MAMMA - M+others Aligned for Military & Murder Accountability

Without more information on any of these deaths, there's 'no way' that any of these ? marks would/should be 'automatically' assumed to be another 'covered up' murder. Each would need to be evaluated individually, but be allowed to be 'worked' in conjunction with one another if the 'facts' and/or circumstances indicate.

Currently, base officials seem to 'automatically' rule out any correlation between any of the deaths. In a July 21, 1999 JDNews story their remarks included the notations: "None of these Marines were from the same unit, so no there's not link to them." and "There was no methodology by which the individuals died." That's Ridiculous! How much easier can these 'officials' make it for any 'criminal' who may be taking care of 'loose ends' that could 'expose' his crime? (You might be interested to know that Lance Cpl. Scott Potter's mother contacted Nichole and is 'positive' that her son was 'murdered'!)

If you have any questions or comments on this case, please feel free to e-mail Chris' sister, Nichole, at: titanone@adelphia.net

PTE GEOFF GRAY, BRITISH ARMY RLC (Jan. 28, 1984 - Sept. 17, 2001)

At the ripe ‘Old Age’ of 12, Geoff Gray decided that he wanted to join the Army and
serve his country. Growing up in a terraced house overlooking Victoria Park in east
London, with his father, (also named) Geoff, his mother, Diane, and brother, Adam,
Geoff, a bright lively young man with a zest for life, became a fine athlete. He was
declared “East London’s fastest man” when he won an allcomers’ 100m race at the Mile
End stadium in 1998. After leaving school, he badgered his father to take him to the
army’s recruiting office in the Strand and on his 17th Birthday his ‘Dream’ became reality
when he joined the British Army. But, on Sept. 17, 2001, just nine months later, that
‘Dream’ became his Family’s NIGHTMARE!

Geoff loved the first 12 weeks of training and wanted to work with computers in the
corps. He did well and was singled out for fast-track promotion through the army ranks,
following his Passing-out Parade, which was a proud day for the entire family.

Geoff was stationed at the Princess Royal Barracks, headquarters for the Royal Logistics
Corps in Deepcut, Surrey, UK and was scheduled to go to Hull, Sept. 21, 2001, to begin
heavy goods vehicle training.

Britain is America’s staunchest ally. On September 12, 2001, Geoff telephoned home to
tell his parents that Deepcut had been put on full alert following the events in America on
9-11.

At 2100, on Sept. 16, 2001, Pte. Gray reported for overnight guard duty. The first hour of
the shift was relatively uneventful. But, around 2200, while guarding the officers’ mess,
Geoff was involved in what reports describe as...an ‘incident’.

According to a statement from Lance Corporal (LCpl) Craig Filmer, second in command
of guard duty, that night, a civilian, a balding Irishman, who appeared to have been
drinking, tried to get into the compound and Geoff, who was later described as: “...a keen
and well-turned-out soldier even at this hour of the night.”, had challenged him and
refused admittance. After a lot of shouting and abusive language, the guards called LCpl
Filmer, who then also endured another 10 minutes of abuse before two officers in the
mess vouched for the Irishman, who was then allowed inside.

At 2300, Geoff went off duty for two hours before he restarted work for another shift at
0100.

At 0100, Pte Gray reported for duty and prepared to patrol the perimeter of the
compound. As the other privates, who were supposed to accompany him on patrol were
still having problems with dealing with the ‘incident’, earlier that night, Geoff went out
on his own.

At 0110, LCpl Filmer received two emergency calls from soldiers reporting that they had
heard “three shots in rapid succession”. Upon reporting to the guard hut, LCpl Filmer
learned that the only person who could not be accounted for was Pte Gray. LCpl Filmer
quickly organized a sweep of the base and led the first search party around the perimeter
fence.

At 0200, on Sept. 17, 2001, on the fifth sweep of the area, LCpl Filmer found Geoff’s
body by the perimeter fence. He was lying on his back with his SA80 rifle and five spent
cartridges by his side and two bullet holes in his head.

At 0930, the army priest and a captain from the Royal Logistics Corps (RLC), knocked on
the door at the home of Geoff’s parents. When Geoff’s mother, Diane, opened the door,
the officers refused to tell her why they were there, but insisted that her husband needed
to be called home.

While they waited, Diane started getting frantic as, by that time, she was sure that
something was wrong with her son. Finally, she couldn’t take it any more and pushing the
captain up against the wall she shouted: “Just tell me, is my son dead? Is he dead?” The
captain nodded and said it looked like a suicide...that he’d taken a gun to his head.

The following day, Geoff’s parents were asked to identify his body at the Frimley Park
Hospital in Camberley, Surrey.

Geoff and Diane Gray were given only the sketchiest of details about their son’s death.
They had been told that he’d been shot twice in the head and that his weapon was on
automatic so the bullets fired very rapidly, so when they visited Frimley Park Hospital, to
formally identify their son, they weren’t surprised to find that bandages had been wrapped
tightly around the top of his head. They were, however, quite confused and questioning of
the fact that it was clear that Geoff had a black eye, bruises on his chest and two red lines
around his neck. Though they were polite and supportive, the army representatives
refused to give the Grays any details as they said they didn’t want to prejudge the verdict
of the inquest at Woking Coroners’ Court on March 19, 2001. However, they left no
doubt that they believed Pte. Geoff Gray had committed suicide.

Geoff’s father had hopes that his son’s friends, who’d served with him, would be able to
tell him more about what had happened. On Sept. 27, 2001, more than 200 mourners,
including a vanload of Geoff’s comrades, turned up to pay their respects at a full military
service at St. John’s Church in Seaham. One of the young soldiers seemed particularly
upset and was seen crying at the funeral. Later, the young man approached Mr. Gray and
said: “I promise you, Geoff was not there. Don’t let this lie. One of us could be next...”,
but before Geoff’s father could ask for an explanation, an officer assembled the soldiers
and they left.

Because Geoff died at a military base, the Gray family assumed the investigation of his
death was the responsibility of the Special Investigation Branch (SIB) of the Royal
Military Police. Later, they learned that the Surrey police actually had jurisdiction over
the case.

There was virtually no contact between the Army and the Gray family from the time of
the funeral until the time of the inquest at Woking Coroners’ Court, some six months
later.

At the inquest, the Coroners Officer handed over papers that disclosed:
- that, though the base was on ‘full alert’, Geoff was patrolling the perimeter fence alone.
- that, Private Ben Morgan, a member of the search party, had reported hearing “the fence
rattle...as if someone was physically shaking it”.
- that, Geoff’s body was found 30cm from the perimeter fence on the fifth ‘sweep’ of said
fence.
- that, at no time was the search party out of arm’s length of the perimeter fence.
- that, while LCpl Filmer was inspecting Geoff’s body, he heard someone climbing over
the fence of the cricket pitch in the distance.
- that, soldiers at the front gate saw someone run across the cricket pitch which adjoins
the officers’ mess compound, just moments before Geoff’s body was found.
- that, Geoff’s rifle was lying about half a meter away from his feet.
- that, Geoff’s rifle, contrary to previous reports, was NOT on automatic.
- that, witnesses reported hearing three gun shots.
- that, five spent cartridges were found beside Geoff’s body.
- that, Geoff’s rifle hadn’t been examined by a ballistics expert or anyone in forensics.
- that, there was no medical explanation for Geoff’s black eye, the bruises on his chest or
the red lines on his neck.
- that, the two shots to Geoff’s forehead had entry wounds above each eye and separate
exit wounds at the back of his head.
- that, either bullet would have killed him.

At the end of the four-hour hearing, the coroner, Michael Burgess, recorded an ‘open
verdict’ and pointedly stated: “I do not find that he took his own life.”

Incredulously, the Army maintains that Pte Geoff Gray committed suicide. Defense
Minister, Dr. Lewis Monnie, asserts that the coroner’s report “has no military influence”
in a SIB investigation that had not “found anything of a suspicious nature.”

If there isn’t anything ‘suspicious’ about Geoff’s death, then...is it ‘strange’ that on March
23, 2002, the body of Pte James Collinson, 17, from Perth, Scotland, was discovered less
than 200 yards from where Geoff’s body was found with a single bullet hole in his head?

Pte Collinson, had been guarding the same gate that Geoff had, on the night he died, and
had gone outside for a cigarette. When his mother viewed his body, she noted that he had
two black eyes and a broken nose. In spite of that, by April 12, 2002, Pte Collinson’s
family was being told to: “Look into his past to find out what drove him to do it.”!

Due to political and media pressure, generated by these two families, the Surrey Police
announced, on April 29, 2002, that both of these cases would be reinvestigated.

In a further twist of fate, the Surrey Police have decided to reinvestigate the deaths of:
- Pte Sean Benton, 20, of Hastings, East Sussex, found with five gunshot wounds in the
head and chest (four from long range and one close up) while on guard at Deepcut
perimeter fence and
- Pte Cheryl James, 17, from Llangollen, Wales, found just outside the perimeter of the
Deepcut barracks with a bullet hole in her head while on guard duty....whose deaths were
ruled as ‘Suicide’ by the military.

Geoff’s parents, Geoff and Diane, are campaigning for a public inquiry into the death of
their son and a growing number of other questionable military deaths. They have
established a web site at: http://www.justice4ptegeoffgray.co.uk/main.htm and you are
urged to visit and support this: “CRY FOR THE TRUTH”!

* Visitors...watch for the MAMMA posting: 9-11 = WAR? and decide for yourself if
joint military maneuvers and training exercises have spread the ‘Virus of Violence’ from
the U.S. military’s Mind Manipulation Program (MMP)...AKA LtCol Dave Grossman’s
“Killology”.

PTE JAMES COLLINSON, BRITISH ARMY RLC (Dec. 4, 1984 - March 23, 2002)

When he was ten years old, James Collinson told his Mum and Dad he wanted to be a soldier. His parents, Jim and Yvonne, were not surprised as James had always been inquisitive and loved the outdoor life. At the age of twelve, he had added an extra year onto his age in order to join the local Army cadet force…he knew the entry age was thirteen!! He went on to thoroughly enjoy cadets and gained the Bronze and then the Silver Duke of Edinburgh awards and he intended to go onto the Gold award when he was eighteen. James’ determination also earned him the rank of sergeant!

His experiences in cadets re-enforced his desire to join the army and against the odds (James was severely dyslexic) he passed his GCSEs and left school at the age of sixteen. Within six weeks he had passed his army entrance exams and was over the moon at the prospect of fulfilling his lifetime dream of serving his country.

On September 10th 2001 James achieved his goal and left home to become a soldier. The very next day, he called home with the shocking news of the atrocities in New York and to say that his training camp was on a heightened state of alert. This is what he had joined the army for, to be a part of the establishment which would protect the innocent from such attacks.

James completed his first phase training and very proudly passed out (the equivalent of the ‘Pass in Review’ in the United States) at Pirbright (Surrey, England) on 18th January 2002. He spent a week’s leave with his family in Scotland before returning to Surrey, this time to Deepcut Army training camp. Within a few weeks of being there, he passed his driving test and was making plans to buy his first car. He spent time boasting to his Dad about his forthcoming H.G.V. training course, which he was about to begin, and was talking eagerly about visiting his Dad and sister in Scotland in time for her 11th birthday party at Easter time.

The evening of the 22nd of March, saw James Collinson with his Mum looking on the Internet for a car and seeking insurance quotes for them. James stayed overnight with his Mum, spent hours on the morning of 23rd March making sure his uniform was in pristine condition for his guard duty that evening, (which he had volunteered to do for a colleague) and chatting about his plans to meet up with his old school friends back in Scotland during the forthcoming Easter weekend. He ate a good lunch, as he always did, and sat laughing at a comedy film with his Mum before she drove him back to Deepcut at 3pm. "Bye Mum, see you in a fortnight" he called as he walked off into the camp. Less than seven hours later he was dead.

On the morning of Sunday, 24th March 2002, an army representative knocked on his father’s door to tell him James had died as the result of a tragic accident. A single shot to the head had killed him.

His mother also had an Army representative call on her with a letter from the commanding officer of Deepcut. The letter explained that James had been on guard duty and had borrowed a rifle from another soldier in order to do a roaming patrol. It said he had walked off alone and a few moments later a shot was heard. James’ lifeless body was discovered soon after. However, the letter did not explain that James was too young to have possession of a loaded weapon while on guard duty (he was 17yrs and 3 months old). He was issued only with a torch loaded with batteries that night. It also did not explain why soldiers are permitted to do roaming patrols alone with guns they had borrowed from their colleagues! SERIOUS BREACHES OF ORDERS! His mother asked the two army representatives how this could be…. they shrugged their shoulders and replied " we don’t know what these guys get up to out there at night".

In the midst of deep shock, James’ mother asked them if they were trying to say James had shot himself. Again another shrug of the shoulders with the comment: " we can only tell you what we have been told, you have to draw your own conclusions". "Where is James? Can I go and sit with him? I need to see him, to be with him," she pleaded. "Sorry, but we don’t actually know where he is at the moment. His body was removed from the camp last night, but we don’t know where it was taken to" was the reply! The next day, his mother received a call from the coroner’s officer to say that James had been taken to a nearby hospital mortuary, which was partly run by the M.O.D. She asked again if she could see him but was told that wasn’t possible as he was about to have a postmortem carried out, but the coroner’s officer needed to ask a few identifying questions about James including asking about his missing teeth…" James has no teeth missing, you must have made a mistake, you’ve got the wrong boy!"… his mum replied hopefully, only to be told that he must have lost them in the trauma of the shot!

Eventually on the 27th of March James’ mum was permitted to say goodbye to her elder son. Before entering the room in which James lay, his mum was instructed not to uncover his body. The sight of her boy lying on a mortuary slab is beyond words. He was draped in a purple velvet cover with his badly bruised eyes only partially closed and his mouth open enough to see that all his teeth were still intact! His head was heavily bandaged and his face swollen.

Back in Scotland, James’ dad had been persuaded by the Army representative against traveling down to Surrey to see his son. He was told that James would soon be back home in preparation for his Military Funeral. Jim eventually got to see James on the 29th of March, almost a week after his death. Jim and Yvonne were in total disbelief that their boy would or could have deliberately taken his own life. They considered postponing the funeral in order to arrange an independent postmortem to take place, but regrettably they decided to allow their son to be buried as arranged with the belief that their son’s death would be being thoroughly investigated.

The funeral was very fitting. The service was held in a newly built modern church situated near the football fields where James would watch his younger brother play football on Sunday mornings. His fellow soldiers took him to his grave through a Guard of Honor formed by the local cadets whom he served with. One young cadet played ‘The Last Lament’ as his coffin was lowered to its resting place. James was laid to rest on the 3rd of April 2002, two days after his sister’s 11th birthday which he was so looking forward to.

By April 5th, Jim Collinson decided to phone an officer at Deepcut to ask how the investigation into his son’s death was developing. "What investigation sir? There was one bullet, one body, you can draw your own conclusions" was his reply! The next few days were spent telephoning every police station in the Surrey area trying to find a police officer who might know something about James’ death and any civilian investigation into it. After leaving messages, there was a response from Surrey police who sent an officer out to take a statement from Yvonne…. he left with more questions than he arrived with.

Jim and Yvonne made contact with the parents of Geoff Gray; he had also been killed at Deepcut six months before James. Both boys had been on guard duty at the same gate, both had been doing a roaming patrol of the same perimeter fence, both died within yards of each other, both with gunshot wounds to the head….only Geoff had two shots, one to each side of his head and either one would have been fatal!

On the 29th of April, after considerable pressure from both sets of parents, Surrey police stepped up the investigation into James’ death and reopened the investigation into Geoff Gray’s death. They later learned that there have been two other deaths at the same camp in 1995. Though the army maintains that both deaths are suicides, the Surrey police will also be reinvestigating their deaths. This is good because these cases shout the question: “Why does it fall to the Family of a possible HOMOCIDE VICTIM to disprove a ‘Suicide’ ruling, when the powers that be never even considered anything else?”

So...’What is wrong with this picture’?
- All of these young soldiers were on ‘Guard Duty’.
- The ‘security’ of the facility (an Army Base entrusted with national security) they were
guarding requires armed guards.
- During the performance of their ‘Duty’ as ‘Guards’, they are found...shot to death.
- ‘Manner’ of death, for each of these young people, is immediately ruled: ‘SUICIDE!’??
- No one questioned the possibility that there was a breach of security and/or that these soldiers were killed...’in the line of duty’.
(Perhaps the base doesn’t need armed guards after all. It would seem that criminals, either on or off base, have nothing to fear from young ‘suicidal’ guards!)

In October 2002, James’ body was exhumed for a second postmortem. The final results of
this are eagerly awaited. Jim and Yvonne will continue to campaign, along with the other
families, to ensure that justice is served for their children.

For additional information and updates on James Collinson’s situation, and the other situations of the families, frequently referred to as the ‘Deepcut Four’, you are encouraged to visit the Homepage at: www.justice4james.co.uk. Also, feel free to Email James’ mother at: yvonne.collinson@blueyonder.co.uk or his dad at: jmc1962@blueyonder.co.uk

Seaman HARVEY RAY LUCAS, US NAVY (May 6, 1938 - June 17, 1985)

Harvey Lucas served his country, in the Navy, from 1956-1960. Harvey served aboard the USS Calhoun County, a LST-519 Class Tank Landing Ship, which was regularly deployed to ‘dump’ Radioactive waste.

During one of these deployments, some of the barrels rolled off the pallets that were on deck and landed on top of Harvey, injuring his back. When his ‘tour’ of duty was over, the Navy wouldn’t allow him to re-enlist, noting he was “physically unfit” for duty and he was Honorably Discharged. But, in addition to his back injury he was suffering from radiogenetic disease.

By 1980, Harvey was completely physically disabled and unable to work. Bone degeneration had set in and his bone marrow was disintegrating within his body. X-rays showed that at the age of 41, his bones were that of a 95-96 year old man and he had developed ‘tumors’ from one of the rarest forms of cancer known to man. A cancer that is induced by radioactivity from atomic wastes, iodizing radiation, nuclear warfare or cobalt poisoning and results in damaging bone, skin, eyes...etc. and life itself. An 11 pound tumor was removed from Harvey in 1984 and at the time of his death, in 1985, he was inflicted by a 34 pound tumor.

The Lucas Family can prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that what Harvey R. Lucas was
subjected to in 4 years of military service, not only endangered and ultimately took his own life but also injured his genetic offspring. Harvey fathered five (5) children, who were all born with severe birth defects caused by radiogenetic diseases.

In November of 1960, Harvey Lucas, in love and eager to start a family, married a remarkable young woman named Barbara Ann Dutcher, who bore him five children and came to fully realize and appreciate the wedding vows of: ‘for better, for worse, in sickness and in health’!

On August 13, 1961, Harvey and Barbara heralded the arrival of their first child, a daughter, whom they named Barbara Sue (Susie) Lucas. The couple was caught off guard when they learned that Susie had been born with a skin disease, eye problems, bone and muscle problems and a host of additional health problems. Their second child, also a daughter, who was born on June 29, 1963 and whom they named Patricia Ann Lucas, fared even worse. Dubbed the “female monster”, the child was born without a spine, without a neck and without a brain and she lived for only 20 minutes!

Ignorant of the radiogenetic disease and trusting in God, Harvey and Barbara continued trying to have a ‘healthy’ child, but none of their three additional children were blessed with a ‘clean bill of health’.

Harvey and Barbara’s first son, whom they named Richard Ray Lucas, was born in 1964 with learning, speech, hearing, eye and a host of other disabilities.

In 1971, another son was born to Harvey and Barbara and the proud parents named him Harvey Ray Lucas, after his father. This son was also severely retarded and physically handicapped with skin, bone and muscle diseases. Harvey is now over 31 years old and is
unable to take care of himself...he can’t even spell his own name.

Lastly, but certainly not least of the five children born to Harvey and Barbara Lucas, another daughter arrived and they named her Jeanine Renee’ Lucas. As a child, Jeanine suffered with growths on her body that required removal. When efforts to freeze them off failed, doctors tried to burn them off. When burning also failed to alleviate the problem, the growths, over 300 of them, were cut off! In addition to the growths, Jeanine suffers with knee and bone deformities, eye problems and cysts, as well as thyroid and heart problems.

Following Harvey’s death from such a ‘rare’ form of cancer in 1985, Channel 7, a news station in Colorado, interviewed his wife Barbara and asked her what she would miss the most about Harvey. Her reply: “The tickle in his eye, how he loved people and how he loved his country, never once being bitter for what they did to him.”

Barbara notes: “My husband gave 4 years of military service to his country only to have them turn their back on him?? I...will always remember what President John F. Kennedy said...’Don’t ask what your Country can do for you but what you can do for your Country’ and all I have to show for my husband’s military service is what the U.S. Government gave me...a folded flag and children with birth defects.”

The Lucas family has learned that 192 men, who served aboard the USS Calhoun County,
have the same health problems. Most have resulted in short life spans and genetic errors that resulted in children suffering from birth defects.

Given the fact that none of these men were ever given protective gear, change some names and some circumstances and the following article by Richard Stott, published in the Sunday Mirror on June 10, 2002, seems to be a 'Taylor Made" accounting of these families' 'plight' and a depiction of a ‘scene’ equitable to life in the United States:

CURSE OF THE A-BOMB: THE LETHAL LEGACY: Scandal shames all of us

Sunday Mirror Date 06/10/2002

Byline RICHARD STOTT

WHENEVER there is talk of war, Prime Ministers are quick to express their undying admiration for Our Boys.

Defence ministers mutter pious platitudes about their duty of care before waving our servicemen off to a hero's fate. Geoff Hoon was at it again last week in Blackpool.

On their return the politicians take the salute, heap lavish praise on the warriors' courage, play God Save The Queen and remind everyone their feats of bravery will never be forgotten by a grateful nation. Then they forget them.

The scandal of the nuclear test guinea pigs is a lasting and ignominious stain on Britain and 14 successive governments, Labour and Conservative. They have not just turned their backs on the suffering of servicemen exposed to radiation, they have consistently ignored mounting evidence and condemned men, women and children of four generations to face lengthy, agonising, humiliating and poverty stricken deaths.

We have known for half a century that the National Servicemen who witnessed the South Pacific atom bomb tests may well have been exposed to unacceptable doses of radiation, the consequences of which then could only be guessed at. When the Prime Minister, Winston Churchill, was told of the possible genetic time bomb these men were being asked to detonate, his reply was simple, stark and chilling. "A pity, but we cannot help it," he said.

In the ensuing half century every other country involved in the tests - Australia, the United States and New Zealand - have accepted responsibility for the servicemen they have sentenced to life-threatening illness or worse. British governments have sat on their hands, ducked, dived, bent the evidence, ignored both statistics and common sense and lied about what happened in those terrible years in the South Seas.

CIVIL servants have misled ministers and ministers have been too lazy and incompetent to find out the facts for themselves.

Tony Blair is no exception. He trots out the old guff about a full inquiry by the National Radiological Protection Board revealing there is no evidence of excessive illness or mortality among the veterans as a group. But for every column of figures produced by the Ministry of Defence, there is another set produced by equally eminent scientists and statisticians proving the opposite.

What we do know is the NRPB's chief scientist insisted there was no connection between
manmade radiation and cancer. Utter nonsense, as Hiroshima, Chernobyl and the hideous deformities of generations of people living in the Soviet nuclear test zones of Siberia bear grim witness. We also know the illnesses suffered by these unfortunate people are remarkably similar to those displayed by the veterans and their descendants.

We know too of the MoD's appalling record of care for its servicemen, from its reaction to Gulf War Syndrome to its failure to conduct a proper inquiry into the deaths of four young soldiers at Deepcut barracks. We know it is so desperate to avoid accepting responsibility for the nuclear veterans that it refused a war widow's pension to the wife of a young RAF pilot ordered to fly a Canberra through a Pacific bomb test mushroom cloud in the 1950s. Flight Lieutenant Eric Denson received the equivalent radiation dose of 6,500 full body X-rays.

He developed allergies, terrible sneezing bouts, personality disorders and wild mood swings. The first time he tried to kill himself, his wife Shirley caught him trying to burn holes in his chest with a cigarette because he thought it might banish the pain in his head. There were other suicide attempts and he threatened to kill the whole family with an axe before finally killing himself in 1976. Shirley was refused a war widow's pension, the MoD arguing that her husband going mad had nothing to do with flying through the cloud. Even though depression is a well-known symptom of radiation poisoning.

The result of the MoD's secrecy and intransigence was that Shirley had no money, brought her three girls up on her own and now lives in a charity flat. Eventually a pensions' appeal tribunal decided Eric's depression WAS down to his service career and rejected the MoD's claim. This is a typical example of the ministry's pitiless determination to go to any lengths to avoid its duty of care obligations to the dwindling band of Pacific test National Servicemen.

I have been writing about this disgraceful blot on Britain's conscience for nearly 20 years now. Many of the veterans' children were born with limbs missing or unformed, others contracted cancers. They are all long dead. Kids like John McLeod who lived to the age of three with terrible deformities, Trevor Harris, whose bones crumbled to dust, John McCormack, who died from kidney cancer ...and so many others. Their gravestones bear silent witness to the callous cynicism of an army of ministers long forgotten but unforgiven. Those were the second generation to die, we have now reached the fourth. The statistics - from both sides - tumble out like bodies tipped from an unddertaker's cart. Yet as far back as the 1960s it became clear in Japan that a second generation was suffering from radiation effects caused by the atom bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. A death certificate study of 455 of 608 members of the Nuclear Test Veterans' Association showed that an accelerated death rate from possible radiation cancers was reported among two-thirds of them. The average age at death was 56. Spina bifida had increased among the second generation and twice as many men reported infertility problems than was the case in the UK as a whole.

NONETHELESS Tony Blair's government continues blandly to defend the indefensible. There are countless examples of men driven to suicide by the accident of national service that put them in the wrong place at the wrong time.

We have deserted them in their hours of need and it is shaming for all of us. As today's revelations show, there is now evidence that a fourth generation is being conceived with fearful abnormalities. We cannot in all conscience allow this to continue without taking responsibility for the fearful mistakes of our grandfathers.

Just before he was shot, President Kennedy urged the US Senate to ratify the test ban treaty with this chilling warning. The number of children and grandchildren with cancer in their bones, or with leukaemia in their blood, or poison in their lungs may be statistically small, he said, "but this is not a natural health hazard - and it is not a statistical issue. The loss of even one human life, or the malformation of even one baby - who may be born long after we are gone - should be of concern to us all. Our children and grandchildren are not merely statistics towards which we can be indifferent."

In Britain we have been indifferent. Our leaders have been cruel, uncaring, uncomprehending. All because they didn't want to admit that radiation can inflict the most horrible injuries and deaths. They won't admit it because nuclear energy is too important for the suffering of little people to matter or for government to admit they made such catastrophic mistakes with an unknown monster half a century ago.

But real leaders face up to horror, they don't try and bury it or confuse with reams of questionable statistics.

There have been too many funerals already, not only of the test veterans, but of their children and their grandchildren.

HOW many more generations of the damned will our politicians allow to suffer before they accept the calamities of their predecessors and the consequences of their own cowardice?

In a very few years there will be no nuclear test veterans left - old soldiers are fading away fast now. Often in terrible pain. Frequently alone. Certainly in a poverty ordained by a government that continues to deny the nightmare repercussions of an experiment that destroyed them and those who came after them.

And remember, lest we forget, that it is all done in our name. We have turned away from the generations we have condemned to walk with the ever present fear of deformity, insanity, cancer, leukaemia and early death. And we have condemned them to do it without the cash help they so desperately need.

That is how we really express our admiration for Our Boys. That is how we demonstrate our Duty of Care.

Every man and woman in this country should be ashamed we tolerate such a legacy. And elect governments that bring hope of justice in opposition only to deny it in power.
(Our thanks to Mr. Gerard Couzens, Sunday Mirror, for supplying ‘Copy’ of this article.)

The fact that Mr. Stott notes (in the 5th paragraph) that the United States has "...accepted
responsibility for the service men they sentenced to life-threatening illness or worse.", though totally erroneous...is a testimonial to how well the US military and the DoD (Department of Defense) have gotten at making a 'display' of high profile situations, while the 'little guy' (AKA individual plights) is left out in the cold!

Lest you doubt that the citizenry of the United States should be just as “...ashamed we tolerate such a legacy.”, please, consider two more ‘papers’, presented here for your consideration of content:
- First up...a Sept. 20, 2000 CBS news story out of Los Angeles that was prompted by Rep. Michael Thompson, D-CA, when he noted: “The veterans who participated need to be identified and located. They need to be tested and interviewed to see if they are suffering any health problems as a result of these tests.” (This piece is augmented by an excerpt from an August 3, 2000 letter to: The Honorable William S. Cohen, Secretary of Defense, from: The Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Washington, Hershel W. Gober, Acting.)
- Secondly... the June 17, 2002, Statement of Kent D. Hill, Director, Kansas City VAMC, to the U.S. House of Representatives.

On August 3, 2000, Hershel W. Gober, Acting Secretary of Veterans Affairs wrote:

The Honorable William S. Cohen
Secretary of Defense
Washington, DC 20301-1000

Dear Mr. Secretary:

    The purpose of this letter is to seek your assistance in obtaining information needed to assist veterans and their survivors with claims associated with involvement in the long-term project named Project SHAD> SHAD, as we understand it, stands for “Shipboard Hazard and Defense.”

    A member of the Veterans Benefits Administration’s Compensation and Pension Service attended a meeting at the Pentagon n this issue in February 1998. At that time, it was determined that much of the material relating to these activities remains classified. Since we were able to award benefits to the claimant who formed the basis of the meeting, our investigation of this issue was not pursued at that time. Recently, Congressman Mike Thompson has also raised this issue. Therefore, we seek your assistance.

    Our understanding of this project is that it occurred over some period of time in which various simulant and active agents, e.g. chemical, biological, or nuclear, were used. We understand that much like nuclear tests, SHAD may have involved a series of independent studies, one of which was titled “Autumn Gold.”

    So that we can execute our mandated obligations to assist veterans who have or believe they have disabilities resulting from their service in Project SHAD, I request that the Department of Defense provide information. The information we seek is provided in the enclosure to this letter.

    I invite you to provide any other information, in addition to what is requested in the enclosure, that you believe would be helpful in adjudicating these claims.

    I look forward to your assistance in this matter. I believe it is essential that each of our Departments work cooperatively in this matter to assure the confidence of the American people and the Congress in our ability to deal with this issue.

This was followed by 10 Department of Veterans Affairs requests for the Department of
Defense to provide information concerning Project SHAD.

Then cbsnews.cbs.com released:

==> Pentagon To Reveal Biowarfare Tests
* Will Release The Names Of Those Tested In The 1960s
* Thousands Of Servicemen Sprayed With Chemicals
* Dept. Of Veterans Affairs Trying To Get More Information

LOS ANGELES, Sept. 20, 2000

DOD/CBS Veterans have repeatedly tried to get information about the experiments, with no success.

CBS News has learned that the names of servicemen who were sprayed with chemicals decades ago in U.S. military germ warfare tests will be turned over to the Department of
Veterans Affairs.

CBS News Correspondent Vince Gonzales reports that during the 1960s, the Pentagon conducted more than 100 secret biological warfare tests at sea. As CBS News first reported back in May, in two of those tests, code-named "Autumn Gold" and "Copper Head," more than a thousand U.S. sailors were sprayed with materials once thought to be harmless.

Many of those sailors-some of whom claim they were subjected to the test without their consent and were never told what it involved-feel their health has been damaged.

In addition to the names of those tested, the Pentagon also will provide a list of all the tests and the biological and chemical agents used.

But according to a letter from the Dept. of Veterans Affairs (VA) to the Pentagon, obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, the VA requested a lot more, including classified medical records. The two departments are currently negotiating over what will be released.

Federal officials Wednesday briefed veterans' groups about efforts to get the Pentagon to
release more details of the tests. Veterans like Robert Bates, who has a variety of health
problems, have repeatedly tried to get information about the experiments with no success. "I was told flat by the VA.'No, that never happened,'" he said. In 1996, Pentagon officials told the VA "they do not possess" any information about the tests. Two years later, they admitted having "15 bound volumes relating to Autumn Gold alone."

The VA agreed to be interviewed for this story, then backed out, saying it didn't want to derail negotiations with the Pentagon. Officials who hope to check the sailors' claims called the deal a good first step but say it could be months before the VA has the names and can contact those veterans.

"The veterans who participated need to be identified and located. They need to be tested and interviewed to see if they are suffering any health problems as a result of these tests," said Rep. Michael Thompson, D.-Calif. Autumn Gold took place off Hawaii in 1963. Copper Head was a similar operation off Newfoundland.

According to a Pentagon briefing film about the tests, the goal was to test the vulnerability of Navy ships to germ warfare attack. Sailors were sprayed with BG, a bacteria considered harmless by the military that is used to simulate the deadly anthrax germ, and then with zinc cadmium sulfide. Zinc cadmium sulfide compound was thought to be safe, but the military later stopped outdoor spraying. Cadmium compounds are now known to be carcinogenic to humans.

In large doses, BG can also be harmful: in rare cases, it has caused pneumonia, allergic reactions, nausea and vomiting. In 1988, an Army biologist recommended BG spraying "be discontinued" because the claim it "is not dangerous" is "patently erroneous."

Target Ships Operation Autumn Gold * USS Navarro APA 215 * USS Carpenter DD 825
* USS Hoel DDG 13 * USS Tioga County LST 1158 *Lab Ship:USS Granville S. Hall
YAG 40

Operation Copper Head * USS Power DD 839

In documents previously obtained by CBS News, sailors on the "target ships" in the tests are called "test subjects." Only eight men wore gas masks. They were the "control group" in this experiment. Other crewmen were ordered to give throat swabs or gargle samples.

In a written statement the Pentagon replied in May that the sailors "were not exposed to any harmful chemical and biological compound" and they all "were fully informed about the details of each test."

Dozens of sailors interviewed dispute that. Medical corpsmen on vessels involved in one of the tests say and ships' logs indicate an upsurge in upper respiratory tract infections after the test and some cases of nausea, possibly a reaction to BG.
Copyright 2000, CBS Worldwide Inc., All Rights Reserved.

**********************************************************************

Statement of

Kent D. Hill, Director, Kansas City VAMC

Veterans Health Administration

Department of Veterans Affairs

Before the

Subcommittee on Health

Committee on Veterans Affairs

U. S. House of Representatives

June 17, 2002

Chairman and Members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today on the efforts of the Departments of Defense (DoD) and Veterans Affairs (VA) to provide health care information and support to veterans who were exposed to environmental hazards during military service. Accompanying me today is Dr. Susan Mather, Chief Officer, VA Office of Public Health and Environmental Hazards, and Mr. Robert Epley, Associate Deputy Under Secretary for Policy and Program Management.

War and training for war have always exposed America's men and women in uniform to a wide variety of health hazards. Each war in the last century has produced unique hazardous exposures. In World War I, chemical warfare agents, including chlorine and mustard gas, were used. World War II saw the first deployment of nuclear weapons. Korea exposed many American POWs to psychological brainwashing techniques and to extremely cold weather conditions. The widespread use of herbicides during the Vietnam War is now associated with several adverse health effects. Military personnel encounter a broad array of environmental hazards, infectious disease, and psychological health risks any time they deploy outside the United States.

During peacetime, America's Armed Forces prepare for health hazards through research and by developing better preventive measures and conducting appropriate training. Many of these efforts have been well publicized, while others have been conducted in secret. For example, the testing of nuclear weapons during the Cold War exposed many American veterans to increased levels of radiation. Similarly, VA became aware in 1991 of approximately 4,000 American servicemen who had been exposed to high concentrations of mustard gas in both study chambers and field tests as a part of a larger chemical defense research program begun in World War II. In response, the National Academy of Sciences assessed the medical literature on health effects from those exposures, leading to new VA compensation regulations.

Following the Gulf War in 1991, Congress identified thirty-three separate hazardous substances to which Gulf War veterans may have been exposed. Public Laws 105-277 (signed Oct. 21, 1998) and 105-368 (signed Nov. 11, 1998) required VA to establish an
agreement with the National Academy of Science to review and evaluate the medical literature on possible health outcomes from these exposures. The first phase of this study was published in 2000 and additional studies are underway. In addition, extensive analysis has been conducted to determine the potential health effects of exposure to sarin and cyclosarin at Khamisiyah following the Gulf War.

Most recently, VA became aware of the exposure of an undetermined number of U.S. service members to a variety of biological and chemical agents in secret tests called Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense) conducted during the 1960s.

Because of this long history of hazardous exposures of U.S. military populations, we must carefully examine our methods for identifying exposed veterans, studying the potential effects of the contaminants, and for providing our veterans with appropriate health care and deserved disability compensation.

In the past, VA has established special programs for specific groups of veterans potentially exposed to environmental health hazards. For instance, VA responded to Gulf War health issues through a comprehensive program of health care, research, outreach, and special compensation for "undiagnosed illnesses." About 12 percent (84,000) Gulf War veterans have participated in a clinical registry program. The principal finding from this clinical evaluation program is that these veterans are suffering from a wide variety of recognized illnesses that respond to conventional treatments. Subsequent research studies have supported these findings, as have similar results from studies conducted in the United Kingdom and Canada among their Gulf War veteran populations.

Although special programs are useful, VA has learned many lessons since the Gulf War and is now taking a more pro-active approach in establishing policy and programs that will address environmental health concerns as early as possible.

Lessons Learned

Clinical Practice Guidelines
Special clinical programs, such as the Gulf War Registry reach only a limited number of eligible veterans. Therefore, the VA, in cooperation with DoD, has taken concrete steps to better understand and to routinely manage post-deployment health problems. A further goal is to improve veterans' satisfaction with their health care. VA is using an evidence-based approach to develop clinical practice guidelines for the evaluation of military veterans following hazardous deployments. Just completed in collaboration with DoD are a "Post-Deployment Health Evaluation and Management Guideline" and a second clinical practice guideline for unexplained fatigue and muscle pain, which was recently released. These guidelines will provide VA physicians with the best medical practices for dealing with veterans following deployment. A clinical guideline for PTSD, now in the planning stage, will be the next step in the development of a sound strategy for the screening, assessment, and care of all veterans returning from military deployments.

The regular use of standardized clinical practice guidelines that outline the best medical practices will decrease the need for ad hoc registries. Troops will be specifically screened early in the primary health care setting for illnesses that may be related to a military deployment. The Gulf War registry programs only reached a minority of veterans and the clinical findings from examinations of self-selected populations were difficult to interpret. In contrast, the post-deployment clinical practice guidelines will ensure that the health problems of all veterans returning from hazardous deployments are addressed whenever they seek care in the DoD or VA health systems. These new Guidelines will give VA primary care providers the tools they need to diagnose and treat veterans who had participated in hazardous deployments.

War-Related Illness and Injury Study Centers (WRIISC)
For veterans with severe symptoms that remain unexplained after examination, the local VA physician can refer them to one of VA's two War-Related Illness and Injury Study Centers (WRIISC) (formerly known as Centers for the Study of War Related Illnesses). Many of these veterans are concerned that their illnesses are related to environmental hazards they encountered during deployment. The two Centers are located at the VA medical centers in Washington, DC, and East Orange, NJ. They are charged with identifying current effective treatments, developing new treatments, providing environmental hazard health risk communication to veterans and their families, and promoting education for VA health care personnel on the "difficult-to-diagnose" illnesses found among veterans from all military deployments.

Veterans Health Initiative/Independent Study Guides
Recognizing the need to educate health care providers about the unique medical care needs and concerns of veterans -- including the effects of environmental hazards -- VA began an ongoing training program known as the Veterans Health Initiative. Two key products are our independent study guides "A Guide to Gulf War Veterans' Health," and "Vietnam Veterans and Agent Orange Exposure." In addition, VA has developed other new independent study guides on a broad range of unique veteran health issues, including Cold Injury, Hearing Impairment, Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), Prisoner of War (POW), Radiation, Spinal Cord Injury, Visual Impairment, and Traumatic Amputation and Prosthetics.

Enhanced Outreach
The Gulf War emphasized to us the value to veterans and their families of timely access to reliable information about the environmental health risks during military deployment. Acting on these lessons, VA developed a new brochure that addresses common health concerns for military service in Afghanistan and South Asia. It answers questions about health care and eligibility for VA benefits that veterans, their families, and their health care providers will have following this military deployment in the war on terrorism. The brochure also describes relevant medical care programs that VA has developed in anticipation of the health needs of veterans returning from combat and peacekeeping missions abroad. This outreach material has been distributed to all VAMCs and Regional Offices.

Project SHAD

The recent revelations concerning a series of Cold War tests known as Project SHAD reinforces the potential environmental hazards that our military forces face. This project was part of a DoD chemical and biological warfare test program conducted between 1963 and 1970 to evaluate the vulnerabilities of U.S. warships to attacks with chemical or biological warfare agents. Project SHAD exposed veterans to potentially harmful biological and chemical agents.

VA first learned of SHAD when a veteran filed a claim for service connection for disabilities he felt were related to his participation in Project SHAD. In two meetings held with DoD in late 1997, VA was advised that all material was classified and access to material was not assured and could only be given on a case-by-case basis. VA was able to grant that particular veteran's claim without reliance on classified information.

In May 2000, the Under Secretary for Benefits responded to a Congressional inquiry requesting assistance for veterans involved in Project SHAD. A VA/DoD workgroup was subsequently established and met the first time in October 2000. Since that time, DoD and VA have worked together collaboratively to develop the facts surrounding Project SHAD.

DoD began the formal process of declassification, compiling rosters of participants, and providing VA with names and service numbers of test participants. Initially, information was provided for 1,149 veterans involved in the tests Autumn Gold, Copper Head, and Shady Grove. Over a period of several months, VBA engaged in the labor intensive task of identifying the participants of those three tests identified initially. The social security numbers of 703 veterans were found. Using social security numbers, VA worked through the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health to obtain from IRS the current addresses for 622 of these individuals. On May 21, 2002, outreach letters were mailed to the 622 identified participants involved in the three initial tests.

VA has initiated a significant outreach program to contact Project SHAD veterans once they are located. For SHAD veterans we have so far been unable to identify, VA has established a SHAD Hotline (at 1-800-749-8387), Internet web-site (at www.va.gov/SHAD), and e-mail address (at SHADHELPLINE@VBA.VA.GOV). The VA Internet website provides veterans with information currently available and a link to DoD's web page. To date, approximately 260 SHAD hotline inquiries and 43 e-mail messages have been received. Approximately 14 SHAD related claims for service connection are currently pending.

Since the beginning of calendar year 2002, DoD has provided VA with information on nine additional tests. Information on three tests was provided in January:
    ·    Eager Bell I
    ·    Eager Bell II
    ·    Scarlet Sage
VA received information on six additional tests in May of this year:
    ·    Fearless Johnny
    ·    Flower Drum Phase I
    ·    Flower Drum Phase II
    ·    Purple Sage
    ·    DTC Test 68-50
    ·    DTC Test 69-32

DoD has identified one hundred and three potential SHAD tests. However, the number of tests actually conducted is unknown. Furthermore, the total number of service members involved in these tests is not known at this time. Unfortunately, the number of veterans who participated in multiple tests, the names of those tests, and the potentially harmful agents to which they may have been exposed cannot be determined until all relevant documentation has been collected, reviewed, and declassified.

DoD continues to review documentation and declassify additional SHAD tests. As names
and service numbers or social security numbers are provided, VA will conduct the efforts
required to identify the individuals who participated in these tests and then to locate their
current address. We will engage in an aggressive outreach program to provide
appropriate information to SHAD veterans.

Project SHAD information has been provided to VA medical staff through annual publication of Information Letters from VA's Under Secretary for Health. The Information Letters provide VA health care personnel with background information on Project SHAD, along with information about the potential short- and long-term health effects of the specific chemical and biological agents that DoD tells us were used in these tests. This information has been made available on our SHAD web site at www.va.gov/SHAD, including the information letter and other relevant information. As more information becomes available, satellite video-conferences are planned to broadcast relevant information to all VA health care facilities.

In addition, VA will begin to work with the National Personnel Records Center in St. Louis to review personnel and medical files for individuals listed as participants in tests for whom we have been unsuccessful in finding social security numbers. This represents approximately half of all the known participants provided to date. We are not particularly optimistic that this search will be fruitful but we believe that it represents a possible source of at least a few numbers otherwise unknown.

Importantly, a contract with the Medical Follow-up Agency of the National Academy of Sciences is being developed to include a formal epidemiological study of mortality and morbidity among SHAD participants. In contrast to a clinical registry, which cannot provide scientific data, this independent study will give us the clearest picture of the health status of SHAD veterans and tell us whether their health was harmed by prior chemical and biological exposures.

In the meantime, it should be stressed that there are no markers or laboratory tests for the exposures currently known to have occurred in Project SHAD. However, the provision of appropriate medical care for any of the conditions that have developed in the ensuing 40 years since the SHAD tests were begun is not dependent on specific information about prior exposures. High quality medical care can be provided right now for each SHAD veteran who seeks a clinical evaluation in the VA.

SERVICE-CONNECTED COMPENSATION

In order for VA to make accurate rating decisions on claims for service connection for disabilities associated with SHAD, complete evidence is necessary when the issue is first decided. Because of the piecemeal and fragmented approach of declassifying and providing information, VA may be required to readjudicate claims as additional evidence becomes available for those service members involved in multiple tests. Likewise, as evidence is declassified and made available, VA may find that the new evidence regarding SHAD tests supports grants of service connection previously denied.

VA will continue to send outreach letters to participants as additional tests are declassified and participant names and Social Security numbers are made available. Because it now appears that many of the service members participated in more than one test, our initial outreach efforts run the risk of being incomplete until DoD's declassification efforts are finished. It should be noted that in those cases where inquiries have come from veterans regarding tests not yet declassified, VA has been able to provide names to DoD and they have responded by providing relevant information on a timely basis.

VA also realizes that we cannot understand all the potentially hazardous exposures experienced by members of the Armed Forces without consultation and cooperation with
other government agencies, particularly DoD, but also HHS, EPA, and DOE. This
coordination is being addressed at the highest levels in VHA through the VA/DoD Executive Council.

In conclusion, the Department of Veterans Affairs shares this Committee's concern about the adverse effects of hazardous exposures during military service and will continue to aggressively address them. VA sponsors research to assess the effects of these exposures; is actively contacting veterans of Project SHAD to notify them of potential exposures; and has developed numerous studies with the Institute of Medicine to determine the health effects of hazardous exposures.

This concludes my testimony. My colleagues and I will be happy to answer any questions that the Committee may have.

If this material leads you to suspect that it’s pretty ‘Late in the day’ before a Vet, who has
suffered for years, finally (if ever while they’re alive) gets the information he/she needs to
determine the ‘cause’ of his/her malady...you’d be right! Unfortunately...this is indicative of how the word ‘accountability’ is defind within the military and the DoD! The Lucas Family is making every effort to ‘Right the WRONG’ that’s been done to some of these men and their families. Jeanine Lucas has set up a most informative web site at: www.lucasfamily.com and
you’re encouraged to visit it. Additionally, you can check out the LST Calhoun County
main web site at: http://home.jinko.com/ww2LST/history.htm.

If you have any questions or comments on this ‘case’ you can e-mail Jeanine at:
teddybeareyz@aol.com or Barb at: Bspruse@aol.com.

A thought to Ponder:
"WE ARE APT TO SHUT OUR EYES AGAINST A PAINFUL TRUTH...FOR MY PART, I AM WILLING TO KNOW THE WHOLE TRUTH; TO KNOW THE WORST; AND TO PROVIDE FOR IT."
---- Patrick Henry