The whole thing, from the 50s until now, has been as bent as dog’s hind leg.
Green Audit – Dr Chris Busby and the Nuclear Veterans
Atomic Test Veterans
News 15th June 2013.
Nuclear Test Veterans Appeal Pensions Decision: A conspiracy?
Those Atomic Test Veterans who have been involved in legal actions in the UK appear to have been betrayed in 2013 by their own agents, the Royal British Legion and their solicitors the US firm Hogan Lovells International LLC. The case was a combined hearing in London for Ionising Radiation Pensions Appeals for 16 veterans of the UK Atomic Tests in Australia and Christmas Island. It was a key event in the saga of the Atomic Test Veterans and their need to show that these tests affected them and their children and grandchildren. Dr Busby outlines the history of the betrayal in a presentation from Riga here: http://youtu.be/ll11ZXpbDKg
In this Youtube outline of the situation, Dr Busby explained that he would be putting all the paperwork on the Green Audit website, and that of the Low Level Radiation Campaign
These appeals were questioning earlier decisions not to grant a pension for illnesses and conditions cause by exposure to radiation at the Test sites. The government case was that the vets received very low doses and no effects could be predicted. Busby’;s argument was that for internal radiation and Uranium the doses were unmeasurable and that “dose” itself is an unsafe concept for internal exposure.
Dr Busby was involved as an expert commissioned by Rosenblatts Solicitors in the substantive veterans case against the Ministry of Defence from 2008. But as far as the appeals cases were concerned, where the burden of proof is far smaller (raising reasonable doubt) by 2010, Dr Busby had already won a number of cases for the veterans (e.g. see decisions for Colin Duncan, John Cammish), and at that point had produced new reports for three cases which were due to be heard individually. These were for Dawn Pritchard, Derek Hatton and Mary Williams who all asked him to act as expert witness for them (by 2013, when the case was eventually heard, the first two had died). In 2010 all the outstanding cases were ordered to be heard together.
Because of his earlier successes, he was commissioned by the Test Vets then solicitors, Rosenblatts, to prepare composite reports for the 16 outstanding veterans appeals. This he did. By the end of 2012 he had provided more than 12 reports to the Tribunal for the composite case. Also by the end of 2012 Busby had obtained access through Freedom of Information requests to a number of reports which had been hidden by the Ministry of Defence. These included evidence from photographs taken at Christmas Island that the Grapple Y bomb had sucked up enormous amounts of sea water which rained out as black rain. The black rain was black because the bomb, according to a top secret document, was made of 4 tons Uranium. It was the Uranium particles that were the most likely cause of the cancer and other health problems in the veterans and the genetic damage and malformations in their children and grandchildren. This was exactly like the uranium effects in Iraq and in the Gulf War veterans and their children.
But this evidence had to be excluded by the UK government which is beginning to have to fight Depleted Uranium cancer cases also. Something had to be done, and it was. In December 2012 Rosenblatts in a sudden and very peculiar move pulled out of the case thought they retained two appellants. This meant a gap which was promptly filled by a Washington based firm, Hogan Lovells International, a firm which had a history of representing the establishment, and pharmaceutical industry in court (check on wikepedia). Indeed, the UK end of Hogan Lovells lists on the website as a past client, the UK Treasury Solicitor, the very person who is defending the appeals for the Ministry of Defence. Hogan Lovells said that they would do this work for nothing, pro bono, but they actually received £47500 in legal aid. A letter to Don Battersby, one appellant, who applied for the legal aid is available. Battersby was in fact the strongest case of all, but his case was lost by Hogan Lovells. The plan appears to have been that Hogan Lovells would cut out Busby at the last possible minute before the hearing and not tell any of the appellants they were doing this. If Busby complained to the veterans themselves, there would be no time for any appellant to remedy this, and if they did try to, they would be (and were ) bullied into compliance. Hogan Lovells were to enlist another physicist as expert witness, one Prof Paddy Regan, a man who has no experience of radiation and health and no publications in this area, but critically, for losing the case, a man whose evidence supported the current radiation risk model and which related nothing about Uranium effects. With Regan as expert, all the cases were automatically lost. That seemed to be the plan. But even if there was some astounding innocent explanation, that is what happened…..end quote. see link above for full text.
In the modern world the public of the world has been bombarded for years with the official line, issued by Britain, that nuclear will save the world. And the fact is, in my view, that the nuclear pollution unleashed upon the planet from 1945 throughout the nuclear test era was used, and was intended to be used, as an attempt to “normalise” nuclear pollution. That is, being universal, the inculcation was and is that things go on as before, regards.
The complication in this and the contradictions in this are manifold. The nuclear pollution did cause illness and death. This is clearly shown in the US experience of Down winders and the feeble compensation potentially available to US Down winders. It is shown in the testimony of the people of the US that the results of nuclear pollution are devastating.
Within the Anglo experience in UK and Australia and New Zealand and other places however the pre-eminent official view is that proposed and broadcast by Margaret Thatcher. Nuclear will, according to this view, save the planet.
Any view to the contrary is subject to the most vigorous opposition by the Thatcherites.
The claim has always been made by officials that the doses to which nuclear veterans and downwinders of the bombs was Low Dose.
Those who now attempt to force forward the Thatcher agenda in defence of nuclear pollution are glib in their claims that exposures were not low dose and that nuclear industry, according to them, only produces low dose.
It clearly does not. Around the world, regardless of the dose characterisation, profound human suffering has resulted from nuclear pollution.
And this continues and the deception also continues.
Over the decades nuclear industry has enjoyed the protection of government. Official secrecy enshrined in specific legislation allows nuclear industry a non disclosure clause. It’s stock holders benefit from an ignorance in the market. The events in Japan are a chink in this, and world media has for over two years attempted to paper over the truth of the true impacts. There may be some change as reality forces it’s way into the market.
Whatever. The lack of justice experienced by nuclear victims is due to a set of official imperatives. The obligation to honestly recompense nuclear victims is not on that the list. The imperative to under cut the case and cause for justice is.
Such a process has delayed justice, reduced trust in government, and extended the life of an increasingly ancient technology by suppressing and delaying the advance and implementation of alternatives both old and new. Both known and as yet to be fully explored. Some may seem incredible – as did the idea of nuclear power in 1934.
Nuclear is not the high point of science.
The granting of justice to nuclear veterans is a direct threat to the idea that nuclear industry in non polluting. From the mine to the reactor in which the bomb fuel is made, to the storage of the waste, nuclear is not pollution free.
The British bombs relied upon the mine, the reactor and storage of waste. While bombs are optional the other steps are not optional – they form the core of the nuclear deployment.
We are all Down winders. We are not all nuclear veterans.
The quest for justice by nuclear veterans produces a high stakes game in government.
If it did not, all the cases would have been settled by now and the truth would have been admitted years ago.
The specifics of each event over the years clearly reveals a climate of fear within government at the idea of justice for nuclear victims.
The nuclear veterans are a cohort, a band of service personnel, who were assured at the time their exposures were carefully measured and recorded. This was a lie.
In the context of the depth of this lie, what hope have civilians got in the case of their exposures, past and present?
This is clearly seen in the historic record of the pursuit of justice of the US Downwinders. In the case of the Japanese Black Rain survivors of 1945. It was only last year that the Japanese government overturned the determination of the Japanese courts that the area defined as Black Rain affected be extended.
There is no need for a prize to work why this denial took place, in what context and to salve which phobia of government, beholden as the Diet admitted, as overlorded by nuclear industry, as admitted by the Diet, as successive Japanese governments have been and remain.
The government of Great Britain reveals the failure of its Soveriegnty in its denial of its victims who seek justice and the protection and acknowledgement of what was termed at the time their activities On Her Majesty’s Service.
And in service of British Nuclear Fuels.
The fact is nuclear veterans are of course as anyone else in the diversity of their views, and my views are merely my own.
One has to ask why it is though that the denial of justice in this matter relies so heavily upon the suppression of information and the exclusion from court any consideration of the assumptions upon which the false claim of safety relies.
Evidence from the dawn of the nuclear era supports the veterans, not the governments. If Hamilton was so wrong, the bomb would not have worked.
Oliphan records, in his letter to Marston, his horror as a member of the Manhattan Project British contingent.
When the biological effects of the fallout products were first realised by him, he was horrified. As a member of the phyiscs section, rather than the biology section, he had no right to know.
The upshot of his attempted report to the British government representative in Washington was a full blown FBI investigation as how Oliphant had learnt of the horror of the metabolic data. The compartmental structure of the knowledge had been breached. (Olphant had been at the Lawrence lab, the seat of the EM enrichment method experiments and of the compilation of the fission product list (Seaborg et. al). As was, initially, the biology team under Hamilton via Stone and Compton.) The two compartments shared the same facility. And the shit hit fan when interchange occurred.
Throughout the British nuclear tests in Australia, biologists were barred from sitting on the safety committee.
In the view of the authorities today the crime of Busby appears to be the deployment of his skills as a chemist in relation to the radio-chemicals and the assessment of their biological impacts. The same crime as Oliphant. Breached compartments. Whereas, it is fine and dandy for physics alone to determine the radiological impacts of the internal emitters. What a charade.
The Nazis are no longer on a facing shore, the Reds have packed up and gone home.
Spill the beans Your Majesty and admit the justice of the cause.