.
Page 1: daybydaywithVOA_3-01Mar2003.html
.|
. Usually 2 or more calendar days worth of news bulletins are packaged together and will appear on this web page depending upon the amount and character of the news. Each page which packages several days of news bulletins has a unique designation in its name, "VOA_n", and a date "01Feb2003". The "n" is a number between 1 and 10, or a bit larger. You can expect the number "1" to contain the first few days of news bulletins for a given month. Then the next number "2" will contain the next few days and so on. Neither the number or the date indicate the exact date of the news bulletins. However the date "01Feb2003" indicates the month of the news bulletins. The entire month of news bulletins is stored under a directory on the server having the date name "01Feb2003". Typically the population of this web page with news bulletins may trail the actual date of those bulletins by no more than one or more days. . |
.
COMMENTARY -- WAR -- The completed article.
(To skip this commentary click here for the news - directly below this commentary):
Jesus Christ is the answer. He is both an example of what we must be like as humans and he is the facilitator/mediator/interface whereby we can all know and experience the love/caring of God.
If you have any comments, questions, or concerns you can email this ministry at thilts@help-for-you.com
Click here for "Bruce Atchison Reports", World news bulletins on Christian persecution.
Visit the...
Overcomer on line Study Bible
OOLSB articles
are now being added - Click on::
http://www.help-for-you.com/doc/OOLSB_freestanding.html
Back to the WORLD NEWS
Page 1
x. . xxx.
.
British Prime Minister Tony Blair says a Security Council veto by France and Russia would send Iraqi President Saddam Hussein a message that he can get away with defying the international community. "Let us not be under any illusion. There is no way that Iraq will make any concession or cooperate in any way without the threat of force being there," he said. "The only reason we have made any progress at all in the past few weeks has been because of the threat of force. And my concern is that if countries talk about using a veto in all sets of circumstances, the message that sends to Saddam is: 'You're off the hook.' And I think that would be very unfortunate." Mr. Blair says he fears the Iraq crisis is putting great strains on relations between the United States and Europe. "The trans-Atlantic alliance is important for us, and I believe passionately that if we end up with Europe and America dividing apart, that will be very damaging for both of us and for the rest of the world," Mr. Blair said. "So I think we've got to work very, very hard over these next few days to see if we can't come to a common position." Mr. Blair spoke with reporters after meeting his Portuguese counterpart, Jose Manuel Durao Barroso, part of his diplomatic efforts to line up international support for the tough British and U.S. position on Iraq. Britain is pushing a U.N. resolution that would set disarmament benchmarks for Iraq to meet within a short deadline or face the prospect of war. France and Russia say they will vote against the resolution, which would ensure its defeat due to their veto power as permanent Security Council members. British diplomats say they are still seeking to get a majority of countries on the 15-member Council to support the resolution, even if it is vetoed. The final diplomatic effort comes as Mr. Blair's Iraq policy confronts growing opposition from many British voters and lawmakers. A poll released Tuesday shows just 19 percent of Britons would support going to war against Iraq without U.N. authorization, and one-quarter of the British public would oppose a war under any circumstance.
. End of article 1.
The ring that cuts across the Yucatan Peninsula pictured in this space shuttle image is one of the very few pieces of surface evidence that survives from a cataclysmic day in Earth history. The 3-5-metre-deep and 3-5-kilometre-wide trough (see enlarged photo) traces weaknesses in the rock created by the space impactor that many scientists now believe wiped the dinosaurs from the face of the planet. The so-called Chicxulub crater - or rather what remains of it; it has since been filled in by limestone sediments - has become the focus of intense study in recent years. Earth scientists have drilled samples through the crater area and are now investigating the rock chemistry. They hope to get a better picture of what happened on that day 65 million years ago and discover more about the subsequent catastrophic environmental changes that killed off 70% of all species. Mayan sacrifices The trough is visible today because of instabilities in the limestone sediments that overlie the crater. "Even though the crater has been covered up, when there is crustal movement this is accommodated along faults - and we see it," said Dr Joanna Morgan, from Imperial College London, UK.
Dr Morgan is a lead researcher on the international team that is studying the Chicxulub cores. She is looking at the properties of the rock to help determine what the original crater would have looked like in three dimensions. The collapse of numerous limestone caverns above the crater rim has resulted in an arcing chain of sinkholes - also visible in the shuttle radar image. "They are the result of extensive erosion in the limestone. These beautiful cenotes, as they are called, are several metres across and were in fact used by the Mayans to make their sacrifices. "Inside the crater the cenote population is less dense than it is outside. Exactly why the crater (which is buried a few hundred metres below surface) still has an effect on water flow is not clear." Exactly how the impact caused one of Earth's great mass extinctions is still to be explained, but the billions of tonnes of rock vaporised in the moment of the collision would have produced dramatic global climate change. "Part of our aim is to quantify the amount of carbon and sulphur released into the atmosphere and then to understand what the environmental disaster was and why it may have caused the extinctions." Billions of measurements The Chicxulub image is part of the latest dataset to be released from the US space agency's (Nasa) Shuttle Radar Topography Mission flown in 2000.
This involved pushing radar equipment out from its payload bay on an extending boom, one of the largest structures ever deployed in space. In February, Nasa finished processing the mission's data and delivered it to the National Imagery and Mapping Agency. More than eight terabytes of data have been refined into 200 billion research-quality measurements of the Earth's landforms. Some further processing will be done before the entire package is released commercially.   . End of article 2.
The firm revised down its sales for 1999, 2000 and 2001 by almost $2.5bn, saying that thanks to an incentive scheme there has been "an error of timing in revenue recognition". The scheme encouraged wholesalers to build up excess stocks of Bristol-Myers drugs, in turn helping the company meet its own sales targets. "The errors and inappropriate accounting which are corrected by this restatement arose... from a period of unrealistic expectations for certain of the company's products and programmes," the firm said. Profits for the three years were revised down by $900m. Torrent of lawsuits? The revision comes almost a year after the Securities & Exchange Commission launched a probe into Bristol-Myers' accounting practices, as part of a drive to clean up Wall Street following the Enron scandal.
And analysts warned that, with the SEC inquiry still ongoing, and Monday's announcement likely to launch a flood of lawsuits from investors angry at the firm's accounting, Bristol-Myers faces further challenges. "You know there are plaintiffs lawyers just waiting for the fax on the restatement, so they have the numbers to put in the lawsuits," said Richard Evans, an analyst with Sanford C Bernstein Research. But investors welcomed the lifting of at least some of the uncertainty surrounding the firm, with Robert Hazlett, an analyst at SunTrust Robinson Humphrey, saying Bristol-Myers could now be a tie-up target. "A merger becomes more of a possibility because there is better awareness of Bristol's finances," Mr Hazlett said. And further confirmation that the company expected 2003 profits to come in at a level of $1.60-1.65 a share also eased concerns. Bristol-Myers stock stood $0.06 higher at $22.89 in midday trade in New York on Monday. Difficult times Bristol-Myers shares have suffered, like those in many other drugs giants, over fears that protective patents on best-selling drugs were heading towards expiry. The company has in the past few years filed a rash of lawsuits to fend-off rival drugmakers attempting to start production of generic versions of cash-cow treatments such as the anti-cancer drug Taxol. Late last year, Bristol-Myers announced a $670m preliminary agreement over the cases. The company has also written down more than $1bn of its investment in ImClone, the biotech firm hit last year by an insider trading scandal. On Friday, Bristol-Myers revealed it had reached agreement with the Federal Trade Commission and state attorneys general over anti-trust charges. . End of article 3.
The press in Europe comments on the possible international and domestic political repercussions of the Iraqi crisis in France, Britain, and Turkey. Several papers also analyse the implications of the Maltese vote in favour of EU entry. "USA threatens France with 'serious consequences' if it vetoes the attack," reads the front-page headline in Spain's El Mundo. France's Le Figaro says US
Secretary of State Colin Powell has "upped the tone against France" by warning
Paris against using its veto in the vote on the US-backed resolution later this
week.
Germany's Sueddeutsche Zeitung is not surprised that the Americans have rejected France's proposal to invite the leaders of UN Security Council member states to an emergency summit on Iraq in New York. "They are frightened by the idea," it says, "that a few gentlemen from the old Europe could, shoulder to shoulder, call George Bush to account in front of the whole world." With French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin on a lightning tour of Angola, Cameroon and Guinea, the paper says, Paris is trying hard to win over African countries on the Security Council to prevent a majority in favour of the new resolution. "Only if that succeeds... will Paris not have to use its veto against its most important ally," it concludes. Blair 'in trouble' With new resignation threats in the British cabinet adding to the Prime Minister's domestic difficulties over the Iraqi crisis, Tony Blair is "in serious trouble", according to a headline in Austria's Der Standard. Germany's Frankfurter Allgemeine
Zeitung also believes that "people will desert Blair's flag", as it puts
it, if there is military action against Baghdad without explicit authoriSation
by the UN Security Council.
This is one example, it says, of the "collateral damage" caused by the crisis. The paper blames "unilateralists in Washington" and "adherents of the status quo" for the divisions in the UN Security Council and argues that there is now more at stake than the best way of dealing with Iraq. "The real issue," it says, "is America's power in the world. This is why the debate is being conducted with such intensity." Turkish decision on troops Switzerland's Tages-Anzeiger
says Turkey's prime minister-in-waiting, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, will probably
seek to reverse the decision not to allow the deployment of US troops.
"Erdogan will be tempted to do this because of Washington's financial incentives," the paper believes, pointing out that he needs US funds to fulfil his promise of a better future for his country. But it describes a new debate in the Turkish parliament as "a risky manoeuvre, even for Erdogan." "If Turkey holds another vote on US troops, it won't be able to hide behind a new UN Security Council resolution any more," it warns, since in the paper's view the resolution currently under discussion at the UN is likely to be vetoed. Another Swiss paper, Le Temps, sees it is "an irony of fate" that "the man elected by an overwhelming majority as the symbol of a Turkey which is modern, independent and rooted in the Muslim world finds himself forced to start his term of office under the Star-Spangled Banner to preserve financial aid and his country's role as a mainstay of Nato". Malta's EU vote The main front-page headline in Switzerland's Neue Zuercher Zeitung speaks of a "narrow Maltese vote for EU entry" but notes "continued divisions" on the Mediterranean island. Under the headline "The first yes", a
commentary in Germany's Frankfurter Rundschau agrees that the referendum
will not spell the end of the Maltese debate on EU membership.
According to the paper, even though the result of the referendum is not binding, it has bolstered Prime Minister Eddie Fenech Adami's chances of being re-elected. "The result provides Malta's first European," the paper says, "with the reassuring prospect of winning this year's elections, together with his [Mr Adami's] Nationalist Party." Berlin's Der Tagesspiegel, on the other hand, interprets the closeness of the result as a sign of problems ahead. According to the paper, celebrations on the Mediterranean island or in Brussels are uncalled-for. "The close result shows once again that the birth of a united Europe... will be painful and slow," it warns. The paper adds that the economic gloom and divisions within Europe over Iraq will make the process of unification even more laborious. The European press review is compiled
by BBC Monitoring from
internet editions of the main European newspapers and some early printed
editions. . End of article 4.
Each of the 15 players keeps his hand close to his chest, for fear of giving away his game-plan, while occasionally revealing a card in order to influence the others. So why was it that France and Russia suddenly revealed their entire hand? No more subtle messages about "not supporting" the forthcoming "second" resolution sponsored by Britain, America and Spain: instead, an outright declaration that they will use their veto to block it. Remember: neither France nor Russia actually wants to use its veto, since this would precipitate possibly the worst crisis in the UN's history. But both know they will only need to veto the resolution if it attracts the support of at least nine Security Council members. Preventative action So their diplomacy has been directed at preventing the "yes" side from reaching that magic number of nine. The French look as though they are playing a clever game of bluff or even double-bluff. On his tour of Angola, Cameroon and Guinea, the foreign minister Dominique de Villepin, it is reported, has been telling these current members of the Security Council: look, what is the point of you voting for the resolution when it won't pass anyway, because (as we are telling you) we will veto it? Why get your hands dirty by voting for war, the argument goes, when world opinion is set against it? Thus, by cunningly playing on the smaller countries' fears of stepping out of line, France hopes to persuade them to abstain or vote against the resolution, so that it falls anyway - thus making the French veto unnecessary.
In this light, it might even be conjectured that all of France's recent overtures towards Francophone Africa, and the continent in general, have been gearing up to this moment, when three African votes will be crucial. Earlier this month, it will be recalled, President Jacques Chirac patched up relations with Algeria, with the first visit there by a French head of state since the country's independence. He was hailed as a hero. He also ingratiated himself with African countries by holding a summit for them in Paris last month - and making sure that Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe was allowed to attend, despite an EU travel ban. The Russians have also come clean about their intention to veto the resolution. Resolution worries For them (and presumably for the French) their opposition to it is fuelled by their perception that it is not intended as a means to avert war but as a means to justify war. The Russian foreign minister, Igor Ivanov, speaking to students in Moscow, said it contained "demands which cannot be met, in the form of an ultimatum". Moscow has, it is true, left the door slightly ajar, saying it objects to "the resolution currently introduced for consideration" - allowing for the possibility that it could be further amended to the Russians' liking. Both France and Russia feel they are in the right. If there is a UN crisis, they believe, it will not be their fault for failing to back war.
So by the French and Russian logic, rejected in Washington and London, the looming crisis will be entirely President Bush's fault, if he presses ahead with war despite the lack of a second resolution. The British prime minister Tony Blair has said that "if countries talk about using a veto in all sets of circumstances, the message that sends to Saddam is: you're off the hook". But President Chirac and President Putin may feel that their announcement will force Britain and the US to drop the resolution. They might even succeed in this, for Mr Bush and Mr Blair could conclude that the inevitable crisis will be slightly less severe (that is, their actions may be slightly easier to justify) if they base their decision to attack Iraq on the existing resolution, 1441, rather than having a new one rejected and then openly going against the will of the Security Council. There remains much to play for - but not
much time - before all the cards have to be laid out on the table.
. End of article 5.
It is the first time that Russia has explicitly said it will veto the resolution if it is presented to the UN Security Council in its current form. France, another permanent member, has said it will not let a resolution pass that authorises the automatic use of force, while China has also indicated its opposition to military action at this point. And in another blow to the US and UK, the UN Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, has spoken out against any military action against Iraq that lacks the support of the Security Council. The members of the Security Council faced a grim task, Mr Annan said. "If they fail to agree on a common position and action is taken without the authority of the Security Council, the legitimacy and support for any such action would be seriously impaired," he said. Better life Hours earlier, Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov said the draft resolution was impossible to fulfil and ran counter to the policy currently being implemented under resolution 1441. The White House said it hoped Russia and France would not veto a second UN resolution on Iraq. "If they were to veto...it would be, from a moral point, more than a disappointment. It would let down millions of people around the world, in this case Iraq, who deserve to be free and have a better life," White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said. In other developments:
Our world affairs correspondent Paul Reynolds says the best that Mr Bush and Mr Blair can hope for if there is a veto is to get the so-called "moral majority". This would be nine of the 15 Security Council votes, but a "moral majority" has no legal status. Abstain President Bush has been making an urgent round of calls to world leaders, including Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi and China's President Jiang Zemin. But French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin has also been touring the three African members of the Security Council - Angola, Cameroon and Guinea, to try to persuade them to reject the resolution. After talks in Luanda, Angolan Foreign Minister Joao Bernardo de Miranda, told reporters that Angola was not prepared to commit itself until it came to a Council vote. Mr de Villepin told the same news conference that a solution to the crisis in Iraq could be found without resorting to the use of force. As the diplomatic tempo increases, reports from Islamabad suggest Pakistan, a non-permanent Security Council member, has decided to abstain in any vote that will allow military action against Iraq. Disarmament tasks Giving the weapons inspectors more time, as proposed by France and Russia, would "amount to the failed policy of so-called containment," UK Foreign Secretary Jack Straw has said. Iraq was not being asked to disarm within a week, Mr Straw said in parliament in London.
To that end, Mr Straw said the UK Government wanted to draw up a list of tasks for Iraq to show it was serious about disarming. The detailed disarmament moves are likely to be drawn from a document compiled by UN chief weapons inspector Hans Blix which says Iraq has not fully disposed of its chemical and biological weapons arsenal. It is now expected that the new resolution will not be put to the vote until Wednesday at the earliest. . End of article 6.
The United States has flatly rejected calls to extend a deadline for Iraq to disarm by up to 45 days. A draft resolution that the US and Britain are planning to bring before the divided United Nations Security Council says that Iraq should be given until 17 March to give up banned weapons - or face military action from US-led forces. British diplomats have been seeking possible amendments to the text, to avoid what BBC correspondents say looks like an inevitable defeat in the 15-member body. Russia and France have made it clear that they will use their powers of veto against any resolution that gives the green light for war. A suggestion by the six undecided, non-permanent members of the Security Council that the deadline be extended into April or beyond was described as a non-starter by the US administration.
"There's room for a little more diplomacy here but not much room and not much time," said White House spokesman Ari Fleischer. Amid signs that the Americans are growing increasingly frustrated with the UN route, he insisted that a vote on a new resolution would take place this week. 'Catastrophe' warning At the UN, Iraq's ambassador Mohammed al-Douri, urged the international community to prevent "a catastrophe which has become imminent". Mr al-Douri was speaking on the first day of a two-day open session called by non-aligned states to discuss the draft resolution. The majority of the 28 speakers who addressed the council called for a peaceful solution to the crisis. Canada, which has been influential over undecided council members, called for a three-week deadline for Iraq to demonstrate it had fully complied with the UN's disarmament demands. The debate has been adjourned until 1500 local time (2000 GMT) on Wednesday. The Americans and British have said they are prepared to go ahead with a military assault on Iraq without the backing of a new resolution. There is some suggestion that if the nine votes required to pass the resolution are mustered before it is vetoed, then the Anglo-American side would claim this as a "moral victory". Air raids The US and Britain have built up a massive military presence in the Gulf region. BBC defence correspondent Jonathan Marcus says American and British planes patrolling longstanding "no-fly zones" over Iraq are stepping up raids on air defences in the country to weaken them ahead of a wider conflict.
And the US army says earth fortifications along the Iraq-Kuwait border are being removed to allow an overland assault to begin. Meanwhile, the US and Turkey are holding talks about the use of Turkish airspace by American forces in the event of war. Plans to allow US troops into Turkey, enabling the opening of a northern front in any attack on Iraq, have been blocked by the country's parliament, but that decision may yet be reversed. In other developments:
. End of article 7.
The United States and Britain are suggesting they may be willing to give Iraq more time to disarm, beyond the March 17 deadline proposed in a draft United Nations resolution. That measure is facing a veto threat from Russia and France, which oppose military action against Baghdad for its failure to give up its weapons of mass destruction. With more than a quarter of a million U.S. and British troops now in the Persian Gulf region, the Bush administration says there will be a vote in the U.N. Security Council this week on a resolution that would in effect, give U.N. backing for a war to disarm Iraq. But France and Russia have not budged from their threat to veto it if necessary, insisting Iraq be given at least several more months to disarm in the presence of U.N. weapons inspectors. Russia's U.N. Ambassador Sergey Lavrov echoed the French view. "We see no reason whatsoever to interrupt the inspections and any resolution which contains ultimatums and which contains automaticity for the use of force is not acceptable to us," he said. Opposition to the U.S. and British-backed resolution has led Washington and London to suggest giving Iraq more time to demonstrate a strategic decision to disarm. But Britain's U.N. Ambassador Jeremy Greenstock says the timeline would not go beyond the end of March and at the White House, spokesman Ari Fleischer dismissed a proposal put forward by six undecided members of the security council to extend the disarmament deadline even further. "The president thinks that there is a little room for a little more diplomacy, but not much time. Any suggestion of 30 days, 45 days is a non-starter," he said. Even though no decision has been made to go to war, the U.S. government is already well into planning for the post-war reconstruction of Iraq. Invitations have gone out to American companies to bid on contracts worth hundreds of millions of dollars in what would be the largest reconstruction effort undertaken by the United States since the end of World War II. And at the Pentagon, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld confirmed Tuesday the U.S. military is in contact with members of the Iraqi military who may not want to fight with Saddam Hussein's army in order to devise a way for them to let that be known on the battlefield. "They are being communicated with privately at the present time. They will be communicated with in a more public way," he said. "And they will receive instructions so that they can behave in a way that will be seen and understood as being non threatening and they will be not considered combatants." Meanwhile, here in the United States, a new public opinion poll finds that just over half of those asked, or 55 percent, say they would support a U.S. led attack on Iraq even if it is carried out in defiance of the United Nations. But some 52 percent of the 1,000 people asked by a CBS News and The New York Times poll also say they believe U.N. weapons inspectors should be given more time to search for Iraq's suspected nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs.
. End of article 8.
The U.S. Air
Force has tested a massive new conventional bomb that could be used with
devastating effect in any war with Iraq. The test came as Defense Secretary
Donald Rumsfeld revealed private communications with the Iraqi military on how
to escape attack.
Defense officials said it could be used in any new war with Iraq if it is deemed ready for field deployment. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld concedes it could have a psychological impact on the battlefield - especially in Iraq. "The goal is to have the capabilities of the coalition so clear and so obvious that there is an enormous disincentive for the Iraqi military to fight against the coalition and there's an enormous incentive for Saddam Hussein to leave and spare the world a conflict," Mr. Rumsfeld said. Mr. Rumsfeld told reporters at the Pentagon the United States is already communicating privately with elements of the Iraqi military on how to escape attack. "They will receive instructions so that they behave in a way that will be seen and understood as being non-threatening, and they will not be considered combatants, and they will be handled in a way that they are no longer a part of the problem," he said. The United States now has more than a quarter-million military personnel in the Gulf region poised for an attack on Iraq if President Bush gives the order. Additional forces continue to flow into the area. During his news conference, Mr. Rumsfeld renewed U.S. charges that Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein is deceiving the international community, especially on weapons issues. He said recent intelligence shows Iraq has ordered uniforms virtually identical to those of U.S. and British forces. He said Iraqi forces could wear them to commit atrocities against civilians. Challenged by a reporter on the authenticity of such claims, Mr. Rumsfeld declined to discuss U.S. intelligence sources and methods. But he insisted the charges are accurate. "Whether or not you consider them credible is your choice. In the event ground truth is gleaned at some point in the future you'll find they were accurate," Mr. Rumsfeld said. Questions have been raised about the credibility of some U.S. charges brought against Iraq - especially after U.N. investigators dismissed as fabricated, documents cited by the Bush administration to show Iraq had sought uranium for a nuclear arms program from the African nation of Niger.
. End of article 9.
The 25% stake in the Greater Nile Oil production and pipeline project had attracted heavy criticism from human rights groups. They accused Talisman of providing the Islamist Sudanese government with oil revenues which were used to finance the two decade old civil war with mostly Christian and animist separatists in the south. "We say welcome to the Indian company," Sudanese Energy Minister Awad al-Jaz told reporters. "This deal was done with the consent of all and everybody is happy." The sale was originally due to have been concluded in December. The Indian company ONGC Videsh also operates in Russia, Vietnam, Iran and Libya. US pressures Talisman promised to return to Sudan once a peace agreement is signed. "It has been very difficult for us to operate (in Sudan)," said Talisman's chief executive Jim Buckee. "In the event of signing a peace agreement, we will come back to Sudan," he said. Mr Buckee said the decision to pull-out had been made because of "US pressures" which threatened to exclude Talisman from US financial markets. Talisman could be subject to sanctions under the US Sudan Peace Act if Washington decides Khartoum is not making serious efforts to end the conflict which has claimed 2 million lives. The other partners in the venture are Malaysia's state oil firm Petronas, China National Petroleum Corp and Sudan's Sudapet. . End of article 10.
Research carried out in South Africa has found that washing the cervix or neck of the womb with vinegar shows up potentially cancerous cells. An early trial has suggested the technique is as effective as a pap smear, which is the more usual way of spotting the disease. Doctors believe their research could pave the way for developing countries to introduce a cheap and effective screening programme for cervical cancer. Cancerous tissue Vinegar comprises water and 5% acetic acid. When this solution is placed on the cervix, it turns potentially cancerous tissue white. This enables nurses to offer patients an immediate diagnosis by simply looking at the cervix. This compares with a pap smear which usually needs to be sent off to a laboratory for testing.
"We are using this method almost like a pap smear. We have found that the ability of direct vision inspection is as good as and sometimes better than a pap smear," she said. "This test will identify white lesions on the cervix that are pre-cancerous lesions, equivalent to what the pap smear will detect." Many countries in the developing world are unable to afford to implement a national screening programme for cervical cancer. Dr Denny believes this technique could offer them a viable alternative. Doctors at Groote Schuur Hospital buy their vinegar at a local supermarket. "It is not just cost effective it is also logistically a much simpler method of screening," she said. "No extra infrastructure is required and we are using the most rudimentary equipment." The only drawback to the vinegar test is that it sometimes suggests women have cervical cancer when they do not - so-called false-positive results. However, this also occurs with pap smears. "You end up over-treating large numbers of women," Dr Denny said. Further study She is now carrying out further research, funded by the Alliance for Cervical Cancer Prevention, to see if 'over-treating' has an adverse effect on women. "We are currently investigating the impact of this over-treatment on people's lives," she said. "The question is, is over-treating a bad thing to do considering you are preventing as lethal and as serious and as expensive a disease as cervical cancer." More trials are needed before the vinegar test can be introduced elsewhere. "The problem is we need to have more information on the long-term effectiveness of such approaches," said Dr Rengaswamy Sankaranarayanan, a scientist at the International Agency for Research on Cancer. This story is featured in the radio programme Health Matters on the BBC World Service. Click here
for listening times . End of article 11.
Originally Reported: Friday, 7 March, 2003, 21:13 GMT
Even as the US Senate approved a new nuclear disarmament treaty with Russia, the Pentagon was asking Congress for authority to develop a new generation of tactical nuclear weapons.
The US military believes that the new tactical nuclear weapons are essential to meet to threat of terrorism and weapons of mass destruction, and says they could be used against chemical or biological weapons facilities and nuclear bunkers buried deep underground. But arms controls advocates say that the plans could undermine US efforts to limit nuclear proliferation at a time when North Korea, among others, seems intent on developing nuclear weapons. "I don't see how we can look all the nuclear wannabes in the face... when we are going to now launch ourselves into a whole series of new weapons," said Congresswoman Ellen Tauscher, a member of the House of Representatives Armed Services Committee. The new weapons under consideration include low-yield tactical nuclear weapons, which were banned by Congress in 1993, and a "robust nuclear earth penetrator", designed to bury deep into the ground before exploding. Senate treaty approved In a separate action, the US Senate approved, by a vote of 95-0, the strategic arms reduction treaty between the United States and Russia, which was negotiated between President Bush and President Putin at their Moscow summit in June 2002.
The treaty aims to reduce the strategic nuclear arsenals of Russia and the US from current levels of between 6,000 and 7,000 to between 1,700 and 2,200 over the next 10 years. But unlike previous arms control treaties, it does not require the actual destruction of the weapons, leading to fears that they could be retargeted or might fall into the hands of terrorists. The treaty still has to be approved by the Russian Duma. It followed the US decision to deploy anti-ballistic missiles, forcing the abandonment and renegotiation of a series of arms control deals originally signed with the former Soviet Union. New 'mini-nukes' The Bush administration has told Congress that it wants to spend $21m to develop the nuclear earth penetrator, which could be used against potential enemies who bury their war-making facilities underground.
Everet Beckner, deputy head of the National Nuclear Security, said that the research "might culminate in an integral flight or laboratory test". The new bomb would be based on the one remaining US tactical nuclear weapon, the B61, with a strengthened nose cone to allow it to penetrate frozen soil or rocks. Additionally, the Bush administration plans to ask Congress to lift the ban on the development of even smaller nuclear weapons, with yields of under five kilotons, which could be used against above-ground weapons production facilities. This new generation of nuclear weapons would take longer to develop, and might require underground testing. Stephen Schwartz, publisher of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, a magazine that tracks nuclear proliferation issues, said that he "could not imagine anything more counter-productive" if the government was interested in preventing the spread of nuclear weapons. He said that reversing the long-standing ban on the development of tactical nuclear weapons was "stupid, dangerous and irrational", and that even the military itself did not want battlefield nuclear weapons. . End of article 12.
Do you believe everything you saw yesterday was real? Don't be so sure. The results of some new studies suggest it is easy to manipulate human memory. In one experiment, researchers worked with people who had witnessed the actual bombing of several apartment buildings in Moscow in September 1999. Lead researcher Elizabeth Loftus of the University of California at Irvine says investigators used the power of suggestion to plant some false information about the bombing. "And we made people believe that they had seen a wounded animal in conjunction with that particular bombing when in fact they didn't see that," she says. "So in fact about 12 to 13 percent of our subjects bought into the suggestion, and even went on the describe what this made up animal looked like." Next, researchers wanted to see whether they could plant entirely false information in the memories of their subjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
There are lawyers just waiting for the
fax on the restatement, so they have the numbers to put in the
lawsuits 
