The dirt about BAE Systems. TODAY 6 PM sharp! Smiling Chair next to Sprinters the on Stokes Croft.

south west | peace | news report Wednesday April 20, 2011 12:52 by budgie

Barnaby pace from CAAT will talk about his many years of researching and unearthing

The story so far:

Allegations that BAE contracts have been won through bribery payments are not new The biggest probe focused on a £43bn contract to supply more than 100 fighter jets to Saudi Arabia. The deal began in 1985 but a National Audit Office investigation was suppressed in 1992 The SFO launched an investigation in 2004 into the allegations - including BAE running a "slush fund" that offered sweeteners to Saudi royals and their intermediaries in return for lucrative contracts This was dropped two years later by Tony Blair after political pressure from the UK and Saudi Arabia. BAE always denied any wrongdoing In July 2008, BAE pledged to implement recommendations from an independent review into its conduct
Feb 2010 BAE Systems to pay £280m in fines after pleading guilty to false statements and accounting after landmark settlement with UK and US authorities. Related Link: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/bae-sys....html

More filth is coming out about BAE even as I write this! See below:

Anti-nuclear group CND defied a government gagging attempt yesterday to expose the use of "substandard" nuclear reactors in Britain's Astute-class submarines.

A Ministry of Defence document, now posted online in its entirety, shows that the reactors in British nuclear subs do not meet best practice and are twice as likely as the safest reactors to suffer coolant accidents which could result in serious radioactive leaks.

The report was sent to campaigners in response to a Freedom of Information request but without redactions.

When alerted to the fact the government desperately tried to suppress the information.

But CND has published in full the internal MoD report into submarine safety - in a direct challenge to the ministry's attempts to conceal its contents.

The report notes that Britain has largely developed its own standards for submarine design and "in a number of areas it is clear that the UK programme currently falls short of current relevant good practice."

It says that "UK submarines compare poorly" to civil power plants which have systems to inject coolant into the reactor after a loss of coolant accident (LOCA).

And it admits that although Trident replacement would allow the use of a new, safer reactor, the MoD may use the existing one to keep costs down.

CND general secretary Kate Hudson said: "This report has only come to light because of the tenacity of anti-nuclear campaigners seeking much-needed transparency on Trident replacement.

"The MoD wanted to keep this report secret because it exposes the fact they are continuing to use substandard nuclear reactors on their submarines and they are struggling to reach a decision on the type of Trident replacement sub to pursue," said Ms Hudson.

The report says all pressurised water reactors (PWRs) are potentially vulnerable to a structural failure which would release highly radioactive fission products outside the reactor core.

If this occurs some leakage is "likely" and "in any event the radioactive 'shine' from the submarine poses significant risk to those in close proximity, and a public safety hazard out to 1.5km from the submarine."

"In the current UK PWR2 plant the initiating structural failure causing a LOCA is twice as likely to occur as in equivalent civil and submarine reactor good practice."

The report says that for current classes of submarine, including the Astute class under construction, "there is a limit to what improvements are reasonably practicable."

But to keep costs down and meet production schedules the MoD is considering whether to pursue a new reactor or merely modify the existing one for use in Trident replacement subs.

Ms Hudson said: "Not only does the MoD admit it is continuing to use substandard reactors on Astute submarines - putting both our environment and our submariners' lives at risk - but they seem to be struggling to decide whether or not, as budgets tighten, to compromise on safety in order to save both time and money."

The report can be read online at cryptome.org/0003/mod-nuke-leak.htm 

And while on the subject of opposing the arms trade this frightening statistic has just come to light:

Report puts US drone victims at 2,283 in 7 years

Investigators for human rights group Reprieve in Pakistan this week said that up to 2,283 people have been killed by US drones since 2004.

They pointed out that the numbers had been rapidly escalating in the past two years.

As many as 730 victims have been wholly innocent, according to one official source, but preliminary investigation by Reprieve suggests that the number may be far higher and that, contrary to US claims, the likelihood of the US hitting its intended "high-value terrorist" is low.

Islamabad-based lawyer Mirza Shahzad Akbar, representing drone victim families, has been building evidence on drone strikes and consulting with Reprieve on potential legal action.

He joined the group in calling for for a full and independent inquiry into the use of drones, as well as litigation in Pakistani and international courts.

Reprieve director Clive Stafford Smith said: "Our mission to Pakistan leads us to believe that US drones, guided by highly questionable US intelligence, indiscriminately kill innocent people, including children.

"We are accumulating evidence and believe that war crimes may have been committed against civilians who played no part in any conflict."