Showing posts with label Chemicals. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Chemicals. Show all posts

Monday, December 16, 2013

Fracking Chemicals Linked to Birth Defects, Infertility

At Alternate Viewpoint, the privacy of our visitors is of extreme importance to us (See this article to learn more about Privacy Policies.). This privacy policy document outlines the types of personal information is received and collected by Alternate Viewpoint and how it is used.


Log Files


Like many other Web sites, Alternate Viewpoint makes use of log files. The information inside the log files includes internet protocol (IP) addresses, type of browser, Internet Service Provider (ISP), date/time stamp, referring/exit pages, and number of clicks to analyze trends, administer the site, track user"s movement around the site, and gather demographic information. IP addresses, and other such information are not linked to any information that is personally identifiable.


Cookies and Web Beacons


Alternate Viewpoint does use cookies to store information about visitors preferences, record user-specific information on which pages the user access or visit, customize Web page content based on visitors browser type or other information that the visitor sends via their browser.


DoubleClick DART Cookie


  • Google, as a third party vendor, uses cookies to serve ads on Alternate Viewpoint.

  • Google"s use of the DART cookie enables it to serve ads to users based on their visit to Alternate Viewpoint and other sites on the Internet.

  • Users may opt out of the use of the DART cookie by visiting the Google ad and content network privacy policy at the following URL - http://www.google.com/privacy_ads.html.

These third-party ad servers or ad networks use technology to the advertisements and links that appear on Alternate Viewpoint send directly to your browsers. They automatically receive your IP address when this occurs. Other technologies ( such as cookies, JavaScript, or Web Beacons ) may also be used by the third-party ad networks to measure the effectiveness of their advertisements and / or to personalize the advertising content that you see.


Alternate Viewpoint has no access to or control over these cookies that are used by third-party advertisers.


You should consult the respective privacy policies of these third-party ad servers for more detailed information on their practices as well as for instructions about how to opt-out of certain practices. Alternate Viewpoint"s privacy policy does not apply to, and we cannot control the activities of, such other advertisers or web sites.


If you wish to disable cookies, you may do so through your individual browser options. More detailed information about cookie management with specific web browsers can be found at the browser"s respective websites.



Fracking Chemicals Linked to Birth Defects, Infertility

Sunday, September 8, 2013

UK delivered Syria chemicals needed for sarin production ‘for 6 years’



Published time: September 08, 2013 12:03

AFP Photo / Ricardo Garcia Vilanovoa

AFP Photo / Ricardo Garcia Vilanovoa




British companies sold sodium fluoride, a key ingredient in the manufacture of the deadly nerve gas sarin, to a Syrian firm from 2004-2010, British media reveal, a sale that has been called ‘disturbing’ following the chemical weapons attack in Damascus.


Between July 2004 and May 2010, the British government issued five export licenses to two companies, allowing them to sell Syria sodium fluoride, necessary for the production of sarin, according to a report in the Daily Mail, a British daily.


Sarin, a nerve gas that is hundreds of times deadlier than cyanide, is considered one of the world’s most dangerous chemical warfare agents. It works on the nervous system, over-stimulating muscles and vital organs, and a single drop can be lethal in minutes. The US, France and Germany say the deadly chemical was used in the attacks of August 21 in the Damascus neighborhood of Ghouta that left hundreds of civilians dead or injured.


The Sunday Mail says UK firms did export sodium fluoride to a Syrian cosmetics firm throughout the six years for what they claim were legitimate purposes. The daily quotes British MPs admitting for the first time that the chemical was delivered to Syria which has been condemned as a ‘grossly irresponsible’ move and a clear violation of international protocol on the trade of dangerous substances.


British MPs signaled their extreme displeasure with the shocking revelations.


“These are very disturbing revelations uncovered by The Mail on Sunday regarding the provision of sodium fluoride to Syria. At no time should we have allowed President Assad’s regime to get its hands on this substance,” Thomas Docherty MP, a member of the Commons Arms Export Controls Committee, said on Saturday.


“Previously we thought that while export licenses had been granted, no chemicals were actually delivered. Now we know that in the build-up to the Syrian civil war, UK companies – with the backing of our Government – were supplying this potentially lethal substance,” he added.


While the last export license was issued in May 2010, the licenses are obtained prior to manufacture and the industry standard requires four to five months before the chemicals are delivered.


“We are looking at late 2010 for the British supplies of sodium fluoride reaching Syria,” Docherty said.


The Government has some very serious questions to answer, he concluded.


However, a spokesman for the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) defended the sale of the chemical to Syria, saying the amount was “commensurate with the stated end use in the production of cosmetics and there was no reason to link them with Syria’s chemical weapons program. This remains the case.”


The BIS refused to release the names of the two UK exporters for reasons of commercial confidentiality.


This comes on top of another sarin-related scandal as earlier British officials were found  to have granted export licenses for sodium fluoride and potassium fluoride exports to Syria on the eve of the Syrian civil conflict breakout. The January 2012 licenses were given in the knowledge that both substances “could also be used as precursor chemicals in the manufacture of chemical weapons,” according to a report published by the House of Commons Committee on Arms Export Controls.


Angus Robertson, a Scottish National Party MP, told RT that the matter was raised in the House of Commons last week following the House of Commons ruling not to participate in military action against the Syrian government.


“Defense ministers had to explain why it was that the UK would even consider granting an export license,” he said, adding that it was “impossible to tell” whether rebels could have got hold of the chemicals once they had passed into the country.


“I’m still concerned, however, as the chemical licenses were issued at a time when the situation in Syria had already deteriorated,” Robertson added.


Meanwhile, in the US, members of Congress are debating whether to give President Barack Obama the green light for a military strike on the Syrian government of President Bashar Assad, who the White House holds responsible for last month’s deadly chemical weapons attack.


The US leader had earlier warned that the use of chemical weapons in Syria was the “red line” that, if crossed, would necessitate US involvement. The White House caveat, however, did not consider the possibility that Syrian rebel forces would jump at the opportunity of bringing US forces over to their side in the event of such an attack.


During the G20 summit, which just wrapped up in St. Petersburg, the White House released a joint statement signed by the leaders and representatives of 11 nations – ten of whom are G20 members. The signees included Australia, Canada, France, Italy, Japan, Republic of Korea, Saudi Arabia, Spain, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and the United States.


The signatory nations said they “support efforts undertaken by the United States and other countries to reinforce the prohibition on the use of chemical weapons.”


However, the signatories to the statement were clearly opposed to any military action against Syria.


“Recognizing that Syria’s conflict has no military solution, we reaffirm our commitment to seek a peaceful political settlement through full implementation of the 2012 Geneva Communique.  We are committed to a political solution which will result in a united, inclusive and democratic Syria,” it read.


Russia and China, among other nations, remain highly skeptical of claims that the Assad regime resorted to the use of chemical weapons, saying there is not enough evidence to prove with any certainty the identity of the perpetrators of the attack.


At the G20 summit, President Vladimir Putin called the chemical attack “provocation” carried out by rebels and cautioned strike supporters to act within the UN charter, and only after firm results of the UN probe are published, which may happen as soon as next week.




RT – News



UK delivered Syria chemicals needed for sarin production ‘for 6 years’

Saturday, June 15, 2013

Russia Faults Proof of Use of Chemicals in Syrian War


MOSCOW — The Russian government on Saturday stepped up its attack on the accusation by the United States that Syria had used chemical weapons in its civil war, saying that evidence cited by the Americans was unreliable because the samples were not properly handled by experts until they reached a laboratory.




The criticism, by Foreign Minister Sergey V. Lavrov at a news conference in Moscow, laid out Russia’s most specific argument to date supporting its contention that the evidence was faulty. The remarks came a day after President Obama spoke with the leaders of four of the United States’ closest allies — Britain, France, Germany and Italy — about the charge of chemical weapons use by the forces of President Bashar al-Assad.


The United States said last week that it would begin sending weapons to the Syrian rebels because of the evidence of chemical arms, but the European allies have expressed differing views and pressed for urgent discussions on how to respond, including at a Group of 8 summit meeting in Northern Ireland beginning on Monday.


Russia has reacted furiously to the announcement by the United States, saying the allegations are not reliable and accusing American officials of creating a pretense for military intervention, based on intelligence assessments similar to the later-disproven reports of unconventional weapons in Iraq that preceded the invasion there.


Mr. Lavrov, speaking after meeting with Foreign Minister Emma Bonino of Italy, urged the United States to adhere to a plan to hold an international conference that would bring both the Assad government and the rebels to the negotiating table.


In Washington, Secretary of State John Kerry said that while the United States still sought a political solution for the conflict, “the use of chemical weapons and increasing involvement of Hezbollah demonstrates the regime’s lack of commitment to negotiations and threatens to put a political settlement out of reach.”


 Mr. Kerry had been one of the most outspoken advocates of a political process, but in recent weeks has grown increasingly concerned that the advances made by pro-government forces would give Mr. Assad little reason to negotiate. The provision of arms to the rebels, officials have said, is partly intended to turn the tide enough to force a real negotiation.


Mr. Kerry’s remarks, in a telephone conversation with his Iraqi counterpart, were summarized in a statement issued by the State Department on Saturday. Mr. Lavrov said arms shipments by the United States would only prolong the bloodshed by encouraging the rebels to continue fighting. He also said the use of chemical weapons made no sense, given that Mr. Assad’s forces had seemed to gain the upper hand in the fighting in recent days.


“What sense does it make for the regime to use chemical weapons, especially in such small quantities, only to expose itself?” he said.


On the evidence cited of chemical weapons use, he said it did not meet requirements set forth in a 1997 international treaty for the handling of samples.


“There are rules of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, which are based on the fact that samples of blood, urine, soil, clothing are considered serious proof only if the samples were taken by experts, and if these experts controlled these samples all the time while they are transported to a proper laboratory,” he said.


In addition, he criticized reports that the United States and its allies were considering the establishing of a no-fly zone over Syria, using Patriot air defense systems and F-16 planes based in Jordan. “You do not have to be an expert to understand that this would still be a violation of international law,” he said.


White House aides say the administration has ruled out that option as too dangerous and costly.


President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia is scheduled to meet with Mr. Obama on Monday on the sideline of the summit meeting.




David E. Sanger contributed reporting from Washington.





NYT > Global Home



Russia Faults Proof of Use of Chemicals in Syrian War