Wednesday, April 16, 2014

Know Where Your Tax Money Is Going And What Your State Official's Make and Own



Rep. Susana A. Mendoza (D)


staterepmendoza@gmail.com
1st Representative District

(Mendoza is currently the elected City Clerk of Chicago, succeeding Miguel del Valle)



2008 District Spending Report
2008 Total Expended: $69,397.00
2008 Available Balance: $12.00
2009 District Spending Report
2009 Total Expended: $68,336.27
2009 Available Balance $1,072.73
Provided by the Illinois House District Accounting System


2008 Salary: $76,731.96
2009 Salary: $76,366.08
2010 Base Salary: $64,717.08
2010 “Bonus” Pay: $9,852.12
2010 Total Salary Paid: $74,569.20

2007 Mileage Funds Received: $5,610.00
2007 Per Diem/Lodging Funds Received: $11,536.00
2008 Mileage Funds Received: $3,689.002008 Per Diem/Lodging Funds Received: $6,837.00

2009 Mileage Funds Received: $4,318.00
2009 Per Diem/Lodging Funds Received: $8,448.00

2010 Mileage Funds Received: $3,060.00
2010 Per Diem/Lodging Funds Received: $7,075.00
Provided by the Illinois Office of the Comptroller


2010 LPU Abuse #1: Two-Sided Poster (16.5”W x 16”H) Mailer
14,135 copies
Taxpayer Production Cost: $1,289.17 for Labor, Materials and Paper…
Taxpayer Postage/Mailing Cost: TBD


2010 LPU Abuse #2: Miscellaneous Brochures…
11,500 copies
Taxpayer Production Cost: $2,549.22 for Labor, Materials and Paper…
Taxpayer Postage/Mailing Cost: TBD


2010 LPU Abuse #3: Miscellaneous Cards…
49,038 copies
Taxpayer Production Cost: $933.87 for Labor, Materials and Paper…
Taxpayer Postage/Mailing Cost: TBD


2010 LPU Abuse #4: Women’s Self-Defense and Back to School Flyers…
1,000 copies
Taxpayer Production Cost: $285.14 for Labor, Materials and Paper…
Taxpayer Postage/Mailing Cost: TBD
Total 2010 LPU Abuse and Taxpayer Production Cost Waste: $5,057.37
2003 – 2008 Rep. Selected: Scholarship Recipients

Provided by the Illinois State Board of Education



Qualifying District Address:
2646 S. Sawyer Ave., 2nd Floor;
Chicago, Illinois 60623

Know Where Your Tax Money Is Going And What Your State Official's Make and Own


Sen. Antonio Muñoz (D)

2010 District Spending Report2010 Total Expended: $79,693.59
2010 Available Balance: $3,369.41
2010 Base Salary: $64,717.08
2010 “Bonus” Pay: $19,699.68
2010 Total Salary Paid: $84,416.76
2008 Salary: $76,731.96
2009 Salary: $86,450.88
2005 Mileage Funds Received: $2,632.00
2006 Mileage Funds Received: $2,848.00
2007 Mileage Funds Received: $5,804.00
2008 Mileage Funds Received: $3,564.00
2009 Mileage Funds Received: $4,882.00
2010 Mileage Funds Received: $3,260.00
2005 Per Diem/Lodging Funds Received: $6,024.00
2006 Per Diem/Lodging Funds Received: $5,670.00
2007 Per Diem/Lodging Funds Received: $12,403.00
2008 Per Diem/Lodging Funds Received: $5,805.00
2009 Per Diem/Lodging Funds Received: $8,844.00
2010 Per Diem/Lodging Funds Received: $6,797.00


Qualifying District Address:

3211 S. Hamilton Ave.; Chicago, Illinois 60608

Property Index Number (PIN): 17-31-108-046-0000

Board of Review: Certified 2009

Assessor Estimated 2010 Market Value: $258,750.00

2009 Property Taxes [Paid in 2010]: $3,109.39

Illinois still is violating constitutional law











 Mary Flowers 31st District Illinois state Representative
I Voted against Concealed Carry knowing a majority of them are PRO-GUNN

Christine Radogno 
State Republican Leader 41st District
State Senator
I voted for Concealed Carry in Illinois  







Illinois states that it is a SHALL ISSUE state but reserves the right to deny applicants as the state is a MAY ISSUE. I think Illinois politicians need to know what the meaning is between the two. Well do I have a update for you. One of our readers who applied and sent us his denial letter went and filed in court today for a administrative review. but did not meet the fee waiver requirements. So he walked in to room 802 in the Daley center to file but was told it will cost 400 bucks. This man can not afford 400 bucks that is why he wanted the fees waived. So then he informed us that he notified these two lovely ladies for some help which we hope that they do help him.

But the reason for this blog today is because this same reader stated that there were over 150 people all with out of state CCW's that were denied. I have to ask did these people fall under the Shall Issue guidelines, I would think so or they would not be filing appearances. out of 150 75 of them walked away as they could not afford to file. Wait what they walked away so the state infringed upon the rights by using the may issue criteria as part of a shall issue.

SHALL ISSUE
 States with "shall issue" systems require a license or permit to carry a concealed handgun, and applicants must meet certain well defined objective criteria. However, unlike "may issue" systems, a "shall issue" state removes all arbitrary bias and discretion, compelling the issuing authority to award the permit. These laws require that the empowered authority “shall issue” a permit to applicants who meet the criteria defined by law. Generally, the criteria for issuance of a license include proof of residency within the state, a minimum age, fingerprints for a background check, no record of mental illness or adjudication of mental defect by a court, proof or certification from an acceptable handgun safety class (including live-fire range qualification exercises to demonstrate safe and acceptable proficiency), and submitting the required application fee.
 
So why is Illinois denying people because some folks have been brought to court under false pretence with order's of protections. Illinois is using this in order to deny the applicants right, but were in the law above says the state can do that? I don't see anything.

This is the correct criteria for a shall issue for ILLINOIS which has declare to be by the state, which is highlighted in yellow.

A Valid Driver’s License or State Identification card.
A valid FOID card.
A head and shoulder electronic photograph taken within the last 30 days.
Be able to provide the last ten years of residency.
Fingerprints – Electronic fingerprints will expedite your application! Specify to the Live Scan vendor
that your fingerprint application is for the Concealed Carry application (ORI = IL920707Z, Purpose
Code = CCW).
NOTE: Applicants will be assigned a transaction control number (TCN) at the time of fingerprinting
and will be required to retain that TCN to complete the application.
$150.00 payable with a credit card or electronic check.
The FCCL will be valid for 5 years.

MAY ISSUE
States with these systems require a license or permit to carry a concealed handgun, issuance of such is at the discretion of local authorities, the issuing authority "may" issue a permit if the citizen meets certain criteria, and the likelihood of issuance within a may-issue state can range, for all practical purposes, from no-issue to a sure thing, for qualified applicants. California and New York county authorities are given a lot of latitude in determining whether a license or permit will be issued. California ranges from a no-issue in areas like San Francisco, to nearly shall-issue environment in rural counties. Connecticut law provides authorities very limited discretion in the issuance of a permit. Maryland law allows citizens to apply for a permit, but if you don't have law enforcement or political connections it is extremely rare that one will be issued (making it effectively a non-issue state). Alabama, by law, is a may-issue state, but Alabama county sheriffs issue permits to almost all qualified applicants.

But Illinois uses the factors below in green highlight as to deny ones CCW which falls under a MAY ISSUE state not SHALL ISSUE. If the state falls under may issue then yes the below is sufficient enough to deny.

A person is not eligible for a FOID card , and thus not eligible for a CCL, if he or she: (1) is prohibited from possessing firearms or ammunition by any state or federal law; (2) has been convicted of a felony; (3) is addicted to narcotics; (4) has been a patient in a mental health facility in the past five years; (5) is intellectually disabled; (6) is admitted to the U.S. under a non-immigrant visa; (7) is an undocumented immigrant; (8) is subject to an order of protection prohibiting him or her from possessing a firearm; (9) has been convicted within the past five years of battery, assault, aggravated assault, or a violation of an order of protection in which a firearm was used or possessed; (10) has been convicted of domestic battery or aggravated domestic battery; (11) has been adjudicated a delinquent minor for an offense that would be a felony; (12) has been adjudicated as a mentally disabled person; (13) has been involuntarily admitted into a mental health facility; (14) is developmentally disabled; or (15) has a mental condition that poses a clear and present danger to the applicant, any other person, or persons of the community.
Additional requirements. In addition to meeting the FOID card requirements, a CCL applicant: (1) must be at least 21; (2) must not have been convicted of a misdemeanor involving the use or threat of physical force or violence or two or more DUI violations within five years of the application; (3) must not be the subject of a pending arrest warrant, prosecution, or proceeding for an offense or action that could lead to disqualification to own or possess a firearm; (4) must not have been in residential or court-ordered treatment for alcoholism, alcohol detoxification, or drug treatment within the five years prior to application; and (5) must have successfully completed the required firearms training.8
If the Department issues a denial or fails to act on an application within 90 days of receipt, the applicant may appeal to the director of the Department for a hearing. All final decisions of the Department are subject to judicial review.

But Illinois stands as a SHALL ISSUE so why are they denying people who are not convicted felons the right to carry. Well I will tell you why because deep down Illinois politicians like Mary Flowers thinks that having no guns will protect people when in actuality criminals don't give a rates ass about the law that is why they are called criminals. Secondly people have to carry a firearm for protection since all the Illinois Politicians want to do is raise taxes to feed their pockets and could careless about hiring more cops so we have to police and protect ourselves. 
I am now asking for lawyers who read this to stand up and help the ones that have been denied to file a class action lawsuit against the state of ILLINOIS and it's elected officials for still infringing upon Constitutional rights.  

Tuesday, April 15, 2014

Porch Monkey looking for banana kills in Rodgers Park

A 16-year-old boy killed in a drive-by shooting in Rogers Park has connections to a local rapper that was killed in 2012.

It happened at about 2:40 a.m. Tuesday on the 7600 block of north Ashland Avenue.

Police say the boy was walking on the sidewalk when one or more person in a gray mini-van opened fire.

The boy has been identified as Kenos Glass.

The shooting happened just east of the Stephen F. Gale Math and Science Academy, and about three blocks from the Howard station on the CTA’s Red Line.

This is a developing story – check back for details.

Wednesday, April 9, 2014

Sarges history:WWII Code Talker gets honored

U.S. Marine Corps Cpl. Chester Nez receives an American flag from Pfc. Tiffany Boyd, at Code Talker Hall, Marine Corps Base Quantico, Va., April 4, 2014. The flag was flown over the Marine Corps War Memorial, on the first day of spring in honor of Cpl. Nez's attendance at the Platoon 382 Hall rededication. Cpl. Nez is the last of the original 29 Navajo Code Talkers of World War II.
As 1942 dawned, World War II was not going well for America and her Allies. Japanese carrier-borne bombers and fighters had crippled the U.S. Navy's proud Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941; attacked American bases in the Philippines and on Guam; and were intent on seizing other island bases in the south and central Pacific. In Europe, France had fallen to Germany's blitzkrieg, and stalwart Britain was still staggering from the Nazis' relentless nighttime bombing during the previous year.

Half a world away, two great British ships — the battleship Prince of Wales and battle cruiser Repulse — and members of their crews lay at the bottom of the sea off the coast of Malaya, unfortunate victims of Japanese bombing attacks on December 10, 1941. Meanwhile, Germany's armies continued to advance methodically into the Soviet Union, while Hitler's submarines wreaked havoc on supply convoys outbound to Russian ports from the United States.
For the U.S. Armed Forces, communications, which had always been a complex issue, had now become a bewildering problem. Japanese cryptographers were proving themselves amazingly adept at breaking top secret military codes almost as rapidly as newer, more complicated procedures could be devised. Many of the Japanese code breakers had been educated in the United States where they had learned to speak English and had become familiar with American colloquialisms, including slang terms and profanity. As a result, American battle plans became known to the enemy almost immediately, often before they had become operational, and there appeared to be no immediate workable solution. The result was an appalling loss of American lives. One war analyst commented, 'Military communications were made available to the enemy like sand sifting through a sieve.' Some months before, Philip Johnston, a middle-aged civil engineer who lived in Los Angeles, read a newspaper article on military security. During World War I, he had served with U.S. forces in France, and although too old to fight in World War II, Johnston wanted to aid the current war effort in some way. From the age of four, he had lived on the Navajo Indian Reservation, where his parents were Protestant missionaries, and had consequently grown up speaking the Navajo tongue with his playmates. Now, as he read, the concept of a secret military code based on the Navajo language flashed across his mind.

In February 1942, after formulating his idea, Johnston traveled south to Camp Elliott near San Diego, where he tried to convince Lieutenant Colonel James E. Jones, the Marines' Signal Corps Communications Officer, that a code based on the Navajo language could not be broken by the enemy. Jones, after listening intently to Johnston's idea, responded: 'In all the history of warfare, that has never been done. No code, no cipher is completely secure from enemy interception. We change our codes frequently for this reason.' But Johnston's graphic presentation proved so convincing that the two men agreed to set up a test.

Johnston's confidence in his theory lay in the fact that the Navajo language includes a number of words that, when spoken with varying inflections, may have as many as four totally different meanings. Navajo verb forms are especially complex. To most listeners, the language is virtually incomprehensible and has been variously likened to the rumble of a moving freight train, the gurgling noises of a partially blocked sink drain, or, jokingly, the resonant thunder of an old-fashioned commode being flushed. As a result, use of the Navajo tongue was confined almost entirely to the reservation; few non-Navajos spoke or understood it. And it was a 'hidden language,' there not yet being an alphabet or written form for others to study.

Returning to Los Angeles, Johnston spent nearly two weeks seeking bilingual Navajos from among that city's population. On February 28, 1942, he returned to Camp Elliott with four Indians in order to prove their linguistic capability before a group of skeptical Marine staff officers. Sent in pairs to separate rooms, the first two Navajos were given a typical military field order to transmit in their own language to the others several doors away. When retranslated back into English, the message received by the second pair proved to be an accurate copy of the order as it was given. The Marines were amazed at the speed and accuracy of the interpretation, and the presentation was pronounced a complete success.

Major General Clayton Vogel, Camp Elliott's commanding officer, composed an urgent letter — supported by another from Johnston — describing the demonstration to the Marine Corps commandant in Washington, D.C., and urging the immediate recruitment of two hundred young, well-educated Navajos to serve as Marine communications specialists. After an agonizing delay, General Vogel was authorized by Washington to recruit just thirty Navajos for training in a trial project. The commandant of the Marine Corps, unwilling to risk turning over such a vital element of the war effort to a civilian and two hundred Navajo Indians, reasoned that if a program using the thirty men did not work out, the Marines would not have expended too much time and effort.

By mid-April, Marine recruiting personnel appeared on the Navajo Reservation. They proceeded to enlist thirty volunteers from agency schools at Fort Wingate and Shiprock, New Mexico, and Fort Defiance, Arizona. In addition to being fluent in both the Navajo tongue and English, each enlistee had to be physically fit in order to serve as a messenger in combat. The Navajos were told only that they would be'specialists' and would serve both in the United States and overseas. Some members of the group were underage, but as birth records were not usually kept on the reservation, it was easy for a recruit to lie or be mistaken about his age. Carl Gorman, a 36-year-old Navajo from Fort Defiance, was too old to be considered by the Marines, so he lied about his age in order to be accepted.

For almost all of the Navajos, travel was a brand new experience. Some had never been off the reservation, and many had never ridden on a bus or train. The majority of them had never seen an ocean and did not realize that they would soon be a part of the ferocious war being fought in the middle of the Pacific. Several of the recruits' families insisted that before leaving, their sons participate in a religious ceremony to pray for the young men's safe return.

The group of Navajos who reported for basic training at the San Diego Marine Corps Recruit Depot had never experienced any sort of military discipline, and several found it difficult to cope with their new lifestyle. Although now officially designated the 382nd Platoon, U.S. Marine Corps, at boot camp, the group was referred to as 'The Navajo School.'

Following their basic training, the Navajo Marines were moved to Camp Pendleton at Oceanside, California, where their new officers were quick to realize that these young men were, in some ways, different from those with whom they were used to dealing. But the Navajos learned to march in cadence, obey orders, and keep their quarters scrupulously clean. On one occasion, during a dress parade on a particularly hot day, several non-Indian Marines passed out from the heat, while all of the Navajos, who hailed from the hot climate of the Southwest, remained erect in formation and stood at attention during the personal inspection that followed.

One writer for the Marine Corps Chevron reported that 'At present they're a typical Marine outfit of budding specialists. They gripe about the things that all Marines gripe about — liberty, chow and the San Diego weather.' In short, the Navajos were rapidly shaping up into excellent Leathernecks.

At Camp Pendleton, the Navajos, in addition to their other duties, were required to devise a new Marine Corps military code which, when transmitted in their own language, would completely baffle their Japanese enemies. The code's words had to be short, easy to learn, and quick to recall. After working long and hard on the project, the men devised a two-part code. The first part, a 26-letter phonetic alphabet, used Navajo names for 18 animals or birds, plus the words ice for I, nut for N, quiver for Q, Ute for U, victor for V, cross for X, yucca for Y, and zinc for Z. The second part consisted of a 211-word English vocabulary and the Navajo equivalents. This code, when compared with conventional Marine Corps codes, offered considerable savings in time, since the latter involved lengthy encoding and deciphering procedures by Signal Corps cryptographic personnel using sophisticated electronic equipment.

Exactly how the Navajos did their job remained a mystery to many Marine Corps staff officers. However, their proficiency, both under training conditions and later in actual combat, proved that the Navajos were completely reliable and erased the initial distrust felt by some Marine officers.

Several of the Navajos remained in California as instructors; two became recruiters; and one did not complete the course. The remainder of the original contingent reported for combat duty in August 1942 to Major General Alexander Vandegrift's First Marine Division on Guadalcanal. The general became so impressed by the code talkers' performance that he requisitioned Washington for 83 additional Navajos to be assigned to his division alone. By the time the Guadalcanal campaign ended that December, General Vandegrift had no doubt about the Navajos' dependability.

Meanwhile, a second, much larger contingent of Navajos had been recruited and sent to boot camp in San Diego. Following completion of their basic training, the men were assigned to the top-secret code-talker program at Camp Pendleton. By August 1943, nearly two hundred young Navajos had been trained at the camp. The staff sergeant in charge of the code-talker program there was Philip Johnston, who, although overage for duty with the Marines, had volunteered his services.

In jungle combat in the Pacific, the Navajos' innate strength, ingenuity, scouting and tracking ability, habitual Spartan lifestyle, and utter disregard for hardships stood them in remarkably good stead. At first utilized usually only at the company-battalion level, the Navajos became virtually indispensable as their capability and reliability were recognized.

Frequently, and especially when a Marine regiment was fighting alongside an Army unit, the Navajos' physical resemblance to the Japanese led to confusion that resulted in several Navajos almost becoming casualties of 'friendly fire' by their fellow-Americans. Many Navajos actually were captured and taken for interrogation. One such Navajo, William McCabe, was looking for something to eat while waiting on a Guadalcanal beach for his transport ship. 'I got lost among the big chow dump,' he recalled, 'All of a sudden I heard somebody say, `Halt,' and I kept walking. `Hey, you! Halt, or I'm gonna shoot!'. . . . [T]here was a big rifle all cocked and ready to shoot. I'm just from my outfit, I was coming here to get something to eat. And he said, `I think you're a Jap. Just come with me." After that incident, McCabe was accompanied by a non-Navajo at all times.

On the eve of the First Marine Division's departure for the island of Okinawa, which was expected to be the bloodiest landing of the Pacific War thus far, the Navajos performed a sacred ceremonial dance that invoked their deities' blessings and protection for themselves and their fellow Americans. They prayed that their enemies' resistance might prove weak and ineffectual. Some of their non-Indian buddies, standing on the sidelines, scoffed at the whole idea. When Ernie Pyle, the famed Scripps-Howard war correspondent, reported the story afterward, he noted that the landings on Okinawa beach had indeed proved much easier than had been anticipated and noted that several of the Navajos were quick to point this out to the skeptics in their units.

Farther inland, however, Japanese resistance stiffened, almost slowing the American advance to a halt. As might be expected, a Navajo was asked by another Marine with whom he shared a foxhole what he thought of his prayers now. 'This,' the Navajo replied, 'is completely different. We only prayed for help during the landings.'

Eventually, Navajo code talkers served with all six Marine divisions in the Pacific and with Marine Raider and parachute units as well. Praise for their work became lavish and virtually endless as they participated in major Marine assaults on the Solomons, the Marianas, Peleliu, and Iwo Jima.

Commenting on the Marines' Iwo Jima landing, Major Howard Conner, the Fifth Marine Division's Signal Officer, said that 'The entire operation was directed by Navajo code. . . . During the two days that followed the initial landings I had six Navajo radio nets working around the clock. . . . They sent and received over 800 messages without an error. Were it not for the Navajo Code Talkers, the Marines never would have taken Iwo Jima.'

On an August evening in 1945, the Navajos were, quite naturally, among the first to receive the news that everyone had been waiting to hear. After the atomic bombings of Hiroshima on August 6 and Nagasaki three days later, Emperor Hirohito had urged the Japanese nation to 'endure the unendurable' of surrender. The war was over.

In all, 421 Navajos had completed wartime training at Camp Pendleton's code talker school, and most had been assigned to combat units overseas. Following Japan's formal surrender aboard the USS Missouri in Tokyo Bay on September 2, 1945, several code talkers volunteered for duty with U.S. occupation forces in Japan. Others were sent to China for duty with American Marines there. One code talker, Willson Price, remained in the Marine Corps for thirty years, finally retiring in 1972.

Several months elapsed before the first Navajos returned from the Pacific to their homes. For most of the returning heroes, their homecoming initiated a round of family reunions and purification rites, traditional dances, and curing ceremonies, all coupled with their mothers' thankful prayers for their sons' return, safe in both body and mind. These ages-old Navajo religious rites had originally been adopted to protect returnees from any harmful or toxic influences they might have encountered or duties they had been forced to perform while away from the reservation. But there was surprisingly little evidence of serious psychological problems or combat fatigue among the returning Navajo veterans.

For many of them, however, returning to reservation life proved difficult after their years away. They missed the excitement, the challenges, and especially the privileges they had grown accustomed to in the service. Some of the men rejoined the same Bureau of Indian Affairs' high school classes from which they had originally been recruited. Others enrolled in various colleges or universities under the G.I. Bill.

For Teddy Draper, Sr., on occupational duty in Japan, there was no such immediate problem. During his off-duty hours, he learned to speak Japanese so well that he eventually served as an interpreter. He later commented: 'When I was going to boarding school [before the war], the U.S. government told us not to speak Navajo, but during the war, they wanted us to speak it!' He remembered thinking that 'if I can get back to the reservation safely, I want to become a Navajo language teacher and educate young Navajos.' His wartime training had given him new insight into modern teaching methods, which he later used to teach other Navajos at home.

But for most of the men who wished to marry and raise families, there were severe problems. Jobs were scarce; in fact, there were none to be had on the reservation. Many banks refused to make G.I. loans even to honorably discharged veterans because Navajo families held their reservation land parcels in trust and had no proof of title. The men felt, with considerable justification, that it was a shameful way for their government to treat them. But, as one veteran code talker remarked, 'We've faced difficult situations before, and tough trails have never defeated us! Somehow the Navajos survived.'

Almost a quarter of a century elapsed before the Fourth Marine Division honored its Navajo code talkers at its June 1969 annual reunion in Chicago. An attractive medallion, struck by the Franklin Mint in commemoration of their services, was presented to each of the group of twenty veteran code talkers who had flown to Chicago for the occasion. To show its appreciation, the division entertained the men in sumptuous style, and the Navajos, many dressed in their best tribal regalia, marched with the Fourth Marines down Michigan Avenue.

Today, a few veteran code talkers still take part in holiday parades, though some must now ride in open convertibles. Several code talkers have held the Navajo Nation's top executive positions, both as chairman and vice-chairman, while others served on its Tribal Council. Fittingly enough, the men also have their own fraternity — the Navajo Code Talkers' Association — which meets regularly at Window Rock, Arizona, the Navajo Nation's capital.

In December 1971, President Richard M. Nixon presented the Navajo code talkers with a certificate of appreciation from the nation, thanking them for their 'patriotism, resourcefulness, and courage.' Those brave veterans had given the Marine Corps its only unbreakable means of battlefield communication, saving thousands of American lives in the process.

A Japanese general admitted after World War II that the most highly skilled Japanese cryptographers had not been able to decipher the Marines' messages. After being informed that it was a code based on a Native American language, he said: 'Thank you, that is a puzzle I thought would never be solved.

Friday, April 4, 2014

Agent Orange A chemical used in Viet Nam Haunts us to this day almost 40 years later

Approximately 20 million gallons of herbicides were used in Vietnam between 1962 and 1971 to remove unwanted plant life and leaves which otherwise provided cover for enemy forces during the Vietnam Conflict.  Shortly following their military service in Vietnam, some veterans reported a variety of health problems and concerns which some of them attributed to exposure to Agent Orange or other herbicides. 
The Department of Veterans Affairs has developed a comprehensive program to respond to these medical problems and concerns.  The principal elements of this program include quality healthcare services, disability compensation for veterans with service-connected illnesses, scientific research and outreach and education. 

About 3 million Americans served in the armed forces in Vietnam and nearby areas during the 1960s and early 1970s, the time of the Vietnam War. During that time, the military used large amounts of mixtures known as defoliants, which are chemicals that cause the leaves to fall off plants. One of these defoliants was Agent Orange, and some troops were exposed to it. Many years later, questions remain about the lasting health effects of those exposures, including increases in cancer risk.
This article offers a brief overview of the link between Agent Orange and cancer. It does not offer a complete review of all evidence – it is meant to be a brief summary. It also includes some information on benefits for which Vietnam veterans exposed to Agent Orange may be eligible.
During the Vietnam War, US military forces sprayed millions of gallons of herbicides (plant-killing chemicals) on lands in Vietnam, Laos, and other nearby areas to remove forest cover, destroy crops, and clear vegetation from the perimeters of US bases. This effort, known as Operation Ranch Hand, lasted from 1962 to 1971.
Different mixes of herbicides were used, but most were mixtures of 2 chemicals that were phenoxy herbicides:
  • 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D)
  • 2,4,5-trichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4,5-T)
Each mixture was shipped in a chemical drum marked with an identifying colored stripe. The most widely used mixture contained equal parts 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T. Because this herbicide came in drums with orange stripes, it was called Agent Orange. Today, Agent Orange refers generally to all the phenoxy herbicides sprayed at the time. (Other types of herbicides were also used, including cacodylic acid and picloram.)
The 2,4,5-T in Agent Orange was contaminated with small amounts of dioxins, which were created unintentionally during the manufacturing process. Dioxins are a family of dozens of related chemicals. They can form during the making of paper and in some other industrial processes. The main dioxin in Agent Orange, 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin, or TCDD, is one of the most toxic.
After a study in 1970 found that 2,4,5-T could cause birth defects in lab animals, the use of 2,4,5-T in Vietnam was stopped. A year later, all military herbicide use in Vietnam ended. During the 1970s, some veterans returning from Vietnam began to report skin rashes, cancer, psychological symptoms, birth defects in their children, and other health problems. Some veterans were concerned that Agent Orange exposure might have contributed to these problems. These concerns eventually led to a series of scientific studies, health care programs, and compensation programs directed to the exposed veterans.
A large class-action lawsuit was filed in 1979 against the herbicide manufacturers, and was settled out of court in 1984. It resulted in the Agent Orange Settlement Fund, which distributed nearly $200 million to veterans between 1988 and 1996.
Although there is now quite a bit of evidence about the health effects of Agent Orange, many questions have not yet been answered.

How were people exposed to Agent Orange?

About 3 million people served in the US military in Vietnam during the course of the war, about 1.5 million of whom served during the period of heaviest herbicide spraying from 1967 to 1969.
In studies comparing Vietnam veterans with veterans who had served at the same time elsewhere, blood TCDD (dioxin) levels were found to be higher among those who had served in Vietnam, although these levels went down slowly over time.
Exposure to Agent Orange varied a great deal. Most of the large-scale spraying in Operation Ranch Hand was done with airplanes and helicopters. However, some herbicides were sprayed from boats or trucks, and some were applied by soldiers with backpack sprayers. Those who loaded airplanes and helicopters might have been exposed the most. Members of the Army Chemical Corps, who stored and mixed herbicides and defoliated the perimeters of military bases, probably also had some of the heaviest exposures. Others with potentially heavy exposures included members of Special Forces units who defoliated remote campsites, and members of Navy river units who cleared base perimeters.
Exposures could have occurred when the chemicals were breathed in, ingested in contaminated food or drink, or absorbed through the skin. Exposure may have been possible through the eyes or through breaks in the skin, as well.
One of the challenges in assessing the health effects of Agent Orange exposure has been determining how much any individual veteran was exposed to (or even what they were exposed to), as very little information of this type is available.

Does Agent Orange cause cancer?

Researchers use 2 main types of studies to try to determine if a substance or exposure causes cancer.
One type of study looks at cancer rates in different groups of people. Such a study might compare the cancer rate in a group exposed to a substance versus the rate in a group not exposed to it, or compare it to what the expected cancer rate would be in the general population. But studies of people can sometimes be hard to interpret, because other factors that are hard to account for might be affecting the results.
In studies done in the lab, animals are exposed to a substance (often in very large doses) to see if it causes tumors or other health problems. Researchers may also expose normal cells in a lab dish to the substance to see if it causes the types of changes that are seen in cancer cells. In these types of studies, other factors are easier to control for, but it’s not always clear if the results in lab dishes or animals would be the same in humans, for a number of reasons.
In most cases neither type of study provides definitive evidence on its own, so researchers usually look at both human and lab-based studies when trying to determine if something might cause cancer.

Studies in people

Studies of Vietnam veterans provide some of the most direct evidence of the health effects of Agent Orange exposure.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the US Air Force, and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) have conducted studies in thousands of Vietnam veterans. However, most of these studies have been limited by the fairly small number of people who were highly exposed to Agent Orange. About a dozen states have also conducted studies of their veterans, and some of them have yielded cancer risk information. A series of studies of Australian Vietnam veterans has also provided some information on cancer risk.
Because of the limits of the Vietnam veteran studies, studies of 3 other groups have provided important information on the potential cancer-causing properties of Agent Orange exposure:
  • Vietnamese soldiers and civilians exposed to the same herbicides as United States service personnel, often for more prolonged periods (although there have been few thorough health studies in these populations)
  • Workers exposed to herbicides in other settings, such as herbicide manufacturing workers, herbicide applicators, farmers, lumberjacks, and forest and soil conservationists, who often had much higher blood dioxin levels than Vietnam veterans
  • People exposed to dioxins after industrial accidents in Germany, Seveso (Italy), and California, and after chronic exposures at work and in the environment
Each of these groups differs from the Vietnam veterans in the characteristics of the people exposed, the nature of the dioxin exposures, and other factors such as diet and other chemical exposures.
Taken together, these studies have looked at possible links between Agent Orange (or dioxin) and a number of cancer types.
Soft tissue sarcoma: Most studies in Vietnam veterans have not found an increase in soft tissue sarcomas. However, soft tissue sarcomas have been linked to phenoxy herbicide exposure in a series of studies in Sweden and in some studies of industrially exposed workers. Many studies of farmers and agricultural workers show an increase in soft tissue sarcomas, which may relate to herbicide exposure. Soft tissue sarcomas have also been linked to dioxin exposure in some chemical manufacturing workers and in some other workplace studies.
Non-Hodgkin lymphoma: Most studies of Vietnam veterans have not shown an increase in non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). But several studies have found a link between phenoxy herbicide exposure (usually on the job) and NHL. Some studies of farmers and agricultural workers also suggest this association, although not all studies have found such a link.
Hodgkin disease: Most studies of Vietnam veterans have not found an increase in Hodgkin disease. However, Hodgkin disease has been linked to phenoxy herbicide exposure in some other studies. Many studies of farmers and agricultural workers show an increase in Hodgkin disease, which may relate to herbicide exposure.
The link between Hodgkin disease and dioxin exposure specifically is less clear, as studies have given mixed results.
Lung and other respiratory cancers: Most studies of Vietnam veterans have not shown an increase in respiratory cancers, such as those of the lung, trachea (windpipe), and larynx (voice box). Most studies of people exposed to herbicides at work, such as herbicide manufacturing workers, herbicide applicators, and farmers have not found an excess risk of lung cancer.
Most studies of groups of people highly exposed to dioxin after industrial accidents have not found an increase in respiratory cancers. However, chronic exposures to high levels of dioxin in the workplace have been linked with increased risk of respiratory cancers in some studies.
Prostate cancer: Most studies of Vietnam veterans have not found an excess risk of prostate cancer, but results from a few studies have suggested a possible link. For example, a recent study in veterans found that exposure to Agent Orange was linked to an increased risk of developing more aggressive forms of prostate cancer.
Studies of other groups have also yielded mixed results. Most studies of people exposed to phenoxy herbicides at work do not show an excess of prostate cancer. However, some studies have found a small excess risk of prostate cancer related to dioxin exposure.
Multiple myeloma: Most studies of Vietnam veterans have had too few cases of multiple myeloma (a type of immune system cancer that affects the bones) to be helpful in determining if there is a risk.
However, other studies of people exposed to pesticides, herbicides, and/or dioxins have suggested a possible link. Several studies of farmers and agricultural workers have reported a small increase in risk of multiple myeloma, although some studies show no excess risk.
Gastrointestinal (GI) cancer: Cancers of the GI system – esophagus, stomach, liver, pancreas, colon, and rectum – have been extensively studied in Vietnam veterans, groups with herbicide exposure in the workplace, and people exposed to dioxins. Most of these studies have not found a link between these exposures and any GI cancer.
Brain tumors: Most studies have not found a link between Vietnam service, workplace herbicide exposure, or dioxin exposure, and brain tumors.
Breast cancer: As most Vietnam veterans are men, in whom breast cancer is very rare, few studies have looked for possible links between Agent Orange and breast cancer. Some studies looking at exposure to dioxin in the workplace or from industrial accidents have noted a possible link, but others have not, so more research is needed in this area.
Other cancers: Few studies have looked at a possible link between Agent Orange exposure and other cancers, including cancers of the nose and nasopharynx (upper part of the throat), cervix, endometrium (uterus), ovaries, liver and bile ducts, bone, kidneys, bladder, testicles, or skin, or leukemias other than chronic lymphocytic leukemia (in veterans themselves, as opposed to their children).
Leukemia and other cancers in the children of veterans: A few studies have pointed to a possible link between a father’s exposure to Agent Orange or other herbicides and leukemia in his children. But several other studies have not found links with leukemia or other childhood cancers.

Studies done in the lab

Herbicides such as 2,4,5-T and 2,4-D are not considered highly toxic compounds by themselves, and high doses are needed to cause effects in lab animals. These compounds have not been linked with cancer in animal studies.
In the lab, TCDD (dioxin) increases the risk of a wide variety of tumors in rats, mice, and hamsters. In lab dish studies, it has been shown to alter which genes are turned on or off and affect how cells divide and die, all of which could affect cancer risk.

What the expert agencies say

Several agencies (national and international) study different substances in the environment to determine if they can cause cancer. (A substance that causes cancer or helps cancer grow is called a carcinogen.) The American Cancer Society looks to these organizations to evaluate the risks based on evidence from laboratory, animal, and human research studies.
Some of these expert agencies have looked at whether Agent Orange or related compounds can cause cancer.

Institute of Medicine

Since 1994, the federal government has directed the Institute of Medicine (IOM), part of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), to issue reports every 2 years on the health effects of Agent Orange and similar herbicides. TitledVeterans and Agent Orange, the IOM reports assess the risk of both cancer and non-cancer health effects. Each health effect is categorized as having one of the following:
  • Sufficient evidence of an association
  • Limited/suggestive evidence of an association
  • Inadequate/insufficient evidence to determine whether an association exists
  • Limited/suggestive evidence of no association
This framework provides a basis for government policy decisions in the face of uncertainty. As of the most recent update (2012), the links between Agent Orange exposure and cancer were designated as shown. (Note that this table shows only cancers. Other health effects are listed in the next section.)
IOM: Links Between Herbicides (Including Agent Orange) and Cancer
Sufficient evidence of an association
 
Soft tissue sarcoma
Non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL)
Hodgkin disease
Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), including hairy cell leukemia and other chronic B-cell leukemias
 
Limited/suggestive evidence of an association
Respiratory cancers (lung, trachea, bronchus, larynx)
Prostate cancer
Multiple myeloma
 
Inadequate/insufficient evidence to determine whether an association exists
Mouth, throat, and sinus cancers
Gastrointestinal cancers (esophagus, stomach, pancreas, colon, rectum)
Liver, gallbladder, and bile duct cancers
Bone and joint cancers
Skin cancers
Breast cancer
Female reproductive cancers (cervical, ovarian, endometrial, uterine sarcoma)
Testicular and penile cancers
Bladder cancer
Kidney cancer
Brain tumors
Cancers of endocrine glands (thyroid, thymus, etc.)
Leukemia (other than CLL and hairy cell leukemia)
Cancers at all other sites
Cancer (including leukemia) in the children of veterans

National Toxicology Program

The US National Toxicology Program (NTP), formed from parts of several government agencies, evaluates exposures that may be carcinogenic (cancer-causing).
The NTP has not classified the phenoxy herbicides, including Agent Orange, but it lists 2,3,7,8-TCDD (dioxin) as “known to be a human carcinogen.”

International Agency for Research on Cancer

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) is part of the World Health Organization (WHO). Its major goal is to identify causes of cancer.
IARC has not rated Agent Orange itself, but it classifies the phenoxy herbicides, including 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T, as “possibly carcinogenic to humans.” It lists 2,3,7,8-TCDD (dioxin) as “known to be carcinogenic to humans.”

Environmental Protection Agency

The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) maintains the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS), an electronic database that has information on human health effects from exposure to substances in the environment. The EPA is now reviewing whether 2,3,7,8-TCDD (dioxin) is carcinogenic to humans.
(For more information on the classification systems used by the NTP, IARC, and EPA, see our document, Known and Probable Human Carcinogens.)

Does Agent Orange cause any other health problems?

Vietnam service, and Agent Orange exposure in particular, have also been studied for possible links to health problems other than cancer.
In its report Veterans and Agent Orange, the Institute of Medicine has looked at the possible link between exposure to Agent Orange and other herbicides and several non-cancerous health conditions.

IOM: Links Between Herbicides (Including Agent Orange) and Other Health Effects

Sufficient evidence of an association
 
Chloracne
 
Limited/suggestive evidence of an association
Amyloidosis
Early-onset peripheral neuropathy
Parkinson disease
Porphyria cutanea tarda
High blood pressure
Stroke
Ischemic heart disease
Type 2 diabetes
Spina bifida in children of veterans
Chloracne is an acne-like rash caused by exposure to high levels of chlorine-containing chemicals.
Amyloidosis is a condition in which abnormal proteins build up in different tissues and organs in the body.
Early-onset peripheral neuropathy is a condition that starts soon (within a year) after exposure, in which damage to nerves outside the brain and spinal cord causes symptoms such as numbness or tingling in the hands and feet.
Porphyria cutanea tarda (PCT) is a condition that can result in liver damage and blistering of the skin when exposed to light.
Spina bifida is a type of birth defect in which some of the bones of the spine do not form completely before birth.
Concerns have also been raised about other conditions in exposed veterans, including psychiatric illnesses and other nervous system problems, asthma, immune system disorders, digestive diseases, infertility, and birth defects other than spina bifida. According to the Institute of Medicine, there isn’t enough evidence at this time to determine if there is a link between these conditions and Agent Orange.

Benefits for exposed veterans

Vietnam veterans and those who served at certain other locations (such as Thailand or the Korean Demilitarized Zone) who were exposed to Agent Orange or other herbicides may be eligible for 3 kinds of benefits.
Because past Agent Orange exposure is hard to prove, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) presumes that all veterans who served in certain locations at certain times might have been exposed. For example, if a veteran served in Vietnam between 1962 and 1975 and becomes disabled with one of the conditions designated as Agent Orange-related, the VA classifies his or her disability as service-related. To learn more about who might be eligible for the benefits below, call the Department of Veterans Affairs at 1-800-749-8387 or visit their website at www.publichealth.va.gov/exposures/agentorange/militaryexposure.asp.

Agent Orange Registry health exam

The Agent Orange Registry is a program administered by the VA since 1978. Veterans who qualify and participate in this program receive free medical exams, lab tests, and specialty referrals if appropriate. Veterans are not required to enroll in the VA health care system to receive the registry exam.

Disability compensation

Disability compensation payments are available for veterans with service-related illnesses or illnesses that were incurred or aggravated by military service. The amount of the monthly payment is determined by the extent of disability.
The diseases considered related to Agent Orange exposure correspond closely to the conditions found by the IOM to have “sufficient” or “limited/suggestive” evidence of an association. The cancers on the list include:
  • Hodgkin disease
  • Multiple myeloma
  • Non-Hodgkin lymphoma
  • Prostate cancer
  • Cancer of the lung, bronchus, larynx (voice box), or trachea (windpipe)
  • Soft tissue sarcoma (other than osteosarcoma, chondrosarcoma, Kaposi sarcoma, or mesothelioma)
  • Chronic lymphocytic leukemia, hairy cell leukemia, and other chronic B-cell leukemias
Conditions other than cancer on this list include peripheral neuropathy, amyloidosis, chloracne, type 2 diabetes, ischemic heart disease, Parkinson disease, and porphyria cutanea tarda. Also included are spina bifida and certain other birth defects in the children of veterans.

Medical benefits

Some veterans qualify for medical care after being exposed to Agent Orange. The VA provides medical care at VA facilities, prescription medicines, and home health and hospice care to veterans with conditions linked with herbicide exposure in Vietnam. These include the cancers and other health conditions presumed to be Agent Orange-related, as listed before.
Veterans might want to check the VA web site (www.publichealth.va.gov/exposures/agentorange) or their local VA hospitals for more information on any of these Agent Orange-related benefits.

Other things you can do for your health

Be sure your doctor knows if you have a history of Agent Orange exposure. Because of the possibility of excess cancer risk, your doctor may advise you to get cancer screening tests and to see your doctor promptly if you have suspicious symptoms.
Of course, veterans are at risk for many types of cancer just like everyone else, even if they have not been exposed to Agent Orange. You might be able to lower your risk of cancer (and other diseases) by quitting smokingstaying at a healthy weight, getting regular physical activity, eating a healthy diet, and avoiding exposure to other environmental carcinogens.
If you are concerned about past exposure to Agent Orange, you may want to join a support group online or through your local VA hospital. You might also want to consult an occupational and environmental medicine clinic. These clinics can help assess past exposures and any risk that may persist, and can recommend appropriate steps to help you protect your health. You can look for clinics near you by visiting the Association of Occupational and Environmental Clinics at www.aoec.org.

To learn more

More information from your American Cancer Society

Here is more information you might find helpful. You also can order free copies of our documents from our toll-free number, 1-800-227-2345, or read them on our website, www.cancer.org.

National organizations and websites

In addition to the American Cancer Society, other sources of information and support include*:
Department of Veterans Affairs
Toll-free number: 1-800-749-8387
Home page: www.va.gov
Information on Agent Orange: www.publichealth.va.gov/exposures/agentorange
Vietnam Veterans of America
Toll-free number: 1-800-882-1316 (1-800-VVA-1316)
Home page: www.vva.org
Information on Agent Orange: www.vva.org/Committees/AgentOrange/index.html
Institute of Medicine
Home page: www.iom.edu
Veterans and Agent Orange - Update 2012: www.iom.edu/Reports/2013/Veterans-and-Agent-Orange-Update-2012.aspx
Association of Occupational and Environmental Clinics
Website: www.aoec.org
*Inclusion on this list does not imply endorsement by the American Cancer Society
No matter who you are, we can help. Contact us anytime, day or night, for information and support. Call us at 1-800-227-2345 or visit www.cancer.org.

References

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. ToxFAQs for Chlorinated Dibenzo-p-dioxins (CDDs). 2011. Accessed at www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaqs/tf.asp?id=363&tid=63 on February 13, 2013.
Ansbaugh N, Shannon J, Mori M, Farris PE, Garzotto M. Agent Orange as a risk factor for high-grade prostate cancer.Cancer. 2013. Epub ahead of print May 13, 2013.
Chamie K, DeVere White RW, et al. Agent Orange exposure, Vietnam War veterans, and the risk of prostate cancer.Cancer. 2008;113:2464-2470.
Environmental Protection Agency. Integrated Risk Information System: 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD); CASRN 1746-01-6. 2012. Accessed at www.epa.gov/iris/subst/1024.htm on February 14, 2013.
Frumkin H. Agent Orange and cancer: An overview for clinicians. CA Canc J Clin. 2003;53:245-255. Accessed at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.3322/canjclin.53.4.245/full on February 14, 2013.
Institute of Medicine, Committee to Review the Health Effects in Vietnam Veterans of Exposure to Herbicides.Veterans and Agent Orange: Update 2012. Washington: National Academies Press, 2013. Accessed at http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=18395 on January 27, 2014.
International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans. Supplement 7: Overall Evaluations of Carcinogenicity: An Updating of IARC Monographs Volumes 1 to 42. 1987.
International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans. Volume 100F. A Review of Human Carcinogens: Chemical Agents and Related Occupations. 2012. Accessed at http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol100F/mono100F.pdf on February 14, 2013.
Manuwald U, Velasco Garrido M, Berger J, et al. Mortality study of chemical workers exposed to dioxins: Follow-up 23 years after chemical plant closure. Occup Environ Med. 2012;69:636-642.
US Department of Health and Human Services. PReport on Carcinogens, Twelfth Edition. 2011. Accessed at http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/roc/twelfth/profiles/Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin.pdf on February 13, 2013.







ublic Health Service, National Toxicology Program.
US Department of Veterans Affairs. Facts about Herbicides. Accessed at www.publichealth.va.gov/exposures/agentorange/basics.asp on February 13, 2013.
Warner M, Mocarelli P, Samuels S, et al. Dioxin exposure and cancer risk in the Seveso Women’s Health Study.Environ Health Perspect. 2011;119:1700-1705.