29 January 2003 vol 398 c854W854W
§Llew Smith
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether(a) British forces and (b) United States forces deployed to the Gulf have depleted uranium munitions available as part of their armoury. [91974]
§Mr. Ingram
I can confirm that British Forces deployed to the Gulf will have depleted uranium munitions available as part of the armoury. The deployment of depleted uranium munitions by US Forces, is a matter for the US Government.
[But hey, the idea of testing on DU is "out of date" yet just 5 years later we're still using it. After THIS war however, to ask the question again will be "out of date". I wish someone would tell these bastards that, unlike milk and bread etc (or GMO food), Depleted Uranium really doesn't have a sell by date on it. It has a half life of 4.5 BILLON YEARS! Oh but they have been told. I guess it just doen't compute for the stupid pricks OR, alternatiely, they just don't wish to acknowledge it. After all, it's helping them to destroy nations, rebuild in their image, introduce a Rothschild/Western owned Central bank, get the IMF in and make HUGE PROFITS by controlling ANOTHER few economies of nations. Sovereignty? What's that? You're only sovereign if YOU hold the nukes, the DU and the Military arsenal. So tell me Salmond, where's OUR military? Oh yes I forgot, it'll be supplied by the EU you're taking us into. But wait a minute, didn't you say we'd be independent? Ah! Just not independent of the same cunts that are detroying the world like the UN, IMF, BIS, your pal Al Gore and his Global Warming crap and anyone else that'll give wee Alex their financial backing for being the feudal "Lord" of the Scottish "nation". And your SNP voters love ye Alex you little twat!]
Weapons of Mass Destruction
HC Deb 18 June 2003 vol 407 c252W252W
§Mr. Peter Duncan
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many of the bunker-buster missiles used in Iraq were tipped with depleted uranium. [118323]
§Mr. Ingram
There is no air-launched ordnance containing depleted uranium in United Kingdom service.
[ANOTHER total fcuking lie!]
Depleted Uranium
HC Deb 19 July 1999 vol 335 cc423-4W423W
§30.Mr. Gordon Prentice
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence for what reasons the Army does not hold depleted uranium munitions. [90229]
§Mr. Doug Henderson
The Army does hold stocks of depleted uranium based ammunition.
§Helen Jackson
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many individuals(a) in or formerly with the armed forces and (b) in Southern Iraq have been tested specifically for evidence of depleted uranium contamination. [90363]
§Mr. Doug Henderson
There is no central record of any health tests conducted for those still serving or for those who have left the armed forces. ["Who gives a shit" right?]
The Ministry of Defence is aware of the suggestion that exposure to depleted uranium (DU) is a cause of ill-health among some veterans of the 1990–91 Gulf conflict. Any Gulf veteran who is concerned that their health has been adversely affected by service during that conflict is entitled to seek a referral to the Ministry of Defence’s Gulf Veterans’ Medical Assessment Programme (MAP) for a full medical assessment. During assessment, the patient receives a set of standard tests. If the examining physician considers it clinically appropriate for a patient to receive tests to detect DU, these would be arranged. Between one and five people so far examined by MAP physicians, have exhibited symptoms that, in the judgment of the examining physicians, have indicated a clinical requirement for testing to detect DU, and have been tested.
However, a very small number of UK troops, who expressed concern that they might have inhaled DU dust during preparatory training in Saudi Arabia before the state of hostilities, were subjected to Whole Body Monitoring in February 1991. They showed no detectable contamination. [Using what? Were the batteries in?]
The Ministry of Defence is also aware of reports of DU testing undertaken by Professor Sharma of the University of Waterloo, Ontario, and Dr. Durakovic of Georgetown University, Washington. Dr. Durakovic discussed their work in general terms with Ministry of Defence officials in February 1999, when he explained that they are carrying out a study into uranium levels among veterans of the Gulf conflict, in which it is understood a small 424W number of UK Gulf veterans and Iraqi nationals are participating. Dr. Durakovic indicated that they plan to publish their findings, including details of the methodology they are using and the results obtained, later this year. Their work is not being undertaken at the request of the Ministry of Defence and any UK Gulf veterans who choose to participate do so on a voluntary basis. [Again, we don't give a fcuk!]
The healthcare of Iraqi nationals, including any testing for the presence of DU, is a matter for the Iraqi Government.
[Now THAT says it all! Because not only do they not give a flying fart in regard to what they have done to Iraq and the entire Middle East region, he also says "any testing for the presence of DU" is not the British Government's concern WHILE we then sent British troops out there! (4.5 BILLION YEARS half life!) Again, then,"We don't give a fcuk about ANYBODY. Iraqi OR our troops!"]
Iraq
HC Deb 12 May 1999 vol 331 c309309
§Q1.Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow)
What assessment he has made of the impact of the damage to (a) the water supply and (b) oil facilities in Iraq as a result of bombing since 23 March.
§The Prime Minister (Mr. Tony Blair)
Patrols of the no-fly zones remain a vital humanitarian task to protect the Kurds in the north and the Shias in the south of Iraq. Since 23 March, our aircraft have been shot at or threatened some 75 times. Iraqi facilities that pose a threat may be targeted in self-defence; there is, however, no question of our targeting oil facilities or water supplies. Iraq has claimed that one such strike on part of its air defence network temporarily disrupted oil supplies, although no oil pipeline was damaged. We are unaware of any disruption to water supplies.
[Sovereign nation defending itself. Hmmm. If Iraq had attacked us wouldn't we be shooting at them or threatening them?]
§Mr. Dalyell
What is the assessment of the effect of depleted uranium on the water supply and on the health of the civilian population?
§The Prime Minister
We have no such assessment, but we take the utmost care in what we do to make sure that we do not attach ourselves to the water or oil supplies. Indeed, as I said, there is evidence that, as a result of the action, one oil pipeline was damaged, but there is no evidence of damage to water supplies.
I point out to my hon. Friend that we have the no-fly zones to protect the Iraqi people from the Iraqi leader; otherwise, he would be free to do as he did, for example, when he used chemical weapons to kill 5,000 Kurds in the north of Iraq. This is a mission of protection—protection of the Iraqi people.
[Chemical weapons the west supplied him to use against Iranian people! But let's ignore that! You hypocritical little cunt Blair! Meanwhile, the DU you use is indiscriminate and is, effectively a chemical (pyrophonic) poisonous, radiation. Humanitarian my ass! You were well paid off by Rothschild after all of this though weren't you Tony? $2M (then a hell of a lot more) per year pimped out to J.P.Morgan by Evelyn and his wifey! - You sick criminal bastard!]
§Mr. Dalyell
On a point of order, Madam Speaker. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the Prime Minister’s reply, I give notice that I hope to raise this matter on a motion for the Adjournment.
See also: libya-depleted-uranium-and-a-british-mps-hypocrisy-part-2
and: libya-depleted-uranium-and-a-british-mps-hypocrisy
and
Armed forces minister sorry for misleading MPs over depleted uranium
MoD urged to phase out use of depleted uranium weapons after armed forces minister admits review was never carried out
Dundrennan missile testing range, where depleted uranium ordinance was tested. The range includes farmland. Photograph: Murdo Macleod for the Guardian
minister-sorry-dangers-depleted-uranium?newsfeed=true
They’re ALWAYS “Sorry”. Sorry for being caught. Sorry for making “mistakes”.
No. THEY SHOULD BE SORRY FOR BEING A BUNCH OF LYING BASTARDS AND A SORRY EXCUSE FOR HUMAN! What the smell of MONEY will do to people!
BILDERBERG invite you in to the “Inner Circle” and you’ll feed your Granny DU for breakfast!
And it goes on….. and on….and on……
Tartan Warrior
HC Deb 05 July 1995 vol 263 cc268-9W268W
§Mr. Foulkes
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many sorties were flown during the recent exercise Tartan Warrior; how many of these were by ground attack aircraft; and what was the minimum permitted altitude for the ground attack aircraft involved in the exercise. [31336]
§Mr. Soames
A total of 289 sorties were flown during the exercise, of which 200 were by ground attack aircraft. The minimum permitted altitude for the majority of the low-level sorties flown by ground attack aircraft was 250 ft minimum separation distance with a small proportion of sorties permitted down to 100 ft minimum separation distance.
269W
§Mr. Foulkes
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what advance information was given to the media concerning Exercise Tartan Warrior; and if he will list those media organisations to whom the information was sent. [31340]
§Mr. Soames
Exercise Tartan Warrior was a small-scale squadron training exercise and in the circumstances advance information was not given to the media about all of the activity involved. Details of the use of Tain air weapons range were provided to Moray Firth Radio and to Aberdeen Journals Ltd.
§Mr. Foulkes
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many of the ground attack sorties during exercise Tartan Warrior involved carriage of live weapons. [31339]
§Mr. Soames
Five sorties involved carriage of live weapons for practice ground attacks on Garvie Island weapons range.
§Mr. Foulkes
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what was the aim of the recent Tartan Warrior exercise; how many aircraft and of what types took part; and what plans he has for further exercises in this series. [31335]
§Mr. Soames
The aim of the exercise was to provide both routine squadron training, and work-up prior to Exercise Air Warrior in the USA, for No. 41 Sqn RAF Coltishall. The following aircraft took part:
•Ten Jaguar GR1As
•Six Tornado GR1s
•Eight Tornado F3s
•Eight USAF F15s
A further exercise in the headquarters No. 1 group Tartan series involving No. 6 Sqn RAF Coltishall is planned for October 1995.
Garvie Island, Sutherland
HC Deb 08 February 2000 vol 344 c111W111W
§Mr. Maclennan
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what supervisory arrangements are operated to monitor the use by foreign military forces of Garvie Island, Sutherland, as a target. [108992]
§Mr. Spellar
Any use of ranges at Garvie Island is governed by UK regulations and is directly supervised by UK military personnel.
§Mr. Maclennan
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he has approved the use of Garvie Island in Sutherland for shelling by US warships; and if he will make a statement. [108991]
§Mr. Spellar
I have not approved Garvie Island in Sutherland for any use by US warships.
§Mr. Maclennan
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if depleted uranium-based ammunition is authorised for use at Garvie Island, Sutherland, by(a) UK forces and (b) overseas forces; and if he will make a statement. [108993]
§Mr. Spellar
Depleted uranium is not authorised for use at Garvie Island either by UK or overseas forces.
§Mr. Maclennan
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence under what arrangements exercises by non-UK forces are conducted involving the(a) shelling and (b) bombing of Garvie Island, Sutherland; and if he will make a statement. [108990]
§Mr. Spellar
The range at Garvie Island is open to use by members of NATO. All exercises are conducted under UK regulations and are under the direct control of UK military personnel. Garvie Island is used only by aircraft. There is no shelling of the island.
Garvie Island
HC Deb 27 November 1979 vol 974 cc1096-71096
§16.Mr. Maclennan
asked the Secretary of State for Defence if he will review the arrangements to secure safety at the Gar-vie Island range in North-West Sutherland.
§The Under-Secretary of State for Defence for the Royal Navy (Mr. Keith Speed)
Various measures, some introduced only late last year, are in force which are designed to ensure the safe operation of the Garvie Island range. Operations cease if it is believed that the range is not clear.
§Mr. Maclennan
Is the Minister aware that in the last two months there have been episodes which have alarmed fishermen from my constituency because shells have landed within 300 yards of their vessels? Is he aware that arrangements entered into last year appear not to be working as they might? Will he examine this urgently?
§Mr. Speed
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for the letter that he sent me. I shall certainly investigate the matter. The last official complaint that we had 1097 about Garvie was in July 1977, and about the Cape Wrath gunnery range on 13 November last year. We shall, of course, look into all complaints.
Garvie Island
HC Deb 22 November 1991 vol 199 cc350-1W350W
Mr. O’Neill
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what exercises have been carried out on Garvie island in the last month; and how many times in the last two years exercises have been carried out on Garvie island at the weekend.
§Mr. Archie Hamilton
The Garvie island range has been in use on 11 occasions over the last month and on two Saturdays during the past two years. Specific details are as follows:
Date
Activity
Use of Garvie island over the last month
8 October
Aircraft bombing exercise
29 October
Aircraft bombing exercise
351W
Date
Activity
30 October
Aircraft bombing exercise
5 November
Aircraft bombing exercise
8 November
Aircraft bombing exercise
14 November
Offshore naval gunfire exercise
15 November
Offshore naval gunfire exercise
16 November
Offshore naval gunfire exercise
18 November
Offshore naval gunfire exercise
19 November
Offshore naval gunfire exercise
20 November
Offshore naval gunfire exercise
Use of Garvie island at weekends over past two years
2 February 1991
Aircraft bombing exercise
28 September 1991
Aircraft bombing exercise
Bombing Exercise (Scotland)
HC Deb 06 March 1989 vol 148 cc605-76053.34 pm
§Mrs. Margaret Ewing(Moray)(by private notice)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the proposed live bombing exercise to be conducted in the Moray firth on 13 March.
§The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Armed Forces (Mr. Michael Neubert)
There is no question of live bombs being dropped in the Moray firth. On 13 March, which is the day of delivery of the 1,000th Stingray torpedo to the Ministry of Defence, it is planned that three wholly inert practice Stingray torpedoes will be dropped in the Moray firth to demonstrate to the press the ability of the Royal Air Force and the Royal Navy to utilise this important weapon. All appropriate steps will be taken to ensure that shipping is not affected by this demonstration.
§Mrs. Ewing
We welcome the fact that live bombs will not be used, but why did the Minister not take the opportunity that was offered on Thursday when I tabled a written question on the matter to deny that they would be used? When the Ministry of Defence was contacted by the press in Scotland during the weekend, it did not take the opportunity to deny that live bombs would be used. That has caused a great deal of worry to people involved in fishing, the oil industry and aviation in the north and north-east of Scotland. Why is it so important to drop even inert bombs in territorial waters rather than in international waters, as is usual?
§Mr. Neubert
I learnt of the confusion only through the medium of the United States navy exercise called Exercise North Star 89 which is taking place from today until 15 March. During the exercise, aircraft from the US navy aircraft carrier USS America will undertake practice bombing missions. They will drop live ordnance on Garvie island and practice bombs on the training range at Tain. There is no question of live bombs being dropped in the Moray firth or anywhere else in United Kingdom territorial waters.
The concern has arisen as a result of a pamphlet, published by Mr. Malcolm Spaven, entitled “Scottish Defence News”. He is an academic and adviser to several Opposition Members on aviation matters. He has confused the two events, and caused confusion and a great deal of unnecessary anxiety, for which I cannot be held responsible.
§Sir Hector Monro(Dumfries)
Does my hon. Friend agree that it is irresponsible of Opposition Members to raise this matter and to criticise the Royal Air Force for carrying out its training obligations within all the rules and regulations? Does my hon. Friend further agree that the two RAF stations—Kinloss and Lossiemouth—operate to the very highest standards in the Royal Air Force?
§Mr. Neubert
That is undoubtedly true. My hon. Friend is right to suggest that this is, if anything, a mischievous attempt to confuse issues which would otherwise be entirely straightforward.
§Mr. George Foulkes(Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley)
When will Scotland stop being used as the playground of the Royal Air Force? Is the Minister aware that the hon. Member for Dumfries (Sir H. Monro) joined 606 me, the right hon. Member for Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale (Mr. Steel) and the hon. Member for Moray (Mrs. Ewing) to protest strongly at the huge increase in low-level flying—down to 100 ft—over the whole of the south-west of Scotland?
§Mr. Speaker
Order. The question is about bombing.
§Mr. Foulkes
If they were doing it over Croydon you. would understand, Mr. Speaker. It is all the same kind of thing. The Royal Air Force in Scotland and Cumbria does everything that it wants to. Does the Ministry of Defence ever say no to requests made by the RAF for such exercises and low flying?
§Mr. Neubert
I must repeat for the benefit of the hon. Member that this request arises from a press facility arranged by Marconi Underwater Systems to demonstrate a very effective weapon. The use of ranges is entirely different and well established, and I am sure that the Scottish people want to contribute to the defence of the nation.
§Mr. Bill Walker(Tayside, North)
Does my hon. Friend agree that it is a bit rich for Opposition Members to complain about the RAF’s activities when everybody knows that Scotland’s location and the RAF bases there are essential to the well-being and safety of the United Kingdom? Does my hon. Friend agree further that the people who look after the servicing and supplies to those Royal Air Force bases would find it offensive if all such activities were stopped because they are the reason why those bases are there? If the Royal Air Force wants to continue low flying in my constituency, I am happy that it should do so.
§Mr. Speaker
Order. Keep to the Moray Firth, please.
§Mr. Neubert
It is always encouraging to have my hon. Friend with his long experience of the Royal Air Force behind me on these occasions.
§Mr. Alex Salmond(Banff and Buchan)
Will the Minister explain why he did not take the opportunity to deny the story last week? Have not the fear and alarm been caused by a ridiculous public relations celebration to celebrate the 1,000th missile? If all reasonable steps have been taken to alert shipping, why has the Moray coastguard no knowledge of the exercise?
§Mr. Neubert
It may be because the press facilities were arranged for a week from today—Monday 13 March. On the point about confusion and the timing of questions and answers, the “Scottish Defence News” pamphlet is dated February 1989. It has taken a long time for this scurillous rumour to surface.
§Mr. Julian Brazier(Canterbury)
Does my hon. Friend agree that the torpedo to be used in the test, Stingray is easily the best lightweight torpedo in the world and that this test will provide another opportunity to show that the decision made nine years ago to go ahead with it was right?
§Mr. Neubert
My hon. Friend speaks well of the weapon and I hope that the 30 press people leaving from London and going to Scotland to see it demonstrated in complete safety off the Scottish coast will be equally impressed by its effectiveness.
§Dr. Norman A. Godman(Greenock and Port Glasgow)
Will the Minister give an assurance that the disruption to 607 the activities of our fishermen will be kept to a minimum? Will he also give an assurance that any debris left on the seabed will be cleaned up in the interests of our fishermen and their expensive gear?
§Mr. Neubert
I shall certainly take note of the hon. Gentleman’s point on the latter question. On the former, I assure him that every care will be taken not to disrupt local fishermen.
§Mr. Robert Maclennan(Caithness and Sutherland)
Does the Minister accept that the practice of dropping live bombs on Garvie island, which has been properly regulated for many years, has met with complete acceptance locally because of the way in which it has been conducted and that there is no question of opposing in principle the use of live weapons on those ranges? However, can he tell us when he learnt about what he has described as mischievous rumours and how quickly he moved to quell them?
§Mr. Neubert
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his opening remarks. On his second point, I learnt about the confusion from the Sunday Mail, the source of all this anxiety.
§Mr. Allan Rogers(Rhondda)
The Minister has been extremely dismissive in his answers. Is it not true that a notification about live bombing was issued by the Civil Aviation Authority in relation to the Moray firth? Is that not another example of the complete lack of liaison between the Civil Aviation Authority and the Ministry of Defence, which we see in other spheres?
§Mr. Neubert
The original premise of that question is wrong. What follows, therefore, is equally wrong.
§Mr. Andrew Welsh(Angus, East)
Will the Minister answer the question put by my hon. Friend the Member for Banff and Buchan (Mr. Salmond)? Why was the Moray coastguard not informed?
§Mr. Neubert
I have already replied to that question. I pointed out that this press demonstration is taking place a week from now and that arrangements for it are made by Marconi. All who need to know will be notified.
Teamwork 90
HC Deb 26 July 1990 vol 177 c524W524W
§Mr. Andrew F. Bennett
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will provide an estimate of the cost to his Department of United Kingdom participation in NATO exercise Teamwork 90.
§Mr. Archie Hamilton
Costs attributable to exercises such as Teamwork are not indentified separately and could not be calculated without disproportionate effort. As the participation of the ships, aircraft and personnel involved is consistent with their normal training activities, the additional costs of the exercise will be limited to such items as travel and subsistence allowances.
§Mrs. Fyfe
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what activities will take place, and when, at(a) each RAF station involved in Scotland and (b) which Scottish waters in the NATO exercise Teamwork 90.
§Mr. Archie Hamilton
Current plans envisage the use of RAF bases in Scotland at Lossiemouth, Kinloss, Leuchars and Stornoway. A large number of shipping movements are planned to take place off Scotland and the Cape Wrath and Garvie Island ranges will be used. It would be inappropriate to give precise details of the timing and location of activities in the exercise, which will be held from 6 to 23 September.
Uranium-tipped Shells
HC Deb 17 October 1996 vol 282 cc1089-90W1089W
§Dr. David Clark
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment he has made of the current risk posed to civilians from exploded depleted uranium-tipped shells in Kuwait. [41101]
§Mr. Arbuthnot
My Department has conducted no formal assessment of the risks to civilians from exploded depleted uranium-tipped ammunition in Kuwait.
§Dr. Clark
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement concerning the risk to soldiers of handling depleted uranium-tipped shells. [41100]
§Mr. Soames
Depleted uranium has a very low level of radioactivity and the risks attached to the handling of depleted uranium ammunition are minimal.
§Dr. Clark
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment he has made of the 1991 Atomic Energy Authority report on industrial technology concerning the risk of exposure to exploded depleted uranium-tipped shells. [41102]
§Mr. Soames
I refer the hon. Member to the letter sent by my noble Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Defence to the hon. Member for Blaenau Gwent (Mr. Smith) on 7 August 1996, a copy of which has been placed in the Library of the House.
§Dr. Clark
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many depleted uranium-tipped shells were fired by British forces during the Gulf war; and what assessment he has made of the number of exploded shells remaining in Kuwait. [41099]
§Mr. Soames
British forces fired some 88 depleted uranium shells during the Gulf conflict. The Ministry of Defence has made no assessment of the number of exploded shells remaining in Kuwait, as we judge the risk to human health posed by DU rounds to be negligible. It is likely, though, that a large proportion of the 88 shells was expended in Iraq rather than Kuwait.
§Mr. Llew Smith
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what studies have been conducted by his Department into the nephrotoxicity of the inhalation of uranium particles. [41296]
1090W
§Mr. Soames
I will write to the hon. Member and a copy of the letter will be placed in the Library of the House.
Uranium Storage
HC Deb 23 January 1995 vol 253 c9W9W
§Mr. Foulkes
To ask the President of the Board of Trade what type of uranium is stored at Chapelcross.
§Mr. Charles Wardle
[holding answer 19 January 1995]: Depleted uranium.
Depleted Uranium
HC Deb 29 January 2001 vol 362 cc60-1W60W
§Mr. Llew Smith
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what plans he has to request the Defence Radiological Protection Service to update its 1993 report on the exposure by British military personnel to depleted uranium during the Gulf war. [145300]
§Mr. Spellar
My Department’s position on the exposure of British military personnel to depleted uranium during the Gulf conflict was set out on 19 March 1999 in a paper entitled, “Testing for the presence of Depleted 61W Uranium in UK Veterans of the Gulf conflict: the Current Position”. Since then the US Department of Defence has published its own assessment of possible levels of depleted uranium to which troops may have been exposed in the Gulf. These levels are lower than those contained in the Defence Radiological Protection Service reports of 1993, and our 1999 paper. We will analyse the differences.
§Mr. Malins
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many(a) shells and (b) bullets containing (i) uranium and (ii) depleted uranium were fired by the Army on ranges in Surrey in the last 10 years. [147070]
§Mr. Spellar
No munitions containing uranium or depleted uranium have been fired on the ranges in Surrey.
§Mr. Dalyell
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what uranium pharmacological tests he proposes should be undertaken on civilians living in areas of depleted uranium debris; [147194]
(2) if he will conduct uranium pharmacological tests on civilians in Kosovo. [147195]
§Mr. Spellar
The health of civilians is the responsibility of their Government or, as in the case of Kosovo, the United Nations. Although the UK will provide help and advice if requested, it is up to these relevant authorities to decide what tests, if any, should be carried out.
§Mr. Dalyell
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what evidence he has received on measurements of uranium 235 among Kosovans. [147196]
§Mr. Spellar
None. The Ministry of Defence is not aware of any such measurements being taken.
§Mr. Wigley
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many representations he has received concerning a ban on the use of depleted uranium ammunition by the armed forces. [145937]
§Mr. Spellar
[pursuant to his reply, 23 January 2001, c. 537W]: We have received a petition from the Campaign Against Depleted Uranium.
§Mr. Llew Smith
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what recent representations have been received from the campaign against depleted uranium. [145295]
§Mr. Spellar
[pursuant to his reply, 22 January 2001, c. 420W]: We have received a petition from the Campaign Against Depleted Uranium.
Depleted Uranium
HC Deb 12 February 2001 vol 363 cc56-7W56W
§Mr. Duncan Smith
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) how much depleted uranium is left behind in tank gun barrels after the firing of depleted uranium rounds; [146579]
(2) how much depleted uranium is extracted from the barrel of tanks and evacuated into the atmosphere during the firing of depleted uranium rounds; [146580]
(3) what research his Department has undertaken into the potential risks to tank crews of firing depleted uranium rounds; and if he will publish the research. [146578]
§Mr. Spellar
[holding answer 22 January 2001]: MOD officials are researching the reports addressing the issues raised. I will write to the right hon. Member once the review is complete, and a copy of my letter will be placed in the Library of the House.
§Mr. Llew Smith
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his answer of 5 February 2001, Official Report, column 358W, if he will publish a list 57W on the reports on depleted uranium commissioned by his Department from DERA; and if he will place copies of these reports in the Library. [149650]
§Mr. Spellar
I will write to my hon. Friend and a copy of my letter will be placed in the Library of the House.
§Sir Richard Body
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his answer of 16 June 1999,Official Report, column 148, on Kosovo, what measures have been taken to identify targets hit by depleted uranium ammunition; and whether non-standard issue NBC kit has been issued for troops in proximity to such locations. [90950]
§Mr. George Robertson
Although British Forces did not fire depleted uranium ammunition in Kosovo, we await information through NATO channels as to whether any such ammunition was used in the British led sector.
Service personnel deployed in Kosovo have been given appropriate guidance, and provided with standard NBC equipment, including protective gloves and respiratory equipment, which they should wear if contact with targets damaged by DU ammunition is unavoidable.
§Dr. Lynne Jones
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what investigations he is undertaking into the environmental impact of the use of weapons containing depleted uranium during the conflict in Kosovo and Serbia; [91764]
(2) what decontamination work is taking place in Kosovo as a result of the use by US forces of weapons containing depleted uranium; what responsibility the US is taking for the cost of this work, and if (i) UK and (ii) other EU personnel are involved. [91765]
§Mr. George Robertson
No decontamination work is currently taking place in Kosovo. A joint task force has been set up by the UN Environment Programme and the UN Commission on Settlements to assess the environmental and health aspects of the conflict. The UK stands ready to co-operate with that task force.
Depleted Uranium
HC Deb 17 January 2000 vol 342 cc278-9W278W
§Mr. Breed
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much depleted uranium has been authorised for use by his Department in each of the last three years. [104265]
§Mr. Spellar
The UK has not fired DU ammunition during the course of any of the operations it has undertaken over the last three years.
279W
§Mr. Davidson
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what steps will be taken to ensure that United States Forces using the Ministry of Defence range at Cape Wrath later this year do not use depleted uranium shells. [104877]
§Mr. Spellar
Any nation using the ranges at Cape Wrath must abide by our Standard Operating Regulations. These regulations preclude the use of depleted uranium shells.
Interesting this last one because while “Standard Operating Procedure” (they say) for non DU to be used on Garvie Island and Cape Wrath (which we know is bullshit), they then say “but we didn’t need any approval from the EU to use DU in France”. Fcuk the french then too huh? So WHY is it the Standard Operating Procedure not to use it? Perhaps because they’re scared to admit it because they KNOW what the impact and effects aret’s take them at their word (haha). They know the shit it causes so they don’t use it in the UK but they’ll use it in France.
Check your Frogs Legs Parisians!
You have to admit, the hypocrisy, if nothing else, is absolutely outrageous!
Depleted Uranium Shells
HC Deb 16 July 1993 vol 228 cc707-8W707W
§Mr. Llew Smith
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if, pursuant to his answers to the hon. Member for Banff and Buchan (Mr. Salmond) of 1 July,Official Report, columns 630–31, when he expects to begin the environmental impact assessment at Eskmeals and Kirkcudbright. respectively, to which he refers; if Her Majesty’s Health and Safety Executive produced a report following its 1986 visit to Kirkcudbright; and if Her Majesty’s inspectorate of pollution produced published reports following the visits to Eskmeals in 1989 and 1993 to which he refers.
§Mr. Aitken
My Department is already in the process of commissioning independent consultants to undertake an environmental impact assessment at both Eskmeals and Kirkcudbright. A suitable company will be engaged by late summer or early autumn. The Health and Safety Executive did produce a report following its 1986 visit to Kirkcudbright. Her Majesty’s inspectorate of pollution did not produce published reports following its visits to Eskmeals in 1989 and 1993.
§Mr. Llew Smith
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what studies his Department has conducted on the pyrophoric qualities of depleted uranium when distributed into particulate matter on impact in an armour-piercing shell.
§Mr. Aitken
Neither the Ministry of Defence nor the Defence Research Agency has conducted studies or trials specifically addressing this phenomenon. Data available from United States sources indicate that it has no military significance.
§Mr. Llew Smith
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his answer of 2 July,Official Report, column 639, if Her Majesty’s Government made any submissions to the European Commission, pursuant to article 34 of chapter III of the Euratom treaty, when United Kingdom depleted uranium shells were tested at La Gramat in France in 1990.
§Mr. Aitken
The Euratom treaty does not apply to military activities. There was therefore no requirement to make any submission to the European Commission regarding the testing of depleted uranium shells at Gramat in France.
§Mr. Llew Smith
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when British Nuclear Fuels was awarded the contract to monitor for radioactivity at the Dundrennan test range at Kirkcudbright following the testing of depleted uranium shells; and if the monitoring reports have been published.
708W
§Mr. Aitken
British Nuclear Fuel’s contract to analyse samples from the Kirkcudbright range commenced on 1 May 1992 and was renewed earlier this year. As I indicated in my reply to the hon. Member for Banff and Buchan (Mr. Salmond) on 1 July 1993,Official Report, column 630, copies of the monitoring reports on the three ranges where DU rounds have been fired will be placed in the House of Commons Library once they have been checked to confirm that no classified information is included.
§Mr. Llew Smith
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence where the tests for the armour-piercing capability of depleted uranium shells are conducted.
§Mr. Aitken
All tests in the United Kingdom of the armour-piercing capability of DU shells are carried out in the enclosed butt facility, known locally as “VJ Battery”, at Eskmeals. The tests at Kirkcudbright are to test the range and accuracy of DU rounds and no firings have ever been carried out against armour targets there.
§Mr. Llew Smith
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the answer of 5 July,Official Report, column 51, if he will set out (a) how many depleted uranium shells have been recovered following test firing into the Solway firth and (b) what monitoring has been undertaken of the Solway firth as to radioactive contamination from the shells.
§Mr. Aitken
No DU rounds have been recovered from the Solway firth to date. Environmental monitoring arrangements are set out in the reply of my hon. Friend the Minister of State for the Armed Forces’ to the hon. Member for Pembroke (Mr. Ainger) on 14 June,Official Report, column 474.
Depleted Uranium
HC Deb 02 February 2001 vol 362 c311W311W
§Mr. Duncan Smith
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence which aircraft in service with the armed forces use depleted uranium for ballast; and if he will make a statement. [148349]
§Mr. Spellar
The following aircraft contain depleted uranium‘Tristar—elevator and rudder balance weights are made from depleted uranium.’‘C130—elevator counterbalance weights are made from depleted uranium.’‘Wessex—a small number of Wessex helicopters in MOD museuMs and training schools are fitted with depleted uranium ballast weights on their main rotor blade tips.’
We are continuing to investigate whether depleted uranium is also present in Gazelle helicopter tail rotor tip weights. I will write to the hon. Member to advise him of the outcome of this work.
Depleted Uranium
HC Deb 07 February 2001 vol 362 cc519-22W519W
§Mr. Swinney
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how United Kingdom forces in the Balkans were warned to stay clear of areas in which depleted uranium ammunition had been expended; what precautions they were required to take if they were obliged to enter these areas; what monitoring of their physical welfare took place thereafter; and on what date such precautionary warnings and measures were first announced. [145136]
§Mr. Spellar:
[holding answer 15 January 2001]: Specialist explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) troops should be aware of the risks presented by expended DU ammunition through routine training and instructions. EOD troops are most at risk from expended DU ammunition when clearing Armoured Fighting Vehicles. In these circumstances, they are required to wear inner cotton gloves, outer heavy PVC gloves, a Service respirator, a full NBC suit and a Thermoluminescent Dosimeter until the presence of DU can be positively discounted.
[Ah but no issues with the use of DU! That's all just for safety you know even though DU is not in the least bit dangerous! Honest 'Guv]
Gulf War Syndrome
HC Deb 19 July 1994 vol 247 cc160-2160
§2.Mr. Ronnie Campbell
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will set up an independent inquiry into Gulf war syndrome.
§The Minister of State for the Armed Forces (Mr. Jeremy Hanley)
I have no intention of doing so, as there 161 remains no clinical evidence that those who served in the British armed forces in the Gulf conflict are suffering from unexplained symptoms that would call for such an inquiry.
§Mr. Campbell
If the Americans have discovered that there is such a disease and are paying compensation to their armed forces, should not we be paying ours and taking a serious look at the problems facing them? Or is it the case that when there is a war, we wave the union flag and tell our lads how good they are before they go abroad to fight and call them heroes, but turn our back on them when they need our help? It is always the same with this Government and they have been 50-faced on this issue—let us pay our lads now.
§Mr. Hanley
Two points need to be made in answer to that question. First, in July last year I invited anyone who believed that he was suffering from the syndrome to which the hon. Gentleman referred to come forward. In the whole of last year, 52 people came forward, of whom 27 have now seen medical examiners—their general practitioners —and 17 have been found to be suffering from recognised health conditions, none of them peculiar to their service in the Gulf. Solicitors have also put forward the names of some 300 further people, but we have not been given details about them and they have not submitted themselves to medical examination. We are, therefore, trying to do all that we can to ascertain whether their illnesses have been caused by anything that happened in the Gulf, but, at the moment, the evidence is to the contrary.
Secondly, on the American evidence, I am afraid that the hon. Gentleman is taking the words of Back Benchers —be they Senators or Congressmen—and making them into a claim by the Pentagon. There is absolutely no evidence from the United States that there is a “syndrome”, and there is certainly no scientific or medical evidence of chemical or biological warfare being deployed against us, on any level.
§Mr. Fabricant
Is not it the case that the shells that have been accused of causing the syndrome are made of depleted heavy metals with a lower atomic number than the normal isotope? Would not anyone with an A-level or even an O-level in physics know that there is less radioactivity in such shells than in the luminous dial of an average watch? [Who the FCUK is this asshole?]
§Mr. Hanley
My hon. Friend is absolutely right to say that one of the possible causes of any so-called Gulf war syndrome was depleted uranium shells and that the toxicity of depleted uranium is similar to that of lead.
§Rev. Martin Smyth
Does the Minister agree that there may be a case for an investigation, not necessarily into what happened to British troops in the Gulf but into pre-medication against possible poison gas attacks? Is not there something that we could learn for the future?
§Mr. Hanley
The hon. Gentleman is right to say that yet another suspected cause of a possible syndrome were the injections given to our troops before they left. It has all been investigated carefully, and the Surgeon General recently wrote to the British Medical Journal to say that there was absolutely no evidence of any cause from the source to which the hon. Gentleman referred.
Depleted Uranium: Munitions and Materials
HL Deb 12 February 1998 vol 585 cc217-8WA217WA
§The Countess of Mar
asked Her Majesty’s Government:
Whether they are conducting, or intend to conduct, any research into the short and long term effects upon humans, animals and the environment of the use of depleted uranium munitions and other depleted uranium materials; and, if not, why not. [HL388]
§Lord Gilbert
The UK Government are not conducting any experimental work specifically on the short or long term effects of depleted uranium on humans, animals or the environment. However, in order to inform the MoD’s research strategy on the management of wounds in the military environment, a review is being conducted of current developments and future trends in munitions that may have clinical implications for the treatment of injured servicemen and women. This review will take into account the radiological and toxicological health hazards posed by the use of depleted uranium ammunition by opposing military forces, which are well understood. In addition, studies have been carried out by the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency into the rate of corrosion of depleted uranium in the marine environment.
§The Countess of Mar
asked Her Majesty’s Government:
What is their current scientific advice as to the environmental effects of using depleted uranium munitions and other depleted uranium materials within the military test ranges located in the United Kingdom, in both the short and the long term; and [HL386]
What information they have given to communities living in close proximity to military test ranges as to the environmental and public health hazards, now and in the future, of depleted uranium munitions and other depleted uranium materials used on ranges located in the United Kingdom. [HL387]
§Lord Gilbert
During September 1993, local councillors and members of the press were invited onto the ranges at Kirkcudbright and Eskmeals, and were given presentations on environmental monitoring and the possible health hazards associated with depleted uranium firings.
A detailed review of the environmental impact of depleted uranium firings on these ranges was undertaken by an independent environmental consultant, W. S. Atkins, in 1995. The consultant concluded that the radiation doses to members of the public, and the associated risks from exposure to depleted uranium released into the environment, were extremely low. Environmental monitoring completed by the MoD since the Atkins’ report was published has confirmed this view. Copies of W. S. Atkins’ environmental impact assessment were supplied to local councils and have also been placed in the House of Commons Library.
218WA
Depleted uranium environmental monitoring reports are written annually for both the Eskmeals and Kirkcudbright ranges. The 1996 reports are due to be released to the local councils for each range in the early part of 1998. It is intended that all future environmental monitoring reports will be made public.
The environmental sampling programmes have shown very low concentrations of depleted uranium in the environment at both sites. The levels of depleted uranium found have been generally lower than the levels of uranium that occur naturally in the environment, and samples taken on request from homes of members of the public show total concentrations of uranium at natural levels. No depleted uranium contamination has been measured in marine environmental samples. The MoD will continue to respond to public concerns, and will provide such environmental monitoring data as may be required.
§The Countess of Mar
asked Her Majesty’s Government:
What has been the cost to date of research and development of depleted uranium munitions and other depleted uranium materials in the United Kingdom, including any products, services or raw materials purchased for civil or military use; and [HL390]
What research and development has been undertaken to date in relation to depleted uranium technology in the United Kingdom; whether this research and development has been conducted unilaterally or jointly with other nations or private organisations; and in which United Kingdom locations. [HL389]
§Lord Gilbert
Research and development work has been carried out by the Ministry of Defence on two tank munitions programmes which use depleted uranium. CHARM 1 and CHARM 3. These anti-tank rounds were developed unilaterally under commercial contracts placed by MoD. The UK locations where this work took place are: Royal Ordnance facilities at Birtley and Featherstone; Atomic Weapons Establishment (AWE) Aldermaston; the former AWE Cardiff; and MoD ranges at Eskmeals and Kirkcudbright.
The total cost of these programmes is in the region of £200 million. I am withholding information on other MoD research programmes involving depleted uranium under Exemption 1, (Defence, Security and International Relations) of the Code of Practice on access to Government Information. We are not aware of any other research programmes which involve depleted uranium.
Gulf Veterans: Medical Assessment Programme
HL Deb 08 December 1999 vol 607 cc1274-61274
§ 2.48 p.m.
§The Countess of Mar
asked Her Majesty’s Government:
What is the scope of medical examination and follow-up undertaken for members of HM Armed Forces who were at any time located in or passed through areas contaminated by depleted uranium during and after Operation Granby.
§Lord Burlison
My Lords, the Ministry of Defence’s Medical Assessment Programme is the referral centre for Gulf veterans concerned about their health. Patients attending the Medical Assessment Programme are given a full medical interview and examination and a range of laboratory tests, including urinalysis, haematological, biochemical and serological tests, an ultrasound scan of the abdomen and electrocardiography.
The Medical Assessment Programme may recommend also additional investigations or a referral to another consultant; for example, a patient may be tested for the presence of uranium if there was evidence of possible exposure or if the examining physician felt that there were symptoms to suggest uranium-linked illness. In addition, the Ministry of Defence has offered to arrange independent testing for depleted uranium for those veterans who have had samples tested in Canada.
§The Countess of Mar
My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply. Is he aware that there is a widely held belief among the several thousand Gulf veterans who have been involved in passing through areas where depleted uranium was used during the Gulf war that neither the Minister nor the Medical Assessment Programme understands the problem? Is he also aware that there is a widely held belief that by looking only at the 30 people who have had their urine tested in Canada, the MoD is determined either to discredit the Canadian research or to minimise the problem? Is he aware too that the Gulf veterans now believe that the refusal of the Medical Assessment Programme and the MoD to extend this proposal to all the Gulf veterans who were involved is based only on crass ignorance, gross incompetence or calculated deception?
§Lord Burlison
My Lords, I believe that the key issue in this matter is the total load of uranium in the body. The proportion of uranium present as a result of contact with depleted uranium is not relevant to the health aspect. Any patient who attends the MAP may be tested for uranium if there is evidence of possible exposure and if the MAP doctor assesses that that is clinically appropriate.
The noble Countess referred to Canadian testing. The MoD’s line on that was viewed as in some way discrediting the evidence. I hope that that is not the case. We need to see the results of testing by 1275 Dr Durakovic and Dr Sharma before we can reach any conclusion. They have not shown us their results, which is why we are arranging for all those who have been tested to be retested independently of the MoD. Only then shall we know the results and be able to act accordingly. There is no scientific consensus on the issue; for example, Dr Sharma has told us that he does not believe that depleted uranium is responsible for the ill health of Gulf veterans.
§Lord Rea
My Lords, is my noble friend aware—I am sure that he is—that there are persistent anecdotal reports of high or raised levels of cancer, particularly leukaemia, among the women and children of southern Iraq? Will Her Majesty’s Government use their influence to have a proper, expert epidemiological study carried out in southern Iraq by, for example, the World Health Organisation or UNICEF to ascertain what is the truth; and, if there is found to be an increase, whether possibly depleted uranium is responsible?
§Lord Burlison
My Lords, the Ministry of Defence is of course aware of the suggestions, particularly those in the press, that the use of depleted uranium-based ammunition during the Gulf conflict has caused an increase in ill health in southern Iraq, including deformities, careers and birth defects. However, we have not seen any peer-reviewed epidemiological research data on that population to support those claims. The Government will, of course, consider carefully any medical or scientific data which may emerge concerning the incidence of ill health in Iraq. With regard to the suggestion of my noble friend, I believe that the MoD will welcome any assessment in this respect for its consideration.
§Lord Swinfen
My Lords, can the Minister tell the House whether there is any increase in birth defects in children born to servicemen who have been in the area of the depleted uranium, as compared with the number of birth defects in the rest of the population?
§Lord Burlison
My Lords, I d o not have that information. I shall ascertain whether it is available; if it is, I shall be happy to write to the noble Lord.
§Lord Hughes of Woodside
My Lords, can my noble friend say how many patients have been seen at the MoD assessment centre? Can he give a robust assurance to the House that the matter is being looked at openly and properly and that there is no attempt by the MoD to discredit other people’s opinions or, indeed, to skew the research against the proper interests of those people affected in this matter?
§Lord Burlison
My Lords, the number of patients who have passed through the Medical Assessment Programme (to which I referred before as MAP) is 2,906. That was to the end of November 1999. Currently there are 28 patients waiting to attend the programme. A test load is being carried out and, although that may seem a high number, one must take 1276 into account that some 53,000 troops were deployed in the area at that time. I make it quite clear to my noble friend and to the House today that the MoD is sympathetic to Gulf veterans; it will continue with the tests; it will continue to help wherever it possibly can; and it is completely open-minded on the issue. The big problem it faces at the moment is that the evidence available to it is vague and not sufficiently scientifically based for further action to be taken in this area.
§The Earl of Listowel
My Lords, will the Minister say whether any problems are caused by the inhalation of dust from depleted uranium shells?
§Lord Burlison
My Lords, I believe that any problems caused by the inhalation of dust may come from the area indicated by the noble Earl.
I’d say “Get the drift?” but then I’d seriously hope you wouldn’t because if that pyrophonic drift happens to drift your way then you’re fcuked! The problem is that it does!
One last thing: You may have noted John Spellar’s contributions in constantly trying to justify or evade the issue of DU in these exchanges. just look a little closer at Spellar:
Spellar was Comptroller of the Household and the third most senior whip in the Whips’ Office between October 2008 and May 2010.
So you know what HIS role is then!
And he’s one of the Queen’s “boys”: When Tony Blair formed his government in 1997, Spellar was appointed Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at the Ministry of Defence, being promoted to become Minister of State for the Armed Forces in 1999. He was appointed to the Privy Council in 2001.
And, of course, the Labour Friends of ISRAEL:
TheyWorkforyou (my ass) Member’s Interests ?p=10558
Please also note, as an aside, that Spellar has made almost £1M from expenses alone since 2001. Who needs a salary when you’re getting paid expenses like that?
Lastly. from his Parliamentary biography, note his “Political Interests”:
Political interests
Energy, electronics industry, motor industry, construction industry, defence
Just have a little delvnd he’s invested in most of this I’m sure. Then he lobbies for his interests. It’s a nice job! Get an MP’s salary, an MP’s expenses AND lobby (and create) which makes sure YOU profit.
Great life: A FUCKING CRIMINAL ONE but it’s legalized!
Britain’s Labor Party has been trying to rebrand itself lately after a 13-year spell in government. During an annual conference, the most memorable remark by its leader Ed Miliband was “I am not Tony Blair.”
This commitment to change does not appear to have affected Labor’s stance on the Middle East. John Spellar, a shadow Foreign Office minister, has an especially close relationship with London’s pro-Israel lobby.
An inspection of Spellar’s declaration of interests shows that he travelled to the Herzliya security conference, one of the key events on the Israeli political calendar, in February. His airfare and accommodation (estimated total: £1,970 or $3,170) was paid for by David Menton, a director of the Britain Israel Research Center (BICOM). In its own words, that lobby outfit is “dedicated to creating a more supportive environment for Israel in Britain.”
Thanks to a source who shall remain nameless, I also learned that Spellar’s researcher Linda Smith is a partner of BICOM staff member Luke Akehurst (a former spindoctor for the arms industry). Smith and Akehurst both serve as Labor members of Hackney Council, a local authority in London.
I emailed Smith earlier today, asking if her views on the Middle East differ from those of Akehurst but did not receive a reply. Spellar has also not responded to a request for comment.
Lobby at center of resignation scandal
This information about Spellar’s connection to BICOM appears all the more significant given the organization’s role in a controversy leading to the recent resignation of Liam Fox as Britain’s defense secretary. Fox, who belongs to the Conservative Party, was severely embarrassed over revelations that his close friend Adam Werritty was posing as his official adviser during foreign travels, when Werritty had been given no such job by the British government. The Guardian newspaper revealed that Werritty’s jet-set lifestyle was being bankrolled by three prosperous Zionists. They included Poju Zabludowicz, BICOM’s chairman. When Werritty attended the 2009 Herzilya conference, his expenses were covered by BICOM.
David Menton, the man who picked up the tab for Spellar’s trip to Israel earlier this year, is a business associate of Zabludowicz, a billionaire who owns a sizeable chunk of Las Vegas. Menton is a founder of Synova Capital, a private equity fund. According to Synova’s website, the fund’s “cornerstone investor” is the Tamares Group, which is led by Zabludowicz.
I was intrigued to read an article by Spellar, in which he bragged of Labor’s affinity with the poor. It is difficult to square that posture with his willingness to go on junkets funded by a wealthy supporter of Israel, a state that denies an entire people their most elementary rights.
For further information on Depleted Uranium and where it is used both, geographically and within Military ordnance (including Tomahawk Missiles), please click here: index.php?context=va&aid=24212
leave a comment