Author Archives: rff_blog_admin

Persecution of Mideast Religious Minorities

Posted on by

I closed the blog posted on May 11th about the Mideast unrest with a comment that those who support a dictator will suffer when the dictator loses. That may be true, but recent news events show that others are taking advantage of the turmoil to attack people practicing a religion they won’t tolerate. I can’t begin to catalog all of the different ethnic and religious factions that have suffered for centuries because of religious intolerance by others, but the Coptic Christians in Egypt are facing organized attacks from Salafi, ultraconservative Muslims, and Muslim Brotherhood extremists since the overthrow of Hosni Mubarak. One recent incident involved 12 Coptics killed, over 200 wounded, and a church set on fire. Crowds of Muslims were marching and shouting Islamic chants and Osama bin Laden’s name. There is concern that the attacks are intensifying, that moderate Muslims may be increasingly involved, and there are warnings that the overall situation may degrade into a civil war.

Christianity was the dominant religion in Egypt in the fourth to sixth centuries. The language was Coptic, which was based on the Greek alphabet with an additional six to seven characters. The Muslims conquered Egypt in 639 AD, but the population remained mostly Christian. There were gradual conversions to Islam over the next several centuries until Egypt became a mostly Muslin country by the end of the 12th century. It is estimated that 5-10 percent of Egyptians are currently Christians, and the extremists seem to be unwilling to rest until that percentage reaches zero.

It is difficult to sort through and gain much of an understanding about what is happening in the Mideast, or where things are going from here. The Muslim Brotherhood was illegal but tolerated under Mubarak in Egypt, but is now legal and is gaining support. The protests and government crackdown in Bahrain has inflamed tensions between Sunnis and Shiites. The Wall Street Journal reported that the kingdom has blamed Iran for much of the unrest and invited troops from Sunni-dominated Saudi Arabia.  The Libyan civil war remains in the news, although it certainly doesn’t seem certain what will happen in that country should Moammar Gadhafi be ousted. Yemen has a well-organized branch of al Qaeda. President Saleh has supported counter-terrorism forces, and the Obama administration has supported negotiations guided by Saudi Arabia. The protest movements in Syria and Iran seem to have been quieted by violent suppression and mass arrests.  It remains difficult for me to cheer on the protestors, although Tunisia does have a chance to become a democracy. The transitional government is preparing for elections in July to install and assembly to draft a constitution and election laws. I remain skeptical that either democratic governments or freedom of religion will be the outcome in other countries. Let’s hope I write a posting someday celebrating that I was wrong.

What Happens When a Dictatorship Ends?

Posted on by

The events in the Mideast and the television images of thousands of people demonstrating and demanding changes are bringing back memories of my teenage years and watching the evening news as Castro overthrew Batista in Cuba. Batista was a corrupt and oppressive dictator, and Castro was considered to be a liberator. There were celebrations in the streets of Havana when Batista fled, and I recall that the American news media declared it to be a victory for freedom. It wasn’t long before “Che” Guevara (the darling of young people who wear T shirts proclaiming their admiration) was holding televised show trials in an outdoor sports stadium and ordering the execution of hundreds of former government officials and sympathizers.

Another example was when the Shah of Iran was forced from power by the Ayatollah Khomeini after President Carter appealed to the Shah not to destroy the plane carrying the Ayatollah and his supporters. Carter assured the Shah that the United States would not stand by and let him fall, but the opposite happened. The new leadership began arresting, imprisoning, torturing, and executing people who had supported the Shah, repeating the actions by the Shah’s secret police. Carter gave the Shah asylum in the United States to seek medical treatment, the Iranians took over the U.S. embassy, held the people from the embassy hostage, watched Carter lose reelection, and have become a threat to the region and the world.

I should also mention an example where the end of a dictatorship resulted in a more democratic government, and the remarkable example of what happened in Spain when Francisco Franco died is the first (and maybe only example) to come to mind. Franco’s Fascists won the Spanish Civil War against the Stalinist Communists and an agglomeration of allies, perhaps because the Stalinists spent as much time fighting their allies as Franco’s forces. The war and the aftermath was brutal and bloody, and Franco was an oppressive ruler.  He designated Prince Juan Carlos to become monarch after his death, and Carlos began a transition to a parliamentary monarchy within a couple of days of Franco’s death. King Juan Carlos and Queen Sophia preside over a democratic government that has the support of most Spaniards. Of course the country is currently in financial crises, but that seems to be a common problem.

That brings us back to the Mideast. The Egyptian dictator Hosoni Mubarak has been forced out and President Obama has hailed that outcome, which brings to mind a similar reaction from John F. Kennedy when Castro expelled Batista.  The unrest in Egypt had begun when the price of food and fuel inflated, and poor Egyptians could barely afford to survive before that inflation.  The protests ended the needed income from tourism (perhaps temporarily).  Prices of food and fuel haven’t been reduced, and the economy was disrupted by the protests. The military is now in control, as it has always been. I wish the best for the Egyptian people and others who are risking their lives to protest in favor of freedom. However, if the brief history of other examples of the end of dictatorships here is an indication, there is a one chance in three that the outcome will be favorable. The lesson most obvious from history is that those who support a dictator will suffer if the dictator loses.

Japanese Nuclear Reactor Disaster

Posted on by

I did an Internet search to learn the status of the containment structures of the damaged reactors, and the most recent posting I could find was April 6. Most of the articles were posted in March. I’m guessing major news media outlets are losing interest because a “China Syndrome” meltdown (although the exit point from Japan would be somewhere in or near Uruguay) hasn’t occurred. So what is the impact of the disaster if the containment structures hold? There is no doubt the disaster will further add to the fear of nuclear power generation. Japan is hydrocarbon deficient, and had been generating a third of their power needs with nuclear plants. They have stepped up their importation of liquid natural gas via tankers to fill the immediate needs, but that will undoubtedly add expense to an economy that doesn’t need additional expenses.

Do I continue to advocate that nuclear power generation should be a part of our future? You bet I do, and I write that despite Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and now Fukushima. My favorite source of information about energy generation is Dr. Petr Beckman, who published the book “The Health Hazards of NOT Going Nuclear” in 1976. The primary point of the book, which is still very valid today, is that there is no safe way to make energy. “Energy is the capacity for doing work, and as long as man is fallible, there is always the possibility that it will do the wrong kind of work; to ask for safe energy, therefore, is much the same as asking for incombustible fuel.” Nuclear energy is “…far safer than any other form of energy.”

I’m baffled at how casually we accept risks from activities that don’t have the word “nuclear” in their title, even when we have no control over these risks. Anyone who advocates that no risk is acceptable should cut themselves off the power grid. About 1000 people die per year in the U.S. from electrocution. If you overlook the risk of electrocution, what about the risk from mining and burning coal to generate power? There have been 819 deaths in the United States and 52,785 in China from coal mining since 1990. That doesn’t consider the risks to people from the emissions and wastes generated from burning coal. As Dr. Beckman said, there is no method of making energy that is completely “safe.” He advocated that producing plentiful energy is required to preserve economic freedom and prosperity. China, India, Korea, and Russia are not delaying construction of new nuclear reactors, but the United States and some European countries are responding to the Japanese crises by rethinking plans for nuclear facilities. France generates 75% of its energy with nuclear power, and I haven’t found that they intend to shut down their plants.

One consequence of the reactor crises is an increase in “atomic tourism.” Attendance was up by 12 percent on a recent weekend at the Atomic Testing Museum in Las Vegas and by 20 percent at the National Museum of Nuclear Science & History in Albuquerque. A spokesman there was quoted as saying, “Folks definitely want information about nuclear reactors and nuclear radiation.” People pay $250 a person to tour Chernobyl and the nearby ghost town of Pripyat in the Ukraine. I didn’t find any indications that visits are up at the Nagasaki and Hiroshima museums. However nuclear engineer Joseph Gonyeau said that visits to his excellent and extensive web site was up by 119 percent in March. There are updates on that site about the Japanese disaster from the International Atomic Energy Agency, Japan’s Nuclear and industrial Safety Agency, and the Tokyo Electric Power Company.

The bottom line is that we should do everything possible to learn from this disaster to improve safety. We should not cripple our economic prosperity in decades to come by being the only country that decides not to use nuclear energy to produce electricity.

Now Enjoy “An Insider’s View of Rocky Flats” as Kindle e-Book

Posted on by

RockyFlatsFacts.com is pleased to announce that “An Insider’s View of Rocky Flats: Urban Myths Debunked” is now available in an e-book (electronic book) version from the Amazon.com Kindle Store. The e-book version includes dozens of new color and b&w photos to enhance your reading experience, especially for those readers who have never visited the inside of a DOE nuclear facility. Once purchased the e-book can be promptly downloaded and enjoyed on your Kindle Reader. [Please note that Amazon’s hand-held Kindle Reader displays e-book images in black & white (4-bit grayscale), so e-book photos will currently display in grayscale on this device. Free PC and Mac reader apps (see below) will however display color images/photos. There are pictures of gloveboxes, plutonium, burning plutonium, damage from the 1969 fire, decontamination workers, and a couple dozen others.

Don’t have a hand-held Kindle Reader? No problem: a totally free Kindle e-book reader application is available for download here for both Windows PC and Mac platforms. Kindle reader app for your Apple iPad is also available here, as are reader apps for iPhone, Blackberry, and Android phones and mobile devices. With the free app download you also receive a few free e-books: Aesop’s Fables, Pride & Prejudice, and Treasure Island.

I had help with the pictures and e-book. The person who provided the know-how is my friend and colleague, Keith Motyl, and he can be reached at kpmotyl@comcast.net if you are interested in the process of e-book publishing.

Please let us know how you like the newly illustrated e-book.

Soviet Covert Action

Posted on by

I mentioned the funding of the international anti-nuclear movement by the Soviet Union in an earlier blog posting and mentioned that I intended to do additional research on the matter. I obtained a copy of a report titled, “Soviet Covert Action (The Forgery Offensive)” that was published by the House of Representatives Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, ninety-sixth Congress. The report describes hearings held February 6 and 19, 1980.  The hearings were in closed sessions, and several of the documents listed in the Appendices were labeled “TOP SECRET.”  The report obviously had been declassified. The content made it clear the Soviets didn’t hesitate to use any action to further their cause and harm America. (As an aside, can you believe that some of my family members were surprised at my selection vacation reading material?)

A Deputy Director of the CIA made a prepared statement in the first session followed by questioning by the Congressmen.  The testimony confirms that the World Peace Council was the largest Soviet front group used in propaganda campaigns.  It had funding of over three billion dollars in that year, and one organization it supported was its American affiliate, the U.S. Peace Council. The CIA was prevented by law from doing any surveillance of that domestic organization.  The FBI was responsible for any intelligence gathering within the United States, and the CIA had to depend on them to pass along any intelligence involving foreign activities to them.  Examples of activities organized or influenced by the World Peace Council were numerous peace protests, demonstrations against NATO, and a campaign against the neutron bomb.

The second session, titled “Soviet Forgeries and Disinformation,” began with a statement by Ladislav Bittman, who was the Deputy Director of the Disinformation Department of the Czechoslovak Intelligence Service before he defected to the United States. He testified that the “satellite countries” such as Czechoslovakia operated “huge intelligence apparatus that significantly contributes to spreading Soviet influence around the world.”  His department conducted “115 active measures… (consisting mostly of) forgeries leaked either to the press or foreign governments.”  He described how Soviet intelligence used journalists to spread their propaganda and warned, “The press should be more cautious with anonymous leaks.  Anonymity is a signal that the Big Russian Bear might be involved.” He also mentioned that Congressional investigations of the CIA in the 1970s effectively paralyzed that organization.  He observed that Watergate created such a toxic atmosphere in Washington that the Soviets were able to relax their disinformation efforts.  I found it quite interesting that a Congressman asked Bittman whether he had “…ever come across a man or information relative to a man named Lee Harvey Oswald, who was…in the Soviet Union?” Bittman responded, “No, never, no.  The answer is a clear no.”

Bittman also testified that the capture of the embassy and Americans in Tehran was a boon to the Soviet forgery campaign.  The Iranians gave them access to all manner of official State Department documents, letterhead, and the rubber stamps that were used to mark various classification and other designations. Numerous forgeries are described, to include a classified U.S. Army field manual, a faked speech by President Carter intended to strain relations with the Greek Government, several documents with negative information about Egyptian President Sadat and Indonesian President Sukarno, and a report denying that chemical and bacteriological agents stored in Italy had leaked and killed numerous infants. One forgery ties to current events.  It was a bogus CIA report that outlined how members of Islamic religious organizations, including the Muslim Brotherhood, could be bribed and set against others. One operation, code named Neptune, included planting several boxes of forged documents in Devil’s Lake and Black Lake where a dive team was to be filmed while investigating reports that the Nazis had disposed of information.  The planted documents listed numerous West German officials, including several in West German Intelligence, with faked Nazi backgrounds.

There is a current event that is a reminder of the danger of forged documents. Retired Ohio autoworker John Demjanjuk is being tried for war crimes in Germany, and the FBI has released a report that the Soviet Union likely fabricated a Nazi photo identification card that is key to his prosecution.  Demjanjuk was tried in Israel before being deported from the U.S. to Munich where he is currently on trial again. No known witnesses have placed Demjanjuk at the Sobibor death camp in Poland where the identification card places him as a guard.  The FBI argues the Soviets used faked documents such as the forged identification card to smear anti-communists.

The Appendices include copies of several forged documents designed to incite anger about desegregation in America.  Appendix III is the agenda for the U.S. Peace Council Founding Conference held November 9-11, 1979 in Philadelphia.  Welcoming remarks were given by Representative John Conyers.  Presenters included several U.S. State legislators, U.N. representatives from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam and Nicaragua, and a representative of the Palestine Liberation Organization, to name just a few.

Attendees at the first hearing were Representatives Aspin (presiding), Boland (chairman of the full committee), Ashbrook, Young, Whitehurst, and McClory.  The main presenter was John McMahon, Deputy Director for Operations, Central Intelligence Agency.  He was accompanied by five other CIA officials.  The second hearing had the same Representatives in attendance with the exception of McClory, who was absent.

Did Lincoln Really Free the Slaves?

Posted on by

I researched the question after learning why the tax deadline this year is April 18. CNNexplained that the “…bonus days come thanks to Emancipation Day, a little-known Washington, D.C. holiday that celebrates the freeing of the slaves in the district. The text of the Emancipation Proclamation (which is so famous in our history that it is capitalized) shows clearly that the Lincoln did not intend to free slaves except in parts of the country that were in rebellion. The proclamation very clearly did not free any slaves in Union states or areas in rebellious states that had been supportive of the Union. I recommend reading the lengthy proclamation at the link. The proclamation did not apply to 13 parishes of Louisiana, forty-eight counties of West Virginia, and seven counties of Virginia. It is stated those “…excepted parts are for the present left precisely as if this proclamation were not issued.”

Lincoln had previously taken the position that he would free none of the slaves, all of the slaves or some of the slaves depending on which approach would help preserve the Union. The text of the proclamation makes it clear he settled on it idea of freeing some of the slaves. However, I was surprised to read one article at findarticles.com that takes the position he was completely indifferent to the issue of slavery. Lincoln was relaxing and in a good mood after winning reelection, and one visitor mentioned “the vexatious slavery matter.” Lincoln responded with “…the story of the Kentucky Justice of the Peace whose first case was a criminal prosecution for abuse of slaves. Unable to find any precedent, he exclaimed angrily, ‘I will be damned if I don’t feel sorry for being elected when the n…..s is the first thing I will attend to’.” (The author of the article refused to use elision in reporting his use of the offensive word, “Since Lincoln supporters are in a state of constant denial.”)

The author continues with his analysis of the Emancipation Proclamation that, “No other American story is so enduring. No other American story is so comforting. No other American story is so false.” The denial continues, “The testimony of sixteen thousand books and monographs to the contrary notwithstanding, it is not a real emancipation proclamation at all, and did not liberate African-American slaves.” John F. Hume, the Missouri anti-slavery leader, was said to have told Lincoln the proclamation “…did not…whatever it may have otherwise accomplished at the time it was issued, liberate a single slave.” Henry Clay Whitney “…said the Proclamation was a mirage and that Lincoln knew it was a mirage.” Secretary of State Henry Steward said the Proclamation was an illusion in which “we show our sympathy with the slaves by emancipating the slaves where we cannot reach them and holding them in bondage where we can set them free.”

What the proclamation did accomplish was change how history views the Civil War. It was said after the proclamation and continues to be said today that the Civil War was fought to free the slaves

For skeptics or those who are astonished by the information, I suggest an Internet search using the title of this posting. There are several references that provide the same information, although most are written with more understanding about the difficulty of what Lincoln needed to do as President and Commander-In-Chief. I did find it interesting that there are several mentions that Lincoln was convinced whites and blacks could never live together as equals, and his solution was resettling freed blacks in Africa and Latin America in a process he called “colonization.”