Anchor(top)

Gr 19:30

Sommario

In primo Piano

Editoriale

NOTIZIE BREVI

ESTERI

ITALIA

Siparietto

Gr 13:00

In primo Piano

NOTIZIE BREVI

ESTERI

ITALIA

Siparietto

Gr 9:30

ESTERI

ITALIA

Anchor(appunti)

Appunti e note redazionali

AGENTE ORANGE

Punti:

CONFERENZA

COS’E’ L’AGENTE ORANGE E SUE CONSEGUENZE

DOVE FU USATO

DOVE VENIVA PRODOTTO PRODOTTO L’AGENTE ORANGE

GLI INTERESSI DI MONSANTO E DOW CHEMICALS

LE SOSTANZE CORRELATE

INDAGINI E QUESTIONI LEGALI

SEVESO (testi piu' telefonata)

I RISULTATI DELLA CONFERENZA (testo)

ELENCO DELLE COMPAGNIE COINVOLTE

LINK

COS’E’ L’AGENTE ORANGE E SUE CONSEGUENZE

(tibi)

...ma qualcuno le conseguenze non le vuole studiare:

http://www.newscientist.com/channel/opinion/dn7146.html

DOVE VENIVA E VIENE PRODOTTO PRODOTTO L’AGENTE ORANGE

‘’’Il caso ceco’’’ http://greenpeace.cz/agentorange/index_en.shtml

INDAGINI E QUESTIONI LEGALI

(vedi anche Dioxin)

Le risposte delle compagnie accusate:

n a 27,878-word defence brief made public on February 6, the chemical companies put up a long list of arguments seeking to wash their hands of any responsibility. These include:

• The claim that international law did not bar the US military from using Agent Orange or other herbicides during wartime.
• The claim that under US federal law, the government's contractors cannot be held responsible for the government's decision to deploy “the instruments of war”.
• Claiming that under the 1995 US-Vietnam agreement to normalise relations and end US trade embargo against Vietnam there were no provisions for reparations or restitution to settle claims arising out of the US military's use of Agent Orange or other herbicides.
• Claiming that the US “has never agreed that it has either a moral or a legal duty to provide funds or assistance to remedy for harm allegedly caused by Agent Orange” and the current law suit is a backdoor way to seek reparation and should be rejected.
• Arguing that military use of herbicides is still not prohibited under the Chemical Weapons Convention of 1993, “even if the (secondary) effect of such use were the killing or harming of people”.
• Claiming that international law governing the conduct of war has never extended liability to corporate entities. Instead, “states are the principal subjects of international law”.

Piu' dow: dow.com/agentorange

SEVESO

http://www.flanet.org/aseva/evento.asp?WHERE=ID_Evento=8

http://www.lifegate.it/ambiente/articolo.php?id_articolo=1786

I RISULTATI DELLA CONFERENZA

http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/2006/03/28/1509363.htm

E’ stato chiesto pubblicamente dalla conferenza un indennizzo da parte degli Stati Uniti, dopo l’esito negativo del processo di primo grado contro 37 compagnie responsabili di aver prodotto l’AO. Il processo ha auvot luogo a Brooklyn, New York.

ARTICOLI SU DIOSSINA

DioXin

LE COMPAGNIE COINVOLTE

Other companies named in the lawsuit are Monsanto Chemical Co., Pharmacia Corp., Hercules Inc., Occidental Chemical Corp., Ultramar Diamond Shamrock Corp., Maxus Energy Corp., Thompson Hayward Chemical Co., Harcros Chemicals Inc., Uniroyal Inc., Uniroyal Chemical Inc., Uniroyal Chemical Holding Co., Uniroyal Chemical Acquisition Corp., C.D.U. Holding Inc., Diamond Shamrock Agricultural Chemicals Inc., Diamond Shamrock Chemicals, Diamond Shamrock Chemicals Co., Diamond Shamrock Corp., Diamond Shamrock Refining and Marketing Co., Occidental Electrochemicals Corp., Diamond Alkali Co., Ansul Inc., Hooker Chemical Corp., Hooker Chemical Far East Corp., Hooker Chemicals & Plastics Corp., American Home Products Corp., Wyeth., Hoffman-Taff Chemicals Inc., Chemical Land Holdings Inc., T-H Agriculture & Nutrition Co. Inc., Thompson Chemical Corp., Riverdale Chemical Co., Elementis Chemicals Inc., United States Rubber Co. Inc., Syntex Agribusiness Inc. and ABC Chemical Cos.

NB: la Dow Chemical possiede dal 2001 la divisione poliuretani della EniChem...

LINK:

in inglese

http://agent-orange-news.newslib.com/

Servizi audio della giornata