[IN E-NEWS]: Deadly chemicals and weapons at sea + US Plans for Nuclear Wars + Patriotic Act + Unborn Babies Soaked in Chemicals + Environment + Gun Lobby in Brazil.

November 1, 2005

E-Newsletter Research and Development (RnD) by InfoNature.Org

:: INFONATURE.ORG NEWSLETTER - WWW.INFONATURE.ORG ::Information & Education, Activism & Volunteering on: Nature, Human Rights, Animal Rights

LET THESE INFORMATIONS BECOME KNOWN - SEND THIS NEWSLETTER TO ALL YOUR CONTACTS

INDEX:

1- Deadly chemicals and weapons at sea

2- US Plans for Nuclear Wars

3- Patriotic Act

4- Unborn Babies Soaked in Chemicals

5- Environment - Global Warming

6- Gun Lobby in Brazil

US Army secret surfaces: Deadly chemicals and weapons at sea

Millions of pounds of unused weapons of mass destruction were dumped in oceans before Congress banned the practice in 1972. The threat is still out there, and may be growing.

A clam dredging operation off the coast of Atlantic City, N.J., in 2004 pulled up an old artillery shell.

The long-submerged, World War I-era explosive was filled with a black, tar-like substance.

Bomb disposal technicians from Dover Air Force Base in Delaware were brought in to dismantle it. Three of them were injured, one hospitalized with large, pus-filled blisters on his arm and hand.

The shell was filled with mustard gas in solid form.

What was long-feared by the few military officials in the know had come to pass: Chemical weapons that the Army dumped at sea decades ago had finally ended up on shore in the United States.

While it has long been known that some chemical weapons went into the ocean, records obtained by the Daily Press of Newport News, Va., show that the previously classified weapons-dumping program was far more extensive than has ever been suspected.

The Army now admits in reports never before released that it secretly dumped 64 million pounds of nerve and mustard gas agent into the sea, along with 400,000 chemical-filled bombs, land mines and rockets and more than 500 tons of radioactive waste either tossed overboard or packed into the holds of scuttled vessels.

A Daily Press investigation also found:

These weapons of mass destruction virtually ring the country, concealed off the coasts of at least 11 states: six on the East Coast, including New Jersey and Maryland, two on the Gulf Coast, and in California, Hawaii and Alaska. Few, if any, state officials have been informed of their existence.

The chemical agents could pose a hazard for generations. The Army has examined only a few of its 26 dump zones, and none in 30 years.

The Army can't say exactly where all the weapons were dumped from World War II to 1970. Army records are sketchy, missing or were destroyed.

More dump sites probably exist. The Army hasn't reviewed records from the World War I era, when ocean dumping of chemical weapons was common.

''We do not claim to know where they all are,'' said William Brankowitz, a deputy project manager in the U.S. Army Chemical Materials Agency and a leading authority on the Army's chemical weapons dumping. ''We don't want to be cavalier at all and say this stuff was exposed to water and is OK. It can last for a very, very long time.''

A drop of nerve agent can kill within a minute. When released in the ocean it lasts up to six weeks, killing every organism it touches before breaking down into its nonlethal chemical components.

Mustard gas can be fatal. When exposed to seawater it forms a concentrated, encrusted gel that lasts for at least five years, rolling around on the ocean floor, killing or contaminating sea life.

Sea-dumped chemical weapons may be slowly leaking from decades of saltwater corrosion, resulting in a time-delayed release of deadly chemicals over the next 100 years and an unforeseeable environmental impact. Steel corrodes at different rates depending on the water depth, ocean temperature and thickness of the shells.

That was the conclusion of Norwegian scientists who in 2002 examined chemical weapons dumped off Norway's coast after World War II by the U.S. and British military.

Overseas, more than 200 fishermen over the years have been burned by mustard gas pulled on deck. A fisherman in Hawaii was burned in 1976 when he brought up an Army-dumped mortar round full of mustard gas.

Although it seems unlikely the weapons will begin to wash up on shore, last year's discovery that a mustard gas-filled artillery shell was dumped off the coast of New Jersey was ominous for several reasons.

By John BullSpecial to The Morning Callhttp://www.mcall.com/news/local/all-a1_5dumpoct30,0,986529.story?coll=all-news-hed & track=mostemailedlink

US nuclear warplans fly around the internet

Greenpeace

30 September 2005

Illustration explaining the convergence of nuclear and non-nuclear options for Pentagon war planning - Enlarge Image

Washington, DC, United States — "Even in an unclassified world this is not the kind of thing you want flying around the Internet," says Pentagon spokesman Lawrence DiRita. He was talking about a document, yanked from a Pentagon website on September 19th, which outlines US nuclear warfighting plans, including the pre-emptive use of nuclear weapons and the use of nukes in conventional war.

Comments to the document by the various military branches reveal squabbling about who gets to run a nuclear war, a disagreement about the legality of pre-emptive warfighting strategies, and a discussion of the etiquette of alerting allied troops that a nuclear attack is coming their way.

This is exactly the kind of information which we believe ought to be flying around the internet; these guys really shouldn't be left alone to talk about this stuff behind closed doors.

So we took our copy and uploaded it here at www.greenpeace.org. You can help ensure it flies around the internet some more by sending this article to a friend.

Nuclear war: it's not just for breakfast anymore

The document is a rare unpolished look at how the Cold War doctrine of nuclear first strike - previously spun as "deterrence" - has taken on a new dimension.

It reveals that the threshold for actually using nuclear weapons has been lowered dramatically.

And it outs the untruth of George Bush claiming that the US is reducing the importance of its nuclear arsenal.

For instance, the document condones pre-emptive nuclear strikes against nations (even those without nuclear weapons) which the US government thinks might use chemical or biological weapons against US forces or allies. The document also condones the use of nuclear weapons as just another item in the warfighting toolbox, and underscores the importance of US troops being able to continue functioning in a highly irradiated battle zone.

The document has excellent, practical advice on how to deal with situations like a nuclear foe who might retaliate with nuclear weapons: "Executing a nuclear option, or even a portion of an option, should send a clear signal of United States' resolve. Hence, options must be selected very carefully and deliberately so that the attack can help ensure the adversary recognizes the "signal" and should therefore not assume the United States has escalated to general nuclear war, although that perception cannot be guaranteed." It's comforting to know that the Pentagon recognises that nuclear weapons are very, very bad at conveying nuanced messages. Perhaps if they accompanied the attack with a thoughtful card, that would help make their meaning clear?

Fission vision sparks division

However, editing notes show internal disagreement amongst US military commanders. The disputes are over the document's enthusiasm for using nuclear weapons in attacks on infrastructure which would inevitably lead to massive civilian casualties. Some commanders expressed extreme doubts over both the legality of the new nuclear doctrine, and that the threats used to justify this new doctrine actually exist.

Fortunately, the document isn't final until that paragon of military restraint, Donald Rumsfeld, says it makes sense to him. Unfortunately, Rummy delegates this kind of policy-making to his alter-ego, Dr. Strangelove.

The US strategic command, STRATCOM, which directs nuclear warfighting commented "Many operational law attorneys do not believe "countervalue" targeting is a lawful justification for employment of force, much less nuclear force. Countervalue philosophy makes no distinction between purely civilian activities and military-related activities and could be used to justify deliberate attacks on civilians and non-military portions of a nation's economy... For example, under the countervalue target philosophy, the attack on the World Trade Centre Towers on 9/11 could be justified."

Since it's not illegal, it must be ok

In a chilling finale, "Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations" concludes that "no customary or conventional international law prohibits nations from employing nuclear weapons in armed conflict."

Greenpeace disarmament campaigner William Peden said, "This document should send a shiver down the spine of everyone. It shows that the highest levels of the Pentagon have undergone a major shift in thinking and now view nuclear weapons no longer as a weapon of last resort but a weapon that can and should be used."

"This means a US military machine prepared to use nuclear weapons first, against non-nuclear countries and non-military-related, civilian targets."

Make sure the Pentagon's plans for nuclear war fly around the internet

Nuclear warfighting plans concern all of us -- they shouldn't be kept secret. Help ensure that these unclassified documents are exposed to plenty of sunlight by sending this article to a few friends.

Source: http://www.greenpeace.org/international/news/nuclear-warplans-101

Endless sunset - US Patriotic Act

While you were, ah, distracted, Congress was quietly renewing every major provision of the Patriot Act.

Most of the provisions of the USA Patriot Act, including access to library records, were supposed to "sunset" this year, five years after the law's passing. Instead, both the House and the Senate have already voted to renew the entire act, with only minor revisions. While they're at it, they'd like to add some decidedly unpatriotic amendments to expand the death penalty.

These new amendments would let prosecutors shop around for another jury if the one they have is deadlocked on the death penalty; triple the number of terrorism-related crimes eligible for the death penalty; and authorize the death penalty for a person who gives money to an organization whose members kill someone, even if the contributor did not know that the organization or its members were planning to kill.

The Patriot Act was enacted during what President Bush called "a state of emergency." It wasn't even read by most of the members who voted for it. But the whole point of the sunset clause was to allow Congresspeople to actually read the bill and debate it in calmer times. Now, the Act is effectively being made permanent with little or no debate or discussion.

Still, the House and the Senate are still in negotiations over the final wording of the bill and so it hasn't been made final yet. The Bill of Rights Defense Commitee is asking people to make one last push to keep it from getting renewed. They list possible actions you can get involved in and ways to educate your communities about threats to civil liberties.

Posted by Rachel Neumann at 1:03 PM on October 28, 2005.Rachel Neumann is Rights & Liberties Editor at AlterNet.http://alternet.org/blogs/themix/27501/

Unborn Babies Soaked in Chemicals, Survey Finds

Washington - Unborn U.S. babies are soaking in a stew of chemicals, including mercury, gasoline byproducts and pesticides, according to a report to be released Thursday.

Although the effects on the babies are not clear, the survey prompted several members of Congress to press for legislation that would strengthen controls on chemicals in the environment.

The report by the Environmental Working Group is based on tests of 10 samples of umbilical cord blood taken by the American Red Cross. They found an average of 287 contaminants in the blood, including mercury, fire retardants, pesticides and the Teflon chemical PFOA.

"These 10 newborn babies ... were born polluted," said New York Rep. Louise Slaughter, who planned to publicize the findings at a news conference Thursday.

"If ever we had proof that our nation's pollution laws aren't working, it's reading the list of industrial chemicals in the bodies of babies who have not yet lived outside the womb," Slaughter, a Democrat, said.

Cord blood reflects what the mother passes to the baby through the placenta.

"Of the 287 chemicals we detected in umbilical cord blood, we know that 180 cause cancer in humans or animals, 217 are toxic to the brain and nervous system, and 208 cause birth defects or abnormal development in animal tests," the report said.

Blood tests did not show how the chemicals got into the mothers' bodies.

Mercury and Pesticides

Among the chemicals found in the cord blood were methylmercury, produced by coal-fired power plants and certain industrial processes. People can breathe it in or eat it in seafood and it causes brain and nerve damage.

Also found were polyaromatic hydrocarbons, or PAHs, which are produced by burning gasoline and garbage and which may cause cancer; flame-retardant chemicals called polybrominated dibenzodioxins and furans; and pesticides including DDT and chlordane.

The same group analyzed the breast milk of mothers across the United States in 2003 and found varying levels of chemicals, including flame retardants known as PBDEs. This latest analysis also found PBDEs in cord blood.

The Environmental Working Group report coincided with a Government Accountability Office report issued Wednesday that said the Environmental Protection Agency does not have the powers it needs to fully regulate toxic chemicals.

The GAO, the investigative arm of Congress, found that the EPA's Toxic Substances Control Act gives only "limited assurance" that new chemicals entering the market are safe and that the EPA only rarely assesses chemicals already on the market.

"Today, chemicals are being used to make baby bottles, food packaging and other products that have never been fully evaluated for their health effects on children - and some of these chemicals are turning up in our blood," said New Jersey Democrat Sen. Frank Lautenberg, who plans to co-sponsor a bill to require more testing of toxic chemicals.

Pollutants and other chemicals are believed to cause a range of illnesses. But scientists agree the only way to really sort out the effects is to measure how much gets into people and then see what happens to their health.

By Maggie Fox - ReutersThursday 14 July 2005

http://www.truthout.org/issues_05/071405HA.shtml

Warming world blamed for more strong hurricanes

Climate Change special report, New Scientist

A massive global increase in the number of strong hurricanes over the past35 years is being blamed on global warming, by the most detailed study yet.The US scientists warn that Katrina-strength hurricanes could become thenorm.Worldwide since the 1970s, there has been a near-doubling in the number ofCategory 4 and 5 storms - the strength that saw Hurricane Katrina do suchdamage to the US Gulf coastline late in August 2005. Peter Webster of the Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, says thetrend is global, has lasted over several decades and is connected to asteady worldwide increase in tropical sea temperatures. Because of all thesefactors, it is unlikely to be due to any known natural fluctuations inclimate such as El Niño, the North Atlantic Oscillation or the PacificDecadal Oscillation. "We can say with confidence that the trends in sea surface temperatures andhurricane intensity are connected to climate change," says Webster'sco-author Judy Curry, also of the Georgia Institute of Technology. The teamlooked at the incidence of intense tropical storms and the study results arethe strongest affirmation yet that Katrina-level hurricanes are becomingmore frequent in a warmer world.Unnatural trend

The study finds there has been no general increase in the total number ofhurricanes, which are called cyclones when they appear outside the Atlantic.Nor is there any evidence of the formation of the oft-predicted"super-hurricanes". The worst hurricane in any year is usually no strongerthan in previous years during the study period. But the proportion of hurricanes reaching categories 4 or 5 - with windspeeds above 56 metres per second - has risen from 20% in the 1970s to 35%in the past decade. "This trend has lasted for more than 30 years now. So the chances of itbeing natural are fairly remote," says Greg Holland of the National Centerfor Atmospheric Research (NCAR) at Boulder, ColoradoMoreover, says Webster, natural fluctuations tend to be localised. "When theeast Pacific warms, the west Pacific cools, for instance. But sea surfacetemperatures are rising throughout the tropics today." The surface waters inthe tropical oceans are now around 0.5°C warmer during hurricane seasonsthan 35 years ago. Satellite era

Hurricanes form when ocean temperatures rise above 26°C. "The fuel forhurricanes is water vapour evaporating from the ocean surface. It condensesin the air and releases heat, which drives the hurricane's intensity," saysWebster. "The tendency to Katrina-like hurricanes is increasing," Holland says.Without the warmer sea-surface temperatures, "Katrina might only have been acategory 2 or 3".All the data for sea surface temperatures and hurricane numbers andintensities come from satellite data. "We deliberately limited this study tothe satellite era because of the known biases [in the data] before thisperiod," says Webster.This is the third report in recent months highlighting the growing risk tolife and property round the world from hurricanes and tornadoes. In June,NCAR's Kevin Trenberth reported a rising intensity of hurricanes in theNorth Atlantic. 19:00 15 September 2005 NewScientist.com news service Fred Pearce

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn8002

Shot Down: Lobby Kills Brazil Gun Ban

Every 15 minutes, someone in Brazil dies from a gunshot wound, according to the United Nations. Yet the world’s first ever referendum on banning civilian guns in this country failed to pass this past Sunday.

Instead the proposed ban went down to a resounding defeat with almost two thirds of the population voting no to the question: "Should the sale of all types of guns and ammunition be banned nationwide for everyone except the police and the military?"

Earlier this year, support for the ban had been running as high as 80 percent, but in recent weeks, the pro-gun lobby -- arms makers and various activist groups -- played on fears about the crime rate and the public swung dramatically against the proposal. The vote also represented the public’s lack of confidence in security forces -- mired in corruption and inefficiency -- to protect the populace. According to the BBC, middle class men were most likely to oppose the ban, while women and the poor favored it.

For the millions of Brazilians who voted to end gun sales, the defeat was a blow to extensive efforts to curb an epidemic of murder that has claimed hundreds of thousands of lives in the past 20 years. Many see this violence as a hidden civil war fueled by a proliferation of small arms -- an estimated 17.5 million guns -- with about 90 percent in civilian hands and half of them illegal. More than 36,000 died last year alone, twice the toll in the early 1990s.

"It is not a coincidence that the victims of violence are the same victims as always in Brazil: the poor black and segregated. And mostly under the age of 25," says Luis Mir, a Sao Paulo emergency room surgeon and author of "Civil War- State and Trauma."

The battleground of this hidden war is the slums, or favelas, of the bigger Brazilian cities. "The favelas are concentration camps," says Mir. "There is no health, no education, and they are encircled militarily. If you leave and you are a suspect you are shot."

Mir puts the number of civilian dead in the last two decades at 600,000, although some media say that figure is too low. Nor does it include the toll in other Latin American countries such as Colombia, where the media report up to 70 violent deaths a day, or in Guatemala and Mexico, which also face a plague of violence fueled by a proliferation of small arms.

A Bull Market

Most of the guns that end up in civilian hands in Brazil are locally manufactured by Taurus, the largest, but not the only, small arms producer and manufacturer in Latin America. It’s website boasts models including the "Raging Bull Big Bore Revolver," the "CIA" model, and a selection of hollow points bullets.

Based near Porto Alegre in the south of Brazil, the company has grown enormously since its humble start some 64 years ago. Today, thanks to exports to, and marketing and distribution in the U.S. and other countries, Taurus has grown into a considerable world player. In the U.S., each purchase of a Taurus gun comes with a free NRA membership.

No less than 33 percent of all the handguns and pistols sold in the U.S. are of Brazilian origin, according to Viva Rio, a civic organization championing a total ban of firearms.

Knowing how trigger-happy some parts of the American society are, Taurus targeted the U.S. market in the late 60s and hired American gun distributors and marketing consultants. Bangor Punta, a huge U.S. corporation purchased Smith and Wesson before picking up 54 percent of the Taurus stock. Within the Bangor Punta structure, both Smith and Wesson and Taurus remained independent companies, but exchanged methodology and technology.

Twenty three years ago, Taurus do Brasil opened a daughter company and affiliation in Miami and began mining the cowboy cache of American weapons. "That [u.S. connection] not only changed the image of the company but also made a difference in the use of handguns in this country," says Antonio Rangel, a senior-researcher and sociologist at Rio Viva, "We see a link between establishing Taurus in the U.S. and the glamorizing the use of guns with younger people. They think it is trendy to be armed and use firearms."

In Brazil, Taurus’s competition was the Italian arms producer Beretta, the gun of choice in many Hollywood movies and television series.

Most of Beretta’s contracts were with the Brazilian military, which was busily arming itself to defend its territory against alleged foreign intruders, to protect shaky borders, and to repress its civil population during the era of the military dictatorship from 1964 to 1984. The police too, were armed with Beretta-designed weapons.

Well known for stylish clothing and industrial design, the Italians brought their panache to the gun market as well. In 1988, when Beretta sold its interests to Taurus in Brazil, a new era of gun designing began and Taurus now features such fashion statements and pink pearl-handled revolvers with gold detailing and a 357 Magnum Gaucho model in Sundance Blue. Taurus also has introduced the infamous "9" series.

Roots of Violence

"That is the handgun doing most of the killings in our favelas," says Nanko van Buren, a Dutch social worker, active in the Roçinha neighborhood. His Rio-based foundation IBISS (Brazilian Institute for the Innovations in Public Health) sets up community development workshops and seminars for the young favela dwellers who face desperate conditions with little hope of a better future.

With half a million inhabitants, Roçinha is a town in itself, build from cardboard and drift wood, but also with concrete apartment buildings perched on mountain slopes with stunningly beautiful ocean views. It is by far the largest slum in Latin America and among the largest and most notorious worldwide.

"The situation there is mostly ignored by the media and is completely out of hand," says van Buren, who adds that the number of homicides in 2004 surpassed even the rivers of blood in Iraq.

"At least twice a week, I have to dodge stray bullets," van Buren says, "but if you are afraid in my line of work, you’re in the wrong business. And today the gangsters have even more sophisticated weapons, such as laser-guided missiles, they use to shoot police helicopters out of the sky."

Most of the gun-related violence has its roots in the cocaine trafficking, says van Buren. Gangs in Colombia and the Amazon region smuggle cocaine-base into Brazil where it is refined in the bigger cities and sent out to the Caribbean and northern South America for further transport to the U.S. and Europe. The gangs have diversified and now engage in human trafficking, trade in endangered wildlife, bank robberies, kidnaping, money laundering, and, of course, arms trafficking.

Arms in Brazil are readily available both legally and in a thriving black market. Many military guns, such as Kalashnikovs (which can be as cheap as $US20) originate in the former Soviet Union where they were used for combat in Afghanistan and in other central Asian republics, as well as in former Yugoslavia and the Balkan countries.

When quantities of these inexpensive and readily available weapons enter Brazil and get into the wrong hands at the wrong time, they transform criminal activities and gang rivalries into major wars; they turn minor, often domestic, incidents into massacres; change tranquil societies into battlegrounds; and undercut efforts for peace and reconciliation.

Big Guns, Big Stakes

The stakes in the referendum were high, not only for a violence plagued civil society, but also for the arms manufacturers and dealers that poured resources into defeating the proposal. The billion–dollar global arms industry has been expanding rapidly since the end of the Cold War and, at times, has reached the highest levels of government. In Argentina, former president Carlos Menem was arrested after transforming the country into a den of illegal arms shipments during the 1990s.

"Menem became the first ex-chief executive and head of state, to be imprisoned in Argentina during a democratic period for smuggling and selling arms illegally," says Rangel.

Menem’s arrest marked the climax of a lengthy investigation that has produced testimony and evidence linking high officials in his administration to the illicit arms sales by the government-controlled arms manufacturer, Farbricaciones Militares. The inquiry also led to the jailing of presidential adviser Emir Yoma, former defense minister Antonio Ernan Gonzalez, and former army chief of staff General Martin Balza.

Prominent arms dealers with official links are not confined to Latin America. Mark Thatcher, son of Great Britain’s Iron Lady, Margaret Thatcher, was arrested in West Africa for smuggling guns into the war zones. Jean-Christophe Mitterand, son of former French president Francois Mitterand, was charged with helping channel arms worth US$500 million to Angola via French arms company Brenco International, according to the Financial Times.

A Failed Example

Even in its defeat, the government-backed referendum was evidence of a growing public awareness that the unchecked proliferation of small arms has far-reaching consequences for public health and security and incurs staggering human and financial costs. Gun related violence leads not only to the loss of human life, but in Brazil to an economic loss of around 10 percent of the gross national product, according to the Getulio Vargas Institute for Economic Research in Rio de Janeiro.

By 2002, the extent of the violence had roused politicians and law enforcement agencies to line up with the anti-gun movement. Two years ago, the city of Rio de Janeiro organized the public destruction of around 5,000 small firearms seized from criminals. In the glare of media attention, a steamroller crushed small arms and 300 rifles, and a symbolic bonfire consumed guns.

Rubem Fonseca, one of the project designers, called the blaze "The Flame of Peace." It was the second arms destruction in South America, the first being in 1995 in Santiago de Chile.

Earlier this year, the beach-loving citizens of Rio de Janeiro marched for the referendum along the famous beaches of Copacabana and Ipanema singing anti-Taurus, anti-gun, and anti-violence songs instead of the sweet and carefree refrain of "The Girl of Ipanema."

The demonstration turned into a carnival parade, with contingents of victims of gun violence, law enforcement personnel, high-school students, soccer stars, as well as members of the justice system and Senior Citizens Against Arms.

Many in Brazil and abroad had hoped that a yes-vote on the referendum would make the world’s fifth largest nation an example to the many other countries where guns use is out of control, especially the U.S. and other Latin American countries. International arms industries and pro-gun organizations took a keen interest in preventing that outcome.

They had reason to be concerned. "As Brazilians," Rangel says "we have been innovative and creative with many issues." In 2001, deputies of the State of Rio de Janeiro had approved a new and innovative law prohibiting commerce and possession of light arms as well as the bearing of arms in the state. (Law # 3.219) The National Association of Producers and Retailers of Small Arms responded through its lobby to influence the Supreme Federal Court, which annulled the law.

The U.S.-based National Rifle Association (NRA), has been following Brazil’s referendum closely. "We view Brazil as the opening salvo for the global gun control movement," NRA spokesperson Andrew Arulanandam told CorpWatch a week before the vote. "If gun control proponents succeed in Brazil, America will be next." Arulanandam denied that the NRA had given financial support to influence the Brazilian vote, but had provided "advice to help secure that the ban isn’t passed." He declined to name the recipients of that advice.

Cause and Effect

Proponents of the gun ban understand that had it passed, the referendum would not have immediately solved the problem of violence in their country. "Crime stems from a variety of causes," says Rangel. "In addition to the proliferation of arms, you also have to take into account the always increasing number of poor and unemployed, the rapid growth of urban centers with a young population, increasing drug trafficking and habits, as well as administrative corruption and the consequential incompetence of the police and military."

Rangel says that many civic groups including law and medical students and NGO’s working in the poorer neighborhoods have written to Taurus, but received no response. The several branches of the police and military contacted by civic groups have also failed to respond.

Taurus declined to comment on CorpWatch’s inquiries and neither the police, nor the military responded to our requests for an interview.

"Thousands and thousands of people are killed every year in post-war conflict zones around the world as well as in gang- and drug-related violence, says Rangel who blames gun manufacturers and especially Taurus, for much of the bloodshed. There are almost no military victims, he notes; the majority are civilians. Instead of addressing that issue, the company boasts about the quality of their inexpensive small arms: the automatic rifles, grenades, submachine guns, high powered pistols, ammunition and other weapons that a person can easily transport and fire," he told CorpWatch.

by Anton Foek, Special to CorpWatchOctober 25th, 2005

http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=12703