BULLETIN OF NUCLEAR VETERANS AND CHILDREN ISSUE 20

fissionline

PAGE 2 FISSIONLINE 20

Alarming questions over the ability of the Ministry of Defence’s most senior medical adviser to rule on war pension applications were raised during the con-troversial Stubbs Ionising Radiation Pensions Tribunal. In Part Three of our gripping series, we reveal more transcripts which again show how Dr Anne Braidwood was un-able to answer the most basic questions about the effects of radiation on the hu-man body. Under cross-examination by Nuke Vets lawyer Neil Sampson she displayed a disturbing lack of knowl-edge, as illustrated by the following ex-change when Sampson questions Braid-wood about a soldier who was sent into ground zero shortly after an atomic blast. SAMPSON: If I was a soldier working at ground zero after one of the explo-sions and I scratched my leg on a piece of bent corrugated iron sheeting, could that cause me to be contaminated through my bloodstream, perhaps by irradiated material? BRAIDWOOD: I’m not sure why you would be at ground zero as a soldier. SAMPSON: Because I was, because I was employed to move away the bent corrugated sheeting that had been put around the test area. BRAIDWOOD: I can’t answer the ques-tion. SAMPSON: So you don’t know if that corrugated iron would be a source of alpha or beta radiation? BRAIDWOOD: No. SAMPSON: If it was alpha or beta ra-

diation, are you able to say whether it would have been re-corded on his film badge? BRAIDWOOD: Alpha certainly wouldn’t have been. SAMPSON: And beta might have been? BRAIDWOOD: I don’t know. SAMPSON: If I went for a walk along the beach and I took my shoes off to let my toes trickle through the coral sand, which contained irradiated particles, could irradiated material enter my body through that medium? BRAIDWOOD: I don’t know. SAMPSON: Dr Braidwood, if you do not know how irradiated parti-cles could be ingested, inhaled or enter the bloodstream, how is it possible to advise the War Pen-sions Tribunal here, or indeed any other one, that it is not possible for the individual to have been exposed to radiation other than that shown on his film badge? Are you familiar with beta burns? BRAIDWOOD: No. SAMPSON: You wouldn’t know what a beta burn looks like? BRAIDWOOD: No, I wouldn’t. SAMPSON: Would you accept from me that it looks like sun-burn? BRAIDWOOD: Yes. SAMPSON: Are you aware of how many men on Christmas Island were treated for sunburn or skin rashes?

BRAIDWOOD: No. SAMPSON: Would you accept that there were quite a lot, I couldn’t give you a number? BRAIDWOOD: I’ll accept that. I don’t know. SAMPSON: Would it be possible that a doctor treating a soldier who comes along with a red face or a rash on his arm said “Oh, you’ve got sunburn,” whereas in fact he had a beta burn? BRAIDWOOD: I suppose it’s possible. All things are possible. SAMPSON: With respect, Dr Braid-wood, for a qualified medical practitio-ner who has been dealing with these matters one way and another for a num-ber of years, I would hope that you are able to readily appreciate that beta ac-tive material on the body is likely to have an adverse effect. Are you able to agree or disagree with the contention that, “the danger of beta active material being left in close contact with the skin is that beta burns may be produced?” BRAIDWOOD: “I’ve no experience of it but I’ve no reason to doubt it.” SAMPSON: Are you able to help us doc-tor, if there were clouds of irradiated material hanging over the island, would that be a potential source of beta parti-cles to cause beta burns, to be inhaled by those living and working on the is-land? BRAIDWOOD: I don’t think that’s my expertise. *Nest Week: Stubbs’s odd intervention.

It’s Doctor No Idea Stubbs Part 3: Nuke Vet Lawyer Sampson outsmarts MoD Top Doc

PAGE 3 BULLETIN OF NUCLEAR VETERANS AND CHILDREN ISSUE

Project, the joint US and British ef-fort to build the bomb “to end all wars.” Their memo (right) reveals the deadly dangers of fallout and specifi-cally warns: “If it rained the danger would be even worse because ac-tive material would be carried to the ground and stick.”

The pernicious, and deadly , e f fects of “rainout” — radioactive rain — were known about even before the first A-bomb was built. The two architects of the nu-clear chain reaction from uranium, refugees Rudolf Pieirls (top) and Otto

Frisch, wrote about the problem in their famous memorandum “On the construction of a “super-bomb” in 1941. Their blueprint was the trigger for the Manhattan

Rainout Peril Was Known in 1941

On April 28, 1958 Britain deto-nated a hydrogen bomb, code-named Grapple Y. It was a tri-umph for chief scientist Sir Wil-liam Penney and Britain’s military planners, proving at a stroke to the Americans and the Soviet Un-ion that Britain was now a fully a paid-up member of the Megaton Club. At an awesome three mega-tons it was by far the UK’s biggest bomb and the force of the explo-sion, off the south east tip of Christmas Island, was truly terri-fying. Thousands of troops, quaking in huddled masses with only coco-nut palms and flimsy cotton suits to protect them, were thrown about like leaves in a tempest.

Most had only been on the island a short time and for many it was as though they had suddenly been plunged into hell. As they rose dazed and disorien-tated they could only stare in awe-struck wonder at the huge fireball and towering mushroom cloud that grew overhead eventually covering the whole island. But the worst was yet to come: a short time later a huge, black cloud detached itself from the main mushroom stem and began mov-ing ominously up the south coast toward the Port Camp where most of the troops had been mustered for safety. Then it started to rain. But this was no ordinary down-pour. Large black droplets gushed

down from the heavens in a solid curtain. At first the men blessed the coolness of the deluge, but then became alarmed as several Jeeps arrived disgorging figures dressed in protective “zootsuits” and wearing breathing apparatus. They ordered the men to get un-dercover, but it was too late for most who received a thorough soaking. The black cloud moved on and headed out to sea where the little Task Force flotilla of ships were next to be hit. It wasn’t long before queues formed in the sick bays with troops suffering illnesses like diarrhea, hair loss and burns. For thousands the long-term effects would be agonizing disease and lingering death.

Clouds of Danger April 1958: Britain explodes its biggest and deadliest bomb

These four ex-servicemen have be-tween them gazed upon the awesome might of TWENTY nuclear bombs. They were deliberately exposed to the searing heat and the ear-shattering blasts of the explosions, and the silent, deadly peril of radio-active fallout that followed. They have all suffered grievously as a result, as indeed have thousands of other nu-clear veterans. But their agony is compounded by the awful knowledge they have passed on dreadful genetic illnesses to their children and grand-children. These are the devastating consequences of protecting Britain at the height of the Cold War. The fis-sionline project is dedicated to right-ing this historical wrong, and the four men pictured opposite are in the van-guard of doing just that. Join them in their campaign for justice. They want an apology from the Government and the setting up of a compensation scheme at least on a par with that offered by every other nuclear power. Nothing else will do. Alan Rimmer,

Editor

fissionline

Last week’s call for

action by geneticist

Dr Ian Gibson to set

up a research project

on the lines of the

Rowland Report is

already reaping divi-

dends. Dr Gibson

says there is a group at a London Uni-

versity who could take on the studies

and would submit a grant request. He

said: “We need to find the appropriate

bodies for financial support, but I am

sure we can find the money if we get an

action team together. It would only

take £100,000 to get it up and running;

I am sure that is achievable. We could

set up an international conference to

launch the project. It could be very

exciting.”

Like his Biblical name-

sake, legal sledge-

hammer Neil Sampson

has destroyed the

monolithic impregna-

bility of the Ministry of

Defence. His forensic

demolition of so-called experts at the

Stubbs Pension Tribunal exposed the

glaring fault-lines inherent in the wea-

sel arguments used to deny Britain’s

nuclear veterans the justice they de-

serve. Brick by crumbling brick

Sampson has dismantled the carefully

crafted temple of lies, deceit and ob-

fuscation that have been the hallmark

of successive governments. It can

only be a matter of time before the

whole rotten edifice is brought crash-

ing to the ground in a heap of rubble.

On the subject of

grants, I seem to

remember the late,

m u c h - l a m e n t e d

author Catherine

Cookson, donated

at least £50,000 to

the British Nuclear

Tests Veterans’ Association to carry

out vital health research. At the

same time the Joseph Rowntree

Trust also donated £25,000, as I re-

call. Well Britain’s nuclear veterans

could certainly use some of that cash

now as a new campaign begins to

set up a Rowland-type study in Brit-

ain. The BNTVA should contact Dr

Gibson via the Anglia nuclear veter-

ans, who are coordinating the initia-

tive, with its donation.

Sampson Shatters the MoD