Karen Hudes studied law at Yale Law School and economics at the University of Amsterdam. She worked in the USExport Import Bank of the US from 1980-1985 and in the Legal Department of the World Bank from 1986-2007. She established the Non Governmental Organization Committee of the International Law Section of the American Bar Association and the Committee on Multilateralism and the Accountability of International Organizations of the American Branch of the International Law Association.
In 2007 Karen warned the US Treasury Department and US Congress that the US would lose its right to appoint the President of the World Bank if the current American President of the World Bank did not play by the rules. The 66 year old Gentlemen’s Agreement that Europe would appoint the Managing Director of the IMF and US would appoint the World Bank President ended in 2010.
Joining John B. Wells, former World Bank attorney and whistleblower Karen Hudestalked about how she uncovered corruption in the World Bank.
Who is Karen Hudes?
Karen Hudes studied law at Yale Law School and economics at the University of Amsterdam. She worked in the US Export Import Bank of the US from 1980-1985 and in the Legal Department of the World Bank from 1986-2007. She established the Non Governmental Organization Committee of the International Law Section of the American Bar Association and the Committee on Multilateralism and the Accountability of International Organizations of the American Branch of the International Law Association.
What did Karen Hudes blow the whistle on?
In 2007 Karen warned the US Treasury Department and US Congress that the US would lose its right to appoint the President of the World Bank if the current American President of the World Bank did not play by the rules. The 66 year old Gentlemen’s Agreement that Europe would appoint the Managing Director of the IMF and US would appoint the World Bank President ended in 2010http://www.imf.org/external/np/cm/2010/042510.htm
In 1999 Karen reported the corrupt take-over of the second largest bank in the Philippines. Lucio Tan, a crony of Joseph Estrada, then President of the Philippines, acquired stock owned by government employees in Philippines National Bank (“PNB”) valued more than 10% of PNB’s outstanding capital without disclosure, as required by Philippines securities laws. Tan owned Philippines Airlines, in default on its loans from PNB. The government of the Philippines loaned $493 million to PNB after PNB’s depositors made heavy withdrawals. $200 million of a loan from the World Bank and a $200 million loan from Japan were cancelled. Estrada was ultimately impeached, and in 2007 an anti-corruption court in the Philippines required Estrada to refund graft he had plundered. The Bank’s Country Director in the Philippines reassigned Karen when she asked him to sign a letter warning the Philippines’ government that the Bank could not disburse its loan without a waiver from the Board of Executive Directors since the loan conditionality was not met. The World Bank’s Internal Audit Department refused to correct the satisfactory evaluation of the Bank’s supervision performance or the flawed report of the Institutional Integrity Department to the Audit Committee of the Board of Executive Directors. When the Audit Committee requested an audit of internal controls over financial reporting, KPMG, the external auditors, circumscribed the scope of their audit in violation of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles and Generally Accepted Auditing Standards.
Two days after informing the Board’s Audit Committee of the cover-up in the Philippines, Karen was reprimanded and placed on probation. The Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs requested the World Bank’s Audit Committee to look into the cover- up. Instead, the Chair of the World Bank’s Audit Committee requested an inquiry into the World Bank’s Institutional Integrity Department. The Senate Committee on Foreign Relations followed up with three letters to the World Bank. The World Bank forged documents and fired Karen in contempt of Congress. The World Bank also fired the Staff Association’s lawyer. The Staff Association stated that what had happened to Karen had damaged staff morale and prevented others from reporting misconduct. The World Bank’s Ethics’ Officer left in frustration after her request for an investigation by the World Bank’s Institutional Integrity Department was turned down.
Mr. Paul Volcker headed the 2007 inquiry into the Institutional Integrity Department. The Volcker Panel was discredited after sixteen staff employed in the Institutional Integrity Department received significant damage awards in compensation for abuses of authority to intimidate them during the Volker Panel investigation. A staff-member of the EU’s anti-fraud agency, Office Lutte Anti-Fraude, on the Volcker Panel wrote to Karen:
“My Director General and I met with a number of European Executive Directors of the World Bank a few weeks ago to discuss the Volcker Panel report. At the meeting there was also discussion about governance issues. My impression was that the European Executive Directors are well apprised of all relevant issues at the Bank and no further comment by OLAF is warranted even if it was within our legal competence.”
Karen informed Senator Bayh, “[t]he ongoing cover-up is an indictment of the probity of US oversight at the Bank and I would encourage the Senate to request GAO to look into it.” Senators Richard Lugar, Evan Bayh and Patrick Leahy requested GAO to investigate “internal resistance to increased transparency and accountability at the World Bank.” http://citizenoversight.com/pdf/blwb.pdf In 2008 Karen’s Congressman, Representative Chris Van Hollen, noted “that [Karen’s] claims and concerns have already been provided to the GAO…. and to the relevant congressional committees.” In 2009 GAO stated that it could not commence the inquiry “because of challenges we recently faced in gaining access to World Bank officials.” Senator Lugar asked what was delaying the GAO review during hearings on the World Bank’s capital increase.
Mr. Pieter Stek, then Executive Director for the Netherlands, and Chair of the Board Committee on Development Effectiveness, said:
“In a multilateral institution which should be governed by the rule of law and high standards of probity the charge of concealment from the Board of Executive Directors of information relevant to the exercise of its duty of supervising management and the persecution of the person who brings this to light is extremely serious. If correct, which I believe, this poisonous cocktail undermines good governance and ultimately the effectiveness of the Bank in fulfilling its mandate. I shall continue to assist Ms. Hudes in her efforts to have due process brought to bear, preferably by the Bank itself, on these issues of governance.”
David Brooks wrote:
“Then there are violations, when someone intentionally breaks the rules. Errors can be very hard for outsiders to detect. It was people inside the companies who were most likely to report fraud, because they have local knowledge. And yet 80 percent of these whistleblowers regret having reported the crimes because of the negative consequences they suffered. This is not the way to treat people who detect error.” http://brooks.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/13/living-with-mistakes/?comments#permid=34
RESPONSE to Motion re 15 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction filed by Karen Hudes. Replies due by 04/30/2010. (elts, Deputy Clerk) [Transferred from Maryland on 8/26/2010.] (Entered: 04/30/2010)
AMENDED COMPLAINT against AETNA LIFE INSURANCE CO., INTERNATIONAL BANK FOR RECONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT, MARK E. SCHREIBER, KPMG LLP filed by KAREN HUDES.(rdj) (Entered: 10/19/2010)
Memorandum in opposition to re 58 MOTION to Dismiss and Sever MOTION to Sever MOTION for Hearing, 57 MOTION to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint, 59 MOTION to DismissPlaintiffs Second Amended Complaint, 54 MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint filed by KAREN HUDES. (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Exhibit)(Hudes, Karen) (Entered: 01/17/2011)
ORDER granting 54 Aetna Life Ins. Co.’s Motion to Dismiss; granting 57 Mark Schreiber’s Motion to Dismiss; granting 58 KPMG’s Motion to Dismiss; granting 59 IBRD’s Motion to Dismiss. The Court ORDERS that: (1) Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss are GRANTED WITH PREJUDICE as to all federal claims against all Defendants, and as to Plaintiff’s wrongful-termination claim against the World Bank; and (2) Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss are GRANTED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as to all other Maryland and state common-law claims. Signed by Judge James E. Boasberg on 8/30/2011. (lcjeb1) (Entered: 08/30/2011) Hudes v. Aetna Life Ins. Co., et al, 806 F. Supp 2d 180
“It’s going hot.” Those were the ominous opening and closing words from my source inside the Department of Homeland Security in two separate contacts we had within the last 72 hours. Readers to this website and listeners to my radio program know this source as “Rosebud,” a source with access to high levels within the DHS administration.
I asked my source for details. “What exactly is the plan? Can you give me specific details? How do you know about this plan ‘going hot?'”
“Okay, from what I’ve been able to learn, there have been a couple different plans or scenarios developed, ready to be implemented at a moment’s notice, but each are distinctly different in nature and timing.” stated my source. “This is done for a few reasons. Look how the weather changed the plans for [Vice-President Joe] Biden’s visit to Tampa. That’s just one example. They’ve got contingencies. They are watching the poll numbers. They are closely monitoring public sentiment. But the objective of the plan is that they want to portray Obama as a victim of racist hatred by the white gun owners, the people concerned about the Constitution, the people they consider fringe. They want to silence their critics, prove that talk show hosts are causing hatred, and that all gun owners are behind the recent shootings. That’s at the heart of the plan. But to understand just how insidious this is, you’ve got to understand the people who are behind it.”
Nero in the White House, Caligula at the DHS
My source continued, “I’ve been trying to get as much information as possible, but it’s not been easy. This is definitely a plan that has its origins at the highest levels of the White House, and seems limited to maybe a handful of the people closest to Obama. The only reason I know about this authorization order, or approval, or whatever you want to call it, is that there was a major slip up at the very upper level of DHS, and I mean the very upper level” he stated.
“Remember the news about sexual harassment, intimidation and all of the garbage that’s gone on between the people Napolitano brought in and promoted due to their ‘lifestyle’ preferences? These are some sick people, mental rapists and perverts, who she’s brought in to her innermost circle. They make Caligula look like a boy scout, at least with power and sex. Well, one of those people, close to Napolitano, was involved in a meeting where the concept and approval of a false flag was being discussed.”
“This is where they almost lost it. You’ve got to understand that this whole thing is very compartmentalized and we’re talking about a very small group of people in this meeting. This person knew some of the information, not all of it, and let some information slip to a counterpart. That counterpart, who found herself involved in a situation way over her head, talked. I won’t go any further, but that’s how I ended up learning the latest information,” said my source. “Now you should have an idea of how this slipped out. But they had a quick handle on damage control, given the circumstances behind the disclosure. Potentially embarrassing circumstances, sexual blackmail” he added. http://www.homelandsecurityus.com/archives/6640#more-6640 By Douglas J. Hagmann
In a startling article published on the Northeast Intelligence Network, Douglas J. Hagmann is reporting that an inside source from the Department of Homeland Security has revealed to him that a false flag attack, planned by the White House, is set to go hot.
Hagmann, who in the past received widespread attention after a series of articles about DHS prepping for civil war (based on radio interviews he conducted) went ultra viral, is reporting that this same source is now claiming that elements of the Obama White House have given the go signal in regards to an upcoming attack.
“According to my well-placed source within the DHS apparatus, what amounts to a final authorization was reportedly given to DHS directly from the White House. A “go signal” if you will,” wrote Hagmann.
Hagmann then went on to directly quote the apparent well placed source with DHS itself.
“It’s going hot. The plan, or whatever specific operation that was devised, is going hot, being put into motion.
You’ve got to let people know that something is up, approval has been given, and unless somebody stops it, we’re going to have a staged event inside the U.S., and it’s being set up so that it gets real ugly real fast.”
The source then went on to speak about a Tennessee representative who sent out an email with a third hand version of the original DHS prepping for martial law article and how this could have been done on purpose to discredit the information.
“Don’t think for one second that the sudden resurrection of the information, as incorrect as it was by that state rep, was an accident, because it wasn’t.”
“Maybe the rep was played and clueless to the original story, but the way the story was managed after the fact made you look like a fool, like a real nutcase.”
The “DHS Insider” then explained how they originally came across this information which apparently involved a major slip up at the upper levels of homeland security.
The only reason I know about this authorization order, or approval, or whatever you want to call it, is that there was a major slip up at the very upper level of DHS, and I mean the very upper level.”
“Remember the news about sexual harassment, intimidation and all of the garbage that’s gone on between the people Napolitano brought in and promoted due to their ‘lifestyle’ preferences?
These are some sick people, mental rapists and perverts, who she’s brought in to her innermost circle. They make Caligula look like a boy scout, at least with power and sex.
Well, one of those people, close to Napolitano, was involved in a meeting where the concept and approval of a false flag was being discussed.”
{…}
“Now you should have an idea of how this slipped out. But they had a quick handle on damage control, given the circumstances behind the disclosure.
Potentially embarrassing circumstances, sexual blackmail” he added.
(You can read the whole DHS insider source article here)
While The Intel Hub obviously cannot independently confirm this information, it does line up and directly correlate with recent events, including large scale ammo purchases, as well as rhetoric in the media openly calling for a false flag to save Obama’s presidency.
In the last three years, the Federal Government, lead by the Department of Homeland Security, has purchased at least 1.4 billion rounds of ammo with at least 750 million rounds of that ammo being hollow point.
The cover used for most of the orders was that the ammo was being used for “training” purchases yet the total amount ordered is well over a billion rounds.
Many different prominent advisers and corporate media publications have actually indirectly or directly called for a false flag attack to save the now failed Obama presidency.
In 2010, Mark Penn, an influential adviser to former President Bill Clinton, appeared on Chris Matthews Hardball and claimed that:
“President Clinton reconnected through Oklahoma, right? And the president right now seems removed. It wasn’t until that speech that he really clicked with the American public. Obama needs a similar” defining moment.”
Additionally, Robert Shapiro, an actual adviser to President Obama, published an op-ed in the Financial Times that included this stunning statement:
“The bottom line here is that Americans don’t believe in President Obama’s leadership. He has to find some way between now and November of demonstrating that he is a leader who can command confidence and, short of a 9/11 event or an Oklahoma City bombing, I can’t think of how he could do that.”
Although no one knows 100% when or if another false flag attack will actually take place, the fact remains that there is a startling amount of evidence that points towards an attack being directly on the table and a very real possibility.
We can only hope that as the alternative media continues to expose this horrid possibility, enough people wake up to it to make the powers that be pull the attack off the table.
The false flag will use the nuke the neocons stole back in 07 and be blamed on Iran. It will happen on 10-10 and that is the day America will be annihilated by the SCO.
Leaked U.S. Army Document Outlines Plan For Re-Education Camps In America
By Paul Joseph Watson
A leaked U.S. Army document prepared for the Department of Defense contains shocking plans for “political activists” to be pacified by “PSYOP officers” into developing an “appreciation of U.S. policies” while detained in prison camps inside the United States.
The document, entitled FM 3-39.40 Internment and Resettlement Operations (PDF) was originally released on a restricted basis to the DoD in February 2010, but has now been leaked online.
The manual outlines policies for processing detainees into internment camps both globally and inside the United States. International agencies like the UN and the Red Cross are named as partners in addition to domestic federal agencies including the Department of Homeland Security and FEMA.
The document makes it clear that the policies apply “within U.S. territory” and involve, “DOD support to U.S. civil authorities for domestic emergencies, and for designated law enforcement and other activities,” including “man-made disasters, accidents, terrorist attacks and incidents in the U.S. and its territories.”
The manual states, “These operations may be performed as domestic civil support operations,” and adds that “The authority to approve resettlement such operations within U.S. territories,” would require a “special exception” to The Posse Comitatus Act, which can be obtained via “the President invoking his executive authority.” The document also makes reference to identifying detainees using their “social security number.”
Aside from enemy combatants and other classifications of detainees, the manual includes the designation of “civilian internees,” in other words citizens who are detained for, “security reasons, for protection, or because he or she committed an offense against the detaining power.”
Once the detainees have been processed into the internment camp, the manual explains how they will be “indoctrinated,” with a particular focus on targeting political dissidents, into expressing support for U.S. policies.
The re-education process is the responsibility of the “Psychological Operations Officer,” whose job it is to design “PSYOP products that are designed to pacify and acclimate detainees or DCs to accept U.S. I/R facility authority and regulations,” according to the document.
Political activists would be pacified to sympathize with the government
Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Thursday, May 3, 2012
A leaked U.S. Army document prepared for the Department of Defense contains shocking plans for “political activists” to be pacified by “PSYOP officers” into developing an “appreciation of U.S. policies” while detained in prison camps inside the United States.
The document, entitled FM 3-39.40 Internment and Resettlement Operations (PDF) was originally released on a restricted basis to the DoD in February 2010, but has now been leaked online.
The manual outlines policies for processing detainees into internment camps both globally and inside the United States. International agencies like the UN and the Red Cross are named as partners in addition to domestic federal agencies including the Department of Homeland Security and FEMA.
The document makes it clear that the policies apply “within U.S. territory” and involve, “DOD support to U.S. civil authorities for domestic emergencies, and for designated law enforcement and other activities,” including “man-made disasters, accidents, terrorist attacks and incidents in the U.S. and its territories.”
The manual states, “These operations may be performed as domestic civil support operations,” and adds that “The authority to approve resettlement such operations within U.S. territories,” would require a “special exception” to The Posse Comitatus Act, which can be obtained via “the President invoking his executive authority.” The document also makes reference to identifying detainees using their “social security number.”
Aside from enemy combatants and other classifications of detainees, the manual includes the designation of “civilian internees,” in other words citizens who are detained for, “security reasons, for protection, or because he or she committed an offense against the detaining power.”
Once the detainees have been processed into the internment camp, the manual explains how they will be “indoctrinated,” with a particular focus on targeting political dissidents, into expressing support for U.S. policies.
The re-education process is the responsibility of the “Psychological Operations Officer,” whose job it is to design “PSYOP products that are designed to pacify and acclimate detainees or DCs to accept U.S. I/R facility authority and regulations,” according to the document.
The manual lists the following roles that are designated to the “PSYOP team”.
– Identifies malcontents, trained agitators, and political leaders within the facility who may try to organize resistance or create disturbances.
– Develops and executes indoctrination programs to reduce or remove antagonistic attitudes.
– Identifies political activists.
– Provides loudspeaker support (such as administrative announcements and facility instructions when necessary).
– Helps the military police commander control detainee and DC populations during emergencies.
– Plans and executes a PSYOP program that produces an understanding and appreciation of U.S. policies and actions.
Remember, this is not restricted to insurgents in Iraq who are detained in prison camps – the manual makes it clear that the policies also apply “within U.S. territory” under the auspices of the DHS and FEMA. The document adds that, “Resettlement operations may require large groups of civilians to be quartered temporarily (less than 6 months) or semipermanently (more than 6 months).”
A D V E R T I S E M E N T
The historical significance of states using internment camps to re-educate detainees centers around the fact that it is almost exclusively practiced by repressive and dictatorial regimes like the former Soviet Union and Stalinist regimes like modern day North Korea.
We have exhaustively documented preparations for the mass internment of citizens inside America, but this is the first time that language concerning the re-education of detainees, in particular political activists, has cropped up in our research.
In 2009, the National Guard posted a number of job opportunities looking for “Internment/Resettlement Specialists” to work in “civilian internee camps” within the United States.
In December last year it was also revealed that Halliburton subsidiary KBR is seeking sub-contractors to staff and outfit “emergency environment” camps located in five regions of the United States.
In 2006, KBR was contracted by Homeland Security to build detention centers designed to deal with “an emergency influx of immigrants into the U.S,” or the rapid development of unspecified “new programs” that would require large numbers of people to be interned.
Rex 84, short for Readiness Exercise 1984, was established under the pretext of a “mass exodus” of illegal aliens crossing the Mexican/US border, the same pretense used in the language of the KBR request for services.
During the Iran-Contra hearings in 1987, however, it was revealed that the program was a secretive “scenario and drill” developed by the federal government to suspend the Constitution, declare martial law, assign military commanders to take over state and local governments, and detain large numbers of American citizens determined by the government to be “national security threats.”
Read a portion of the Internment and Resettlement Operations manual below.
The following portions of the document make it clear that the policies apply “within U.S. territory” (as well as abroad in countries like Iraq and Afghanistan) and that domestic federal agencies are involved.
*********************
Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a regular fill-in host for The Alex Jones Show and Infowars Nightly News.
The city recently settled lawsuits by 10,000 WTC workers, more than 600 of whom have developed cancer. But officials have so far insisted there is no scientific proof that Ground Zero smoke and dust caused cancer.
An FDNY spokesman gave a statement for Dr. Prezant, saying: ‘The study is ongoing, and no conclusions have been reached on whether cancer rates have increased for firefighters.’ But fire union bosses in New York have expressed their concern about the findings.
Al Hagan, head of the fire-officers union, told the New York Post: ‘I’m led to believe that the numbers for those cancers across all ranks in the Fire Department of people who worked at Ground Zero is up significantly, and we’re all very concerned about it, as are our families.’ Steve Cassidy, president of the firefighters union, said Ground Zero’s ‘toxic stew’ has proven lethal. He said: ‘It’s a fact that New York City firefighters are dying of cancer in record numbers. ‘We have buried 10 firefighters in just the last 15 weeks, seven with cancer. On Sept. 10, 2001, they were young, healthy firefighters.’
In 2007, doctors at Mt. Sinai Medical Center, which monitors World Trade Center rescue workers, noted blood cancers like multiple myeloma, which normally strikes in the 60s or 70s, were being found in relatively young officers.
The New York state Health Department has confirmed that 345 Ground Zero workers have died of various cancers as of June 2010.
Are these cancers all from toxins in the dust? You know what else causes high rates of cancer?
Every potential client considering a contingent fee agreement with a lawyer should first consider this story about a worker who spent hundreds of hours cleaning up the “ground zero” site in New York City after the 9/11/01 terror attacks. He was steered to a NY law firm which is handling 10,000 such claims, so he probably assumed they knew what they were doing. They twisted his arm to get him to accept a settlement for just $10K, all of which went to the firm’s fees, unitemized firm expenses, and paying back a small amount of his workman’s compensation benefits, leaving him, literally, with a check for $0.00, totally broke, and now diagnosed with life-threatening cancer:
CANCER-STRICKEN Ground Zero worker Edgar Galvis has finally received a compensation cheque – for zero dollars.
The man … was relieved to get a cheque in the mail for his court settlement with Merrill Lynch, whose offices he had cleaned.
But he was stunned when he saw the amount: $0.00.
His award had been $10,005, but his lawyers at the firm Worby, Groner, Edelman & Napoli Bern lopped off $2579 for unitemised legal expenses.
Then they took a 33.3 per cent fee of $2124. They also subtracted $352, a fee to the lawyer who referred him.
The remaining $4950 was withheld for unspecified “liens”, the letter says.
Mr Galvis thinks this was repayment of workers’ compensation for aid.
…”I couldn’t believe it. I thought it was a joke.”…In May 2005, a friend gave him a business card passed out by the law firm. A representative came to his home.
“The man told me that more than likely I will get sick and I would get 60 per cent of whatever he won,” Mr Galvis said.
“He even mentioned the words ‘millions of dollars’.”
In April 2010, he got a $10,000 offer. A letter from the law firm said he could expect about $5000 after expenses and fees.
It warned that if his case went to trial and he lost, he could owe the firm up to $100,000 in costs.
He took the settlement. [Apparently the settlement was based on losing sleep and sinus problems, but then he was diagnosed with cancer, but the firm told him] it was “too late” to adjust his claim. [Sounds odd to me.]
The total Merrill settlement came to $18 million for about 400 clients, documents show.
Galvis is one of nearly 10,000 Ground Zero workers represented by Napoli Bern, which led talks for a separate settlement with the city for $712 million. A partner in the firm, Paul Napoli, did not respond to a request for comment.
Lawyers working on a contingent fee basis can’t make money spending lots of time on small claims, which is what they thought this was when they settled it. (There’s even a chance the expenses aren’t real, just another profit center.) Even though they knew the client might get sicker — they even predicted it — they sold him out, pressured him to settle, and apparently didn’t make any effort to amend or restart the proceedings to protect his interests once he got sicker. Settling for $10K, given his financial situation, even if he got to keep the whole $10K, wouldn’t solve any of his problems — but for the firm, assuming they spent little or no time on a matter, you can make $50 million if you make roughly $5K each on 10K cases.
A particularly dirty tactic was to threaten the client with an absurdly inflated amount for expenses to go to trial — not something they mentioned up front, apparently. The primary expense in this sort of case is usually expert medical testimony, but this shouldn’t cost anything close to $100K and it wouldn’t make sense for the firm to recommend settlement without already having an expert opinion. More reasonable contingent fee lawyers eat the expenses rather than bankrupt the clients they fail to help. (This is one of the firms that also earned international disdain for the amount of money they demanded for “legal fees” from the government fund created to help the first responders, etc., who took well over half the money — including payments to government lawyers — and didn’t try a single case. I gather they’ve been paid hundreds of millions of dollars and haven’t even come close to trying a single case.)
Lawyers doing contingent fee work often resort to the same sorts of tactics to woo clients that are used by used car salespeople and con men. This happens every day with many of the contingent fee mills. You need to shop around, make a record of what they tell you before and after you sign, and complain to the police and bar if you believe you’ve been taken advantage of.
In this case, the plaintiff’s lawyer rendered a far more valuable service to Merrill Lynch, which dodged a multi-million dollar bullet thanks to their opponent’s professional advisers. We’ll have to see whether the authorities in New York decide to step in — not likely based on their track record.
Peaceful nuclear explosions
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Peaceful nuclear explosions (PNEs) are nuclear explosions conducted for non-military purposes, such as activities related to economic development including the creation of canals. During the 1960s and 1970s, both the United States and the Soviet Union conducted a number of PNEs.
Six of the explosions by the Soviet Union are considered to have been of an applied nature, not just tests.
Subsequently the United States and the Soviet Union halted their programs. Definitions and limits are covered in the Peaceful Nuclear Explosions Treaty of 1976. The Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty of 1996 prohibits all nuclear explosions, regardless of whether they are for peaceful purposes or not.
Contents [hide]
1 The Peaceful Nuclear Explosions Treaty
2 United States: Operation Plowshare
3 Soviet Union: Nuclear Explosions for the National Economy
4 Other nations
5 Spaceflight Applications
6 See also
7 References
8 External links
[edit]The Peaceful Nuclear Explosions Treaty
In the PNE Treaty the signatories agreed: not to carry out any individual nuclear explosions having a yield exceeding 150 kilotons; not to carry out any group explosion (consisting of a number of individual explosions) having an aggregate yield exceeding 1,500 kilotons; and not to carry out any group explosion having an aggregate yield exceeding 150 kilotons unless the individual explosions in the group could be identified and measured by agreed verification procedures. The parties also reaffirmed their obligations to comply fully with the Limited Test Ban Treaty of 1963.
The parties reserve the right to carry out nuclear explosions for peaceful purposes in the territory of another country if requested to do so, but only in full compliance with the yield limitations and other provisions of the PNE Treaty and in accord with the Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Articles IV and V of the PNE Treaty set forth the agreed verification arrangements. In addition to the use of national technical means, the Treaty states that information and access to sites of explosions will be provided by each side, and includes a commitment not to interfere with verification means and procedures.
The protocol to the PNE Treaty sets forth the specific agreed arrangements for ensuring that no weapon-related benefits precluded by the Threshold Test Ban Treaty are derived by carrying out a nuclear explosion used for peaceful purposes, including provisions for use of the hydrodynamic yield measurement method, seismic monitoring and on-site inspection.
The agreed statement that accompanies the Treaty specifies that a “peaceful application” of an underground nuclear explosion would not include the developmental testing of any nuclear explosive.
[edit]United States: Operation Plowshare
One of the Chariot schemes involved chaining five thermonuclear devices to create the artificial harbor.
Operation Plowshare was the name of the U.S. program for the development of techniques to use nuclear explosives for peaceful purposes. The name was coined in 1961, taken from Micah 4:3 (“And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more”). Twenty-eight nuclear blasts were detonated between 1961 and 1973.
One of the first U.S. proposals for peaceful nuclear explosions that came close to being carried out was Project Chariot, which would have used several hydrogen bombs to create an artificial harbor at Cape Thompson, Alaska. It was never carried out due to concerns for the native populations and the fact that there was little potential use for the harbor to justify its risk and expense. There was also talk of using nuclear explosions to excavate a second Panama Canal.[1]
The largest excavation experiment took place in 1962 at the Department of Energy’s Nevada Test Site. The Sedan nuclear test carried out as part of Operation Storax displaced 12 million tons of earth, creating the largest man-made crater in the world, generating a large nuclear fallout over Nevada and Utah. Three tests were conducted in order to stimulate natural gas production, but the effort was abandoned as impractical because of cost and radioactive contamination of the gas.[2][3]
There were many negative impacts from Project Plowshare’s 27 nuclear explosions. For example, the Gasbuggy site,[3] located 55 miles east of Farmington, New Mexico, still contains nuclear contamination from a single subsurface blast in 1967.[4] Other consequences included blighted land, relocated communities, tritium-contaminated water, radioactivity, and fallout from debris being hurled high into the atmosphere. These were ignored and downplayed until the program was terminated in 1977, due in large part to public opposition, after $770 million had been spent on the project.[5]
[edit]Soviet Union: Nuclear Explosions for the National Economy
The Soviet Union conducted a much more vigorous program of 239 nuclear tests, some with multiple devices, between 1965 and 1988 under the auspices of Program No. 6 and Program No. 7-Nuclear Explosions for the National Economy. Its aims and results were similar to those of the American effort, with the exception that many of the blasts were considered applications, not tests.[6] The best known of these in the West was the Chagan test in January 1965 as radioactivity from the Chagan test was detected over Japan by both the U.S. and Japan. The United States complained to the Soviets, but the matter was dropped.
In the 1970, the Soviet Union started the “Deep Seismic Sounding” Program, that included the use of peaceful nuclear explosions to create seismic deep profiles. Compared to the usage of conventional explosives or mechanical methods, nuclear explosions allow the collection of longer seismic profiles (up to several thousand kilometers).[7]
There are proponents for continuing the PNE programs in modern Russia. They (e.g. A. Koldobsky) state that the program already paid for itself and saved the USSR billions of rubles and can save even more if continued. They also allege that the PNE is the only feasible way to put out large fountains and fires on natural gas deposits and the safest and most economically viable way to destroy chemical weapons.
Their opponents (include the academician A.V. Yablokov) [8] state that all PNE technologies have non-nuclear alternatives and that many PNEs actually caused nuclear disasters.
Reports on the successful Soviet use of nuclear explosions in extinguishing out-of-control gas well fires were widely cited in United States policy discussions of options for stopping the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.[9][10]
[edit]Other nations
This unreferenced section requires citations to ensure verifiability.
Germany at one time considered manufacturing nuclear explosives for civil engineering purposes. In the early 1970s a feasibility study was conducted for a project to build a canal from the Mediterranean Sea to the Qattara Depression in the Western Desert of Egypt using nuclear demolition. This project proposed to use 213 devices, with yields of 1 to 1.5 megatons detonated at depths of 100 to 500 m, to build this canal for the purpose of producing hydroelectric power.
The Smiling Buddha, India’s first explosive nuclear device was described by the Indian Government as a peaceful nuclear explosion.
In Australia proposed blasting was put forward as a way of mining Iron Ore in the Pilbara [11]
[edit]Spaceflight Applications
Nuclear explosions have been studied as a possible method of spacecraft propulsion. The most well known example was Project Orion, which studied the possibility of a spacecraft propelled by the detonation of nuclear devices which it released behind itself.
Another application would be for deflecting or destroying celestial objects like comets, meteors, or asteroids on a collision course with Earth that have the potential for causing destruction.
[edit]See also
Project Gnome
[edit]References
^ “US Congressional Record pg. 25747, 1968-09-05”. Retrieved 2012-01-22.
^ U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Legacy Management: Rulison, Colorado, Site. Fact Sheet [1].
^ a b Peter Metzger (February 22, 1970). Project Gasbuggy And Catch-85*: *That’s krypton-85, one of the radioactive by-products of nuclear explosions that release natural gas Project Gasbuggy and Catch-85 “It’s 95 per cent safe? We worry about the other 5”. New York Times. p. SM14.
^ “DOE Environmental Management (EM) – Gas Buggy Site”. Em.doe.gov. Retrieved 2010-09-19.
^ Benjamin K. Sovacool (2011). Contesting the Future of Nuclear Power: A Critical Global Assessment of Atomic Energy, World Scientific, pp. 171-172.
^ Nordyke, M. D. (2000-09-01). The Soviet Program for Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Explosions. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. pp. 34–35. DOI:10.2172/793554. Report no.: UCRL-ID-124410 Rev 2. U. S. Department of Energy contract no.: W-7405-Eng48.
^ University of Wyoming: http://w3.uwyo.edu/~seismic/dss/
^ “А. В. ЯБЛОКОВ, “ЯДЕРНАЯ МИФОЛОГИЯ КОНЦА XX ВЕКА””. Biometrica.tomsk.ru. Retrieved 2011-08-13.
^ Broad, William J. (2010-06-02). “Nuclear Option on Gulf Oil Spill? No Way, U.S. Says”. New York Times. Retrieved 2010-06-18.
^ Astrasheuskaya, Nastassia; Judah, Ben; Selyukh, Alina (2010-07-02). “Special Report: Should BP nuke its leaking well?”. Reuters. Retrieved 2010-07-08.
^ Nuclear blasting proposed for Pilbara Iron Ore Project in Industrial Reviews and Mining Year Book, 1970 pp.255-259
[edit]External links
Peaceful Nuclear Explosions Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization Preparatory Commission
Video of the 104Kt Sedan PNE as part of Operation Plowshare.
Video of the Soviet Chagan PNE
Video of the Soviet Taiga PNE
On the Soviet nuclear program
On the Soviet program for peaceful uses of nuclear weapons, American Office of Scientific and Technical Information
United States Nuclear Tests, July 1945 through September 1992 (DOE/NV-209 [Rev.14]).
ARMS CONTROL AGREEMENTS,Federation of American Scientists
World Reaction to the Indian Nuclear Tests, Center for Nonproliferation Studies
Nuclear Files.org Treaty between the USA and USSR on underground nuclear explosions for peaceful purposes
Peter Kuran’s “Atomic Journeys” – documentary film includes tests of Peaceful nuclear Explosions.
[hide] v t e
Nuclear technology
Science
Chemistry Engineering Physics Atomic nucleus Fission Fusion Radiation ionizing
Fuel
Deuterium Fertile material Fissile Helium-3 Isotope separation Plutonium Thorium Tritium Uranium enriched depleted
Neutron
Activation Capture Cross-section Fast Fusion Generator Poison Radiation Reflector Temp Thermal
Reactors
Fission
reactors
by
primary
moderator
Water
Aqueous homogeneous reactor Boiling BWR ABWR Heavy CANDU PHWR SGHWR
Natural (NFR) Pressurized PWR VVER EPR Supercritical (SCWR)
Graphite
by coolant
Water
RBMK
Gas
Advanced gas-cooled (AGR) Magnox Pebble bed (PBMR)
UHTREX UNGG reactor Very high temperature (VHTR)
Molten Salt
FLiBe
Fuji MSR Liquid fluoride thorium reactor (LFTR)
Molten-Salt Reactor Experiment (MSRE)
Hydrocarbon
Organically moderated and cooled reactor
BeO
Aircraft Reactor Experiment (ARE)
None
(Fast)
Breeder (FBR) Integral (IFR) Liquid-metal-cooled (LMFR) SSTAR Traveling Wave (TWR)
Generation IV by coolant Gas (GFR) Lead (LFR) Sodium (SFR)
Fusion
reactors
by
confinement
Magnetic
Field-reversed configuration Levitated dipole Reversed field pinch Spheromak Stellarator Tokamak
Inertial
Bubble fusion (acoustic) Fusor electrostatic Laser-driven Magnetized target Z-pinch
Other
Dense plasma focus Migma Muon-catalyzed Polywell Pyroelectric
List of nuclear reactors
Power
Nuclear power plant By country Economics Fusion Isotope thermoelectric (RTG) Propulsion rocket Safety
Medicine
Imaging
by
radiation
Gamma camera
Scintigraphy Positron emission (PET) Single photon emission (SPECT)
X-ray
Projectional radiography Computed tomography
Therapy
Boron neutron capture (BNCT) Brachytherapy Proton Radiation Tomotherapy
Weapon
Topics
Arms race Delivery Design Explosion effects History Proliferation Testing underground Warfare Yield TNTe
Lists
Popular culture States Tests Treaties Weapon-free zones Weapons
Waste
Products
Actinide: (Reprocessed uranium Reactor-grade plutonium Minor actinide) Activation Fission LLFP
Disposal
Fuel cycle HLW LLW Repository Reprocessing Spent fuel pool cask Transmutation
Debate
Nuclear power debate Nuclear weapons debate Anti-nuclear movement Uranium mining debate Nuclear power phase-out
NLE 2012: Will This Years Drill Go Live and Result in a False Flag Cyber Attack?
The Intel Hub
By Shepard Ambellas and Alex Thomas
April 4, 2012
The summer of 2012 is fast approaching. As it inches closer, we will start to see a major increase in US and foreign troop movements as well as military equipment movements throughout the CONUS (Continental United States).
While many of the upcoming sightings may well be normal operations as the military does like to do training in the summer, the fact is that parts of our own military, along with foreign and UN troops, are actively planning to take on the American people.
National Level Exercise drills have been in effect for years now and have been covered by many alternative news sources, including The Intel Hub through our yearly Operation Overwatch which we use to gain intel and tips from the public in order to relay them to our readers.
Over the years many people have worried about the numerous National Level Preparedness drills and, in most cases, for good reason.
In 2011, the NLE focused around an earthquake on the New Madrid Fault Zone and the year before resulted in 70 thousand people being evacuated from a Texas city after a fertilizer fire.
Interestingly enough, this years FEMA national preparedness drill is focusing on the threat of a major cyber attack on America’s infrastructure.
The last year has seen dozens of cyber attacks on government websites as well as government propagandists pushing the fear of a cyber attack on the populace. Now we have the Department of Homeland Security making cyber security the main component of their annual preparedness drill.
Although only a small amount of information has been released on NLE2012, we can see from FEMA’s own website what it primary consists of.
National Level Exercise (NLE) 2012 is part of a series of congressionally mandated preparedness exercises designed to educate and prepare participants for potential catastrophic events.
The NLE 2012 process will examine the nation’s ability to coordinate and implement prevention, preparedness, response and recovery plans and capabilities pertaining to a significant cyber event or a series of events.
NLE 2012 will examine national response plans and procedures, including the National Response Framework (NRF), NRF Cyber Incident Annex, Interim National Cyber Incident Response Plan (NCIRP) and the International Strategy for Cyberspace.
Unique to NLE 2012 will be an emphasis on the shared responsibility among all levels of government, the private sector and the international community to secure cyberspace and respond together to a significant cyber incident.
Obsidian Analysis, the company heading up NLE12 for the private sector, states on their website:
NLE 2012 will comprise four major exercises, including a capstone event. These exercises will share common scenario elements, planning efforts and governance structure.
Participation in each exercise will be determined respectively, but the NLE 2012 process includes the Executive Office of the President; federal, state, local, tribal and territorial department and agency officials and emergency operations elements, nongovernmental and private sector organizations and international partners. These four major exercises include:
Information Exchange: This discussion-based exercise is designed to evaluate the sharing of cyber related information among the intelligence community, law enforcement, federal, state, tribal and local governments, the private sector and international partners, as appropriate
Cyber Incident Management/Virtual Effects: This exercise will examine the coordination and communication processes between public and private stakeholders in response to a significant cyber incident. This will include examining challenges related to managing a cyber event with national security implications.
NLE Capstone/Cyber Physical Effects: This functional exercise will examine challenges related to managing a cyber event with physical consequences and national security implications. This will include addressing cyber and physical interdependencies and impacts while coordinating a Whole Community level cyber and physical response.
Continuity Exercise/Eagle Horizon: This operations-based exercise will evaluate the continuity capability of federal departments and agencies. A component will include a nationwide exercise examining communications capability of the homeland security enterprise under conditions in which critical systems have been degraded or lost.
In addition to the major exercises, the NLE 2012 process will include senior level exercises, building-block events (i.e., seminars, tabletop exercises, and training) and routine exercise planning conferences.
As more information is released on these upcoming national preparedness drills, The Intel Hub will bring them to our readers attention.
VIRGINIA BEACH, Va. — A fighter jet that malfunctioned just after takeoff hurtled into a Virginia Beach apartment complex on Friday in a spectacular crash that sent flames and black smoke billowing from the rubble.
RAW VIDEO: US Military Aircraft Crashes in Virgini…: A US F-18 naval jet crashed in Virginia Beach.
The burning fuselage of an F/A-18 Hornet lies smoldering after crashing into a residential building in Virginia Beach, Va., Friday, April 6, 2012. The Navy did not immediately return telephone messages left by The Associated Press, but media reports indicate the two aviators were able to eject from the jet before it crashed. They were being treated for injuries that were not considered life threatening. (AP Photo/Kandice Angel)
The burning fuselage of an F/A-18 Hornet lies smoldering after crashing into a residential building in Virginia Beach, Va., Friday, April 6, 2012. The Navy did not immediately return telephone messages left by The Associated Press, but media reports indicate the two aviators were able to eject from the jet before it crashed. They were being treated for injuries that were not considered life threatening. (AP Photo/Kandice Angel) / The Associated Press
VIRGINIA BEACH, Va. — A fighter jet that malfunctioned just after takeoff hurtled into a Virginia Beach apartment complex on Friday in a spectacular crash that sent flames and black smoke billowing from the rubble.
The two pilots managed to eject just before impact, suffering minor injuries along with five others on the ground. Several residents described hearing a loud explosion and looking out their windows to see the red and orange blaze. In the confusion that followed, two men helped one of the bloodied pilots from the two-seat F18 Hornet move to safety.
“Oh, my God, I heard three really loud explosions, then the black smoke went up high in the sky,” said 71-year-old Felissa Ezell, who lives in a townhouse near the crash site.
By evening, emergency crews were searching through the charred remains of the complex, where some 40 apartment units were damaged or destroyed. No fatalities had been reported.
Seven people, including the pilots from nearby Naval Air Station Oceana, were taken to a hospital. All except one of the pilots were released by late afternoon.
Virginia Beach Fire Department Capt. Tim Riley said three residents remained unaccounted for late Friday.
“We don’t know if we have working cell numbers, if they’ve traveled,” Riley said. “We don’t know if people are staying with other people.”
He said crews had done an exhaustive search of about 95 percent of the apartment complex and would continue searching throughout the night.
“We consider ourselves very fortunate,” he said.
The plane had dumped loads of fuel before crashing, though it wasn’t clear if that was because of a malfunction or an intentional maneuver by the pilots, said Capt. Mark Weisgerber with U.S. Fleet Forces Command. He said investigators will try to determine what happened. The jet went down less than 10 miles from Oceana.
Bruce Nedelka, the Virginia Beach EMS division chief, said witnesses saw fuel being dumped from the jet before it went down, and that fuel was found on buildings and vehicles in the area
Anti Deep State Party 