A Two Part Warning to the Citizens for the World: "Do
Not Use Depleted Uranium Munitions Again"

Dr. Doug Rokke, Former U.S. Army's DU team health
physicist Former U.S. Army's DU Project Director
George Angus Parker, Formerly Sgt with the 1st Field
Laboratory Unit, Biological-Warfare Detection Unit.
Porton Down. Great Britain

Part 1: Dr. Rokke's comments

The leaders of the United States and Great Britain are
considering a preemptive military attack against Iraq.
Consequently, the potential use of military force
requires the careful evaluation of the health and
environmental impact of any weapon system that may be
employed by U.S. or British forces in their attempts
to achieve their military objectives. Consequently, I
must issue a warning against the deliberate use of any
munitions containing depleted uranium. Depleted
uranium munitions (DU) have been used effectively in
combat since 1973. Their destructive capabilities are
absolutely superior to any other known munitions that
can be fired by tanks, armored vehicles, aircraft, and
rifles. In addition the ADAM and PDM, which are land
mines, are essentially conventional explosives wrapped
in shell containing uranium or a "dirty bomb".
Although DU munitions are an excellent weapon, they
leave a path of death, illness, and environmental
contamination. The radiological and chemical toxicity
are due to uranium, plutonium, neptunium, and
americium isotopes within each DU bullet. We also have
all of the inherent contamination from the equipment,
terrain, and facilities that were destroyed.

Upon the completion of the ground combat phase of the
Gulf war, I was assigned by Headquarters Department of
the Army and consequently the U.S. Central Command to
clean up the depleted uranium contaminated U.S.
equipment and provide initial medical recommendations
for all individuals who were or may have been exposed
as a consequence of military actions. Our initial
observations of the DU contamination can be summed
simply by three words "OH MY GOD!" Although my mission
was limited to U.S. personnel and equipment all
affected persons and equipment should have been
processed identically. They were not! Although I and
U.S. Army physicians assigned to the 3rd U.S. Army
Medical Command issued immediate verbal and written
medical care recommendations those still have not been
complied with for not only all U.S. and coalition
military DU casualties but for Iraqi military
personnel and especially noncombatants, women and
children, who were exposed to DU munitions
contamination. A United States Defense Nuclear Agency
memorandum written by LTC Lyle that was sent to our
team in Saudi Arabia during March 1990 stated that
quote "As Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD), ground
combat units, and civil populations of Saudi Arabia,
Kuwait, and Iraq come increasingly into contact with
DU ordnance, we must prepare to deal with potential
problems. Toxic war souvenirs, political furor, and
post conflict clean up (host nation agreement) are
only some of the issues that must be addressed. Alpha
particles (uranium oxide dust) from expended rounds is
a health concern but, Beta particles from fragments
and intact rounds is a serious health threat, with
possible exposure rates of 200 millirads per hour on
contact." end quote. It took our team from March 1991
to June 1991 to collect and prepare 30 U.S. vehicles
that were damaged or destroyed during friendly fire
incidents involving DU munitions for burial or
shipment to a specialized facility in South Carolina
for decontamination and disposal. Thousands of other
DU contaminated pieces of equipment, bunkers, and
terrain were just ignored. The approximate 1 million
individual DU rounds and submunitions that were used
by United States and British forces were never cleaned
up but left where they fell. During January 1993
following analysis of our written reports and personal
discussions, scientists and physicians assigned to the
United States General Accounting Office issued a
report ("Operation Desert Storm: Army Not Adequately
Prepared to Deal With Depleted Uranium Contamination",
GAO/NSAID-93-90, January 1993, page 7) recommending
that the Secretary of the Army quote:

1. ensure that appropriate Army training schools
provide adequate information and training to personnel
who would come in contact with DU contaminated
equipment, 2. develop time frames to implement the
proposed DU testing policy involving the testing of
all crew members inside vehicles penetrated by DU
munitions, 3. expand testing to include personnel
involved in the vehicle recovery process should
testing of the Army National Guard personnel show that
uranium is present in excess of the standards being
applied in the medical tests, and 4. develop a formal
plan for dealing with the recovery of DU-contaminated
equipment.

At approximately the same time that this report was
being prepared, the United States Army's Environmental
Policy Institute, AEPI, was tasked (December 13, 1992)
by the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for
Environment, Safety, and Occupational health to
determine (quote):

1. The health and environmental consequences of using
DU on the battlefield. 2. Which remediation
technologies exist or might be developed to clean up
DU contamination. 3. Ways to reduce DU toxicity. 4.
How to best protect the environment from the long-term
consequences of DU use.

Therefore it was and still is obvious that United
States military leaders knew that using DU would cause
health and environmental problems. I was asked to help
conduct the research and prepare the recommendations
and final AEPI report because I was the Army health
physicist who helped clean up the DU mess following
Desert Storm and was working for the Army preparing
environmental compliance procedures. The findings
issued in 1995 (Health and Environmental Consequences
of Depleted Uranium Use in the Army: Technical Report,
U.S. Army Environmental Policy Institute, June 1995)
were quote 1. The battlefield is contaminated with
many dangerous things. The impact of DU contamination
on the battlefield is not well defined. Relative to
many of the other hazards, such as unexploded
ordnance. The hazards are probably small; however,
additional environmental modeling and data are needed
to support this judgment. 2. DU remediation
technologies involve one or more of the following:
excavation and earth moving, physical separation,
chemical separation, and in-place stabilization. The
Army will continue to identify and evaluate
remediation technologies by comparing the cost and
effectiveness. From this analysis, the Army will seek
effective, less expensive DU remediation technologies.
3. There are no technologies available that can
significantly change the inherent chemical and
radiological toxicity of DU. 4. Range management and
DU recovery systems have been implemented and are
being improved. Models to better describe the
environmental fate and effect are being developed. DU
migration on test ranges in the United States has been
minimal because soil and water conditions on those
test ranges tend to prevent formation of soluable DU.

Once more we can see that Army officials acknowledged
that DU is toxic forever and that specific remediation
procedures are required to clean up DU contamination.
I then developed and verified these procedures while
the DU Project Director.

Consequently, in response to the GAO report, initial
reports submitted by AEPI scientists, and my/our
efforts the United States Deputy Secretary of Defense
issued an order that was consequently reissued on
August 14, 1993 and signed by General Eric Shinseki
that DOD shall:

"1. Provide adequate training for personnel who may
come in contact with depleted uranium equipment. 2.
Complete medical testing of personnel exposed to DU
contamination during the Persian Gulf War. 3. Develop
a plan for DU contaminated equipment recovery during
future operations."

The criteria describing unusual DU exposures requiring
medical screening within 24 hours of exposure and
consequent medical care were specified in a message
from Headquarters Department of the Army dated October
14, 1993. These exposures included: "a. Being in the
midst of smoke from DU fires resulting from the
burning of vehicles uploaded with DU munitions or
depots in which DU munitions are being stored. b.
Working within environments containing DU dust or
residues from DU fires. c. Being within a structure or
vehicle while it is struck by DU munitions."

Today, at least one decade after thousands and maybe
millions of individuals were exposed to DU
contamination and who should have received medical
care per our original 1991 recommendations and as
specified in the October 14, 1993 directive less than
500 individuals have ever been provided the required
radio-bioassay testing and consequent medical care. We
must note that if United States personnel should
receive medical care then all exposed individuals also
must receive medical care. A letter sent to General
Leslie Groves, head of the Manhatten Project (the
development of the first atomic bomb), during 1943
that I obtained during Fall 1999 emphasized the need
for immediate medical care. In that memorandum dated
October 30, 1943, senior scientists assigned to the
Manhattan Project suggested that uranium could be used
as an air, water, and terrain contaminant. According
to the letter sent by the Subcommittee of the S-1
Executive Committee on the "Use of Radioactive
Materials as a Military Weapon" to General Groves
(October 30, 1943) inhalation of uranium would result
in "bronchial irritation coming on in a few hours to a
few days". This is exactly what happened to those of
us who inhaled DU dust during Operation Desert Storm,
U.S. and KFOR soldiers and civilians in the Balkans,
and residents of Vieques, Puerto Rico. The
subcommittee went on further to state that "Beta
emitting products could get into the gastrointestinal
tract from polluted water, or food, or air. >From the
air, they would get on the mucus of the nose, throat,
bronchi, etc. and be swallowed. The effects would be
local irritation just as in the bronchi and exposures
of the same amount would be required. The stomach,
caecum and rectum, where contents remain for longer
periods than elsewhere would be most likely affected.
It is conceivable that ulcers and perforations of the
gut followed by death could be produced, even without
an general effects from radiation". Verified adverse
health effects from personal experience, reported by
physicians, and from personal reports from individuals
with known DU exposures include: (a) Reactive airway
disease, (b) neurological abnormalities, (c) kidney
stones and chronic kidney pain, (d) rashes, (e) vision
degradation, cataracts, and night vision losses, (f)
gum tissue and teeth problems, (g) lymphoma, (h)
various forms of skin and organ cancer, (I)
neuro-psychological disorders, (j) uranium in semen,
(k) sexual dysfunction, and (l) birth defects in
offspring. Similar health effects also have been
documented in uranium processing facility employees of
and residents living near Puducah, Kentucky,
Portsmouth, Ohio; Los Alamos, New Mexico; Oak Ridge,
Tennessee; and Hanford, Washington who made the DU.
Employees at uranium manufacturing or processing
facilities in New York, Tennessee, Iowa,
Massachusetts, and the four corners area of southwest
Colorado also have repeatedly reported health effects
similar to those reported by verified Gulf War DU
casualties. Iraqi and other humanitarian agency
physicians are reporting the same health effects in
exposed populations. Scottish scientists recently
verified that residents of the Balkans were excreting
uranium in their urine. This indicates that the
uranium is mobile in the environment and is more
evidence to support what we found during the DU tests
in 1994 and 1995. Consequently we can not ignore the
serious adverse health effects from DU exposures and
these known effects substantiate the banning of DU
munitions.

As a result of the 1993 GAO report, congressional
inquiries, our recommendations, and an increase in
observed adverse health and environmental effects; I
was recalled to active duty in the United States Army
as Director of the Depleted Uranium Project. I
supervised the research to verify DU hazards and
processing procedures and to develop the training and
education and formal guidelines for management of DU
contaminated equipment, facilities, and terrain. The
products of the DU project included: Three training
curricula: (1) Tier I: General Audience, (2) Tier II:
Battle Damage and Recovery Operations, (3) Tier III:
Chemical Officer / NCO; Three video tapes: (1)
"Depleted Uranium Hazard Awareness", (2) "Contaminated
and Damaged Equipment Management", and (3) "Operation
of the AN/PDR 77 Radiac Set"; the draft Army
Regulation: "Management of Equipment Contaminated with
Depleted Uranium or Radioactive Commodities"; an
United States Army Pamphlet specifying "Handling
Procedures for Equipment Contaminated with Depleted
Uranium or Radioactive Commodities" and a redesigned
radiac capable of finding and quantifying DU
contamination.

The recommendations that I derived and issued, based
on extensive research and first hand experience were:

1. All DU contamination must be physically removed and
properly disposed of to prevent future exposures. 2.
Specialized radiation detection devices that detect
and measure alpha particles, beta particles, x-rays,
and gamma rays emissions at appropriate levels from 20
dpm up to 100,000 dpm and from .1 mrem/ hour to 75
mrem/ hour must be acquired and distributed to all
individuals or organizations responsible for medical
care and environmental remediation activities
involving depleted uranium / uranium 238 and other low
level radioactive isotopes that may be present.
Standard equipment will not detect contamination. 3.
Medical care must be provided to all individuals who
did or may have inhaled, ingested, or had wound
contamination to detect mobile and sequestered
internalized uranium contamination. 4. All individuals
who enter, climb on, or work within 25 meters of any
contaminated equipment or terrain must wear
respiratory and skin protection. 5. Contaminated and
damaged equipment or materials should not be recycled
to manufacture new materials or equipment.

The United States Army's own task performance
standards for exposure to DU are very specific and
require both respiratory and skin protection. They
also state that quote

"NOTE: Contamination will make food and water unsafe
for consumption" end quote.

The specific task performance requirements are that
individual can quote"

Evaluation Preparation HANDS-ON EVALUATION DATE: TASK
TITLE TASK NUMBER Respond To Depleted Uranium/Low
Level Radioactive Materials (Dullram) Hazards (SL 1-4)
031-503-1017 ITEM PERFORMANCE STEP TITLE (CIRCLE ONE)
1 Identified possible hazards GO / NO GO NOTE: Method
used depends on scenario selected 2 Assumed field
expedient respiratory protection cravat/handkerchief)
immediately or donned protective mask as required GO /
NO GO 3 Warned others of DULLRAM hazard GO / NO GO a.
Alerted other crew members or individuals within 50
meters of the possible DULLRAM hazard GO / NO GO b.
Got out of vehicle and seek shelter if vehicle or
munitions are on fire GO / NO GO 4 Protected himself
from contact with DULLRAM a. Administered first aid
(1) Flushed open wounds with water. (2) Covered open
wounds with field dressing. Did not attempt to remove
any imbedded fragments b. Covered exposed skin within
50 meters of hazard (pulled down sleeves, bloused
pants, put on MOPP gloves, and buttoned up coat) c.
Sealed loose contamination on equipment surfaces GO /
NO GO

GO / NO GO GO / NO GO 5 Reported suspected
contamination to supervisor GO / NO GO Score the
soldier GO if all performance measures are passed.
Score the soldier NO GO if any performance measure is
failed. If the soldier scores NO GO, show the soldier
what was done wrong and how to do it correctly. Allow
the soldier time to retrain and retest. EVALUATOR'S
NAME UNIT: SOLDIER'S NAME STATUS: GO / NO GO

End quote.

It is very important to note that respiratory and skin
protection must be worn by all individuals who are or
may be exposed to DU contamination. If this is
required for United States Army personnel then it must
required for all citizens of the world. Of special
significance is that Army officials acknowledge that
DU contamination will make water and food unsafe as
specified during October 1943. Consequently, it is
apparent the use of DU munitions is simply too
dangerous to use even by the U.S. Army's own safety
standards.

Today, eleven years after the extensive use of
depleted uranium munitions during the Gulf War,
followed by use of DU in the Balkans; on Vieques,
Puerto Rico in preparation for combat use in the
Balkans, in Okinawa, and on many military
installations around the world; visual evidence,
personal experience, and published reports verify
that:

1. Medical care has not been provided to all DU
casualties.

2. Environmental remediation has not been completed.

3. Contaminated and damaged equipment and materials
have been recycled to manufacture new products.

4. Training and education has only been partially
implemented.

5. Contamination management procedures have not been
distributed and implemented. The denials about DU
hazards although obvious were and still are guided by
the infamous Los Alamos memorandum
( http://www.spidersmill.com/gwvrl/los_alamos.htm) that
was sent to our team in Saudi Arabia during March
1991. The author of this memorandum acknowledged
serious health and environmental hazards but wrote
that we should only report those findings that would
permit the continued use DU munitions. IN OTHER WORDS
LIE!

If we use DU munitions again in areas already
contaminated or any new location then we will cause
additional health problems and environmental
contamination. Consequently, as a scientist, educator,
and military officer who was given the responsibility
by United States Army officials to clean up the DU
mess; I must issue the following recommendation to the
citizens of the world.

As the military and civilian leaders of the United
States and Great Britain contemplate preemptive
attacks on the nation of Iraq; the citizens of the
world, all humanitarian agencies, the United Nations,
and all concerned law abiding governments of the world
must raise a unified voice to ban the use of depleted
uranium munitions and force those nations that have
used depleted uranium munitions to recognize the
immoral consequences of their actions and assume
responsibility for medical care and thorough
environmental remediation. A nation's military
personnel cannot willfully contaminate any other
nation, cause harm to persons and the environment then
ignore the consequences of their actions. To do so is
a crime against GOD and humanity!!! WE MUST DO WHAT IS
RIGHT FOR GOD AND THE CITIZENS OF THE WORLD --- BAN DU
!!!

PART 2: George Angus Parker's comments

My name is George Angus Parker. I am a British Gulf
Veteran.

The above warning issued by Professor Doug Rokke is a
chilling reminder that war is nothing more than a
monument to the incompetence of politicians and their
advisors. His concerns regarding the misuse of
depleted nuclear waste (Depleted Uranium - DU) as a
weapon of conventional warfare are those of a very
knowledgeable scientist, who has witnessed and made
actual measurements to support his assertions. As
evidence of that fact the reader should be aware that
many of the documents and training films pertaining to
depleted uranium munitions currently used by the US
and UK armed forces, were produced by him and members
of his team.

None of his measurements and reports of actual
contamination should have been news to the US or UK
authorities. They had known for many years that using
depleted uranium ammunition would lead to considerable
contamination of both the environment and mankind. As
early as the 1940's powdered uranium was considered
for use against German agricultural and industrial
targets as an area contamination/denial weapon. The
idea was a product of the Manhattan Project headed by
J. R. Oppenheimer. It was abandoned because of the
obvious long-term health consequences for the civilian
population and the environment.

As late as July 1990 (one month before Iraq invaded
Kuwait) official reports warned against using DU as an
antitank weapon. It was reported that the public
outcry regarding the use of such a controversial
weapon on a conventional battlefield would likely make
it impossible to ever use it again. Obviously, those
in positions to authorise the use of depleted uranium
were well aware of the consequences.

For whatever reason, it was decided that DU would be
used against Iraq and the warnings issued by
physicists, physicians and good intentioned
environmental scientists were to be ignored. That
decision alone marks the Gulf conflict of 1991 as the
biggest political cock-up (military term) of modern
times. Bigger even than the first use of atomic bombs
against the already defeated Japanese, marking the end
of W.W.II.

Ironically, before the start of the ground war phase
of Operation Desert Storm the British Ministry of
Defence issued a warning to British ground forces. It
stated that care should be taken to avoid areas were
DU had been used. Probably for reasons of operational
efficiency that warning was not permitted to reached
the front line troops. Would an infantry man be so
willing to take up his personal weapon and engage the
enemy at close quarters, if he had been warned that
the burning tank only feet away was belching
radioactive dust? I think not! Particularly if he was
made aware that the dust would not only endanger his
life but also those of any children he fathered at a
later date.

I am not qualified to write with the same authority as
Professor Rokke on the technical aspects of DU
environmental contamination because his actual
experience and scientific knowledge of the subject is
considerable. However, as a former vice chairman of
Gulf Veterans association, I can comment on the
official resistance to fully investigate the depleted
uranium contamination of Gulf War Veterans. The
reluctance and obstruction of attempts made by
veterans who sought and still seek official
investigations into this matter, has uncovered a trail
of deceit and lies that shook the beliefs of many.
Serving Queen and Country by placing oneself in harms
way in support of the ideals, freedom, truth, and
justice, no longer has the same attraction.

It was the National Gulf Veterans and Families
Association (UK charity) who on advice from
independent scientists initiated the clinical testing
of veterans looking for Depleted Uranium. After
encountering and defeating every dirty trick in the
political obstruction book, the findings have now been
published in a peer reviewed US medical science
journal, the August 2002 issue of Military Medicine.
Dr Assaf Durakovic the principle author, is himself a
Gulf Veteran and was formerly a Colonel in the US Army
Medical Corp. He was professor of nuclear medicine at
George Town University School of Medicine and was part
of the United Nations quick response to nuclear
incidents.

As you can plainly see, the credentials of those
learned scientists and physicians currently issuing
grave warnings regarding the future use of Depleted
Uranium, are impeccable. The fact that Professors
Rokke and Durakovic committed what is best described
as professional suicide when they decided to speak out
on these issues only adds to the growing honour and
international standing of these fine gentlemen. Few
other scientists have lived up to the words of Robert
Oppenheimer, the man initially responsible for the
abuse of nuclear material in warfare. He wrote:

"There must be no barriers to freedom of inquiry.
There is no place for dogma in science. The scientist
is free, and must be free to ask any question, to
doubt any assertion, to seek for any evidence, to
correct any errors."-J. Robert Oppenheimer, Life, 10
October 1949

As veterans and human beings we owe Doug Rokke, Assaf
Durakovic and others a great debt, considerably more
than we owe to J. R. Oppenheimer. Even though as you
can see above, he begged others to undo his injustice.

With all sincerity I can say that witnessing the pain
and suffering of ill Gulf Veterans and their families,
has had a dramatic effect on the way I view future
military deployments by the US and UK. Things
witnessed and endured have opened my eyes to the
realities of the relationship between my country's
government (together with the civil service) and
members of the armed forces. Rather than valued
members of society owed a debt of honour for defending
the state, I am now aware that armed forces personnel
are considered as disposable items. Something to be
used abused and then discarded when broken. Further
more, when made ill by the use of politically
sensitive weapons such as DU they are an expensive
embarrassment to be silenced when voicing concerns.

It is my sincere and heart felt belief that until such
time as the UK and US governments can properly care
for ill and dying veterans of war, they should refrain
from deploying members of the armed forces over seas.

As for the contention should we invade Iraq again,
this time to overthrow the government of that country?
I contest the rational, competency and therefor the
relevance of the question. My reasons are clearly
explained above.

George Angus Parker Formerly Sgt with the 1st Field
Laboratory Unit, Biological-warfare Detection Unit.
Porton Down.

(Foot note: On reflection, perhaps there are good
reasons to revisit the battlefields of Kuwait and
Iraq. To scrape our nuclear waste from their soil and
beg forgiveness from the Gods of the common people.)