From: ASlater Subject: (abolition-usa) Fwd: FW: Message from Robert Redford Date: 01 Nov 2001 19:31:28 -0500 > > User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022 > Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2001 18:38:11 -0500 > Subject: FW: Message from Robert Redford > From: Elisa Novick > To: "Act against Bush's Oil bill" > X-Loop-Detect: 1 > > This is a well-written letter you can take action on. > God bless our beautiful planet. > Elisa > __________________________________________________________________________ > ______ > Subject: Message from Robert Redford > > Dear Friend, > > It is understandable that we Americans feel an almost reflexive need for > unanimity in trying times like these. As a nation, we are rightly consumed > with responding to the terrorist attacks on September 11th. But, at some > point -- and I think we're beginning to get there -- we need to take a > long-term view even as we are reacting to the current crisis. Really > important domestic issues facing us before all of this happened -- > education, energy and the environment, health care -- still have the same > dimension and consequence. But we have to recognize that it's much more > difficult to discuss and debate them in the aftermath of Sept. 11th. > Unfortunately, disagreement is sometimes characterized as unpatriotic during > times such as these and open, thoughtful discourse is somewhat muted. The > gravity of the current situation is not lost on any of us and we all want to > do what's right to insure our national security. It is with this in mind > that I felt compelled to write you today. > > A handful of determined U.S. senators, encouraged by the White House, are > arguing that national security requires the Senate to rush a pro-oil energy > bill into law. They have vowed to hold up normal Senate business and attach > the bill to every piece of legislation that comes to the Senate floor. So > far they have failed in what The Boston Globe is calling "oil opportunism." > But with President Bush, himself, now calling for rushed passage of this > disastrous bill, intense pressure is building on Senate leaders to succumb > to the emotions of the moment. Using our national tragedy as an opportunity > to advance the narrow interests of the oil lobby would not be in the best > interest of the public. This bill, already passed by the House, would not > only open the Arctic Refuge to oil rigs, it would also pave the way for > energy companies to exploit and destroy pristine areas of Greater > Yellowstone and other gems of our natural heritage. As important, it would > do nothing to address energy security. > > I'm asking for your immediate help in stopping this legislation. After > reading my letter I hope you'll take action at > http://www.savebiogems.org/arctic/index.asp?src=ab0110a > and then forward this letter to your friends and colleagues. Last spring, > the Bush administration and some members of Congress said we had to pass the > president's oil-friendly energy bill because we were facing the most serious > energy crisis since 1973. But here we are, a mere six months later, and the > energy crisis has vanished. Due to a slowing economy and falling demand, the > prices for gasoline, natural gas and home heating oil have plunged. > Meanwhile, the much-feared "summer of blackouts" in California never > happened, largely because consumers and businesses made dramatic cuts in > energy use by launching the most successful statewide conservation campaign > in history. With no energy crisis to scare us with, the administration and > pro-oil senators are now promoting their "Drill the Arctic" plan under the > guise of national security and energy independence. Don't buy it. It would > take ten years to bring Arctic oil to market, and when it arrives it would > never equal more than two percent -- a mere drop in the bucket -- of all the > oil we consume each year. Our nation simply doesn't have enough oil to drill > our way to energy independence or even to affect world oil prices. > > We possess a mere 3 percent of the world's oil reserves, but we consume > fully 25 percent of the world's oil supply. We could drill the Arctic > Refuge, Greater Yellowstone, and every other wildland in America and we'd > still be importing oil, still be paying worldwide prices for domestic oil, > and still be vulnerable to wild gyrations in price and supply. As The > Atlanta Constitution put it: "Burning through our tiny oil supply faster > will not make our country more secure." I'd go further: increasing our > dependence on oil, whether that oil comes from the Persian Gulf or the > Arctic Refuge, practically guarantees national *insecurity*. And we know > that it will bring more habitat destruction, more oil spills, more air > pollution, and more global warming. The public health implications will be > devastating. > > If our nation wants to declare energy independence, then we have no choice > but to reduce our appetite for oil. There's no other way. We need to rely on > smarter and cleaner ways to power our economy. We have the technology right > now to increase fuel economy standards to 40 miles per gallon. If we phased > in that standard by 2012 we'd save 15 times more oil than the Arctic Refuge > is likely to produce over 50 years. We could also give tax rebates for > existing hybrid gas-electric vehicles that get as much as 60 mpg. We could > invest in public transit. We could launch an "Apollo Project" to bring fuel > cells and hydrogen fuel down to earth, allowing us to begin the mass > production of vehicles that emit only water as a by-product. The list goes > on and on. In this climate of national trauma and war, it is up to us -- the > people -- to ensure that reason prevails and our natural heritage survives > intact. > > The preservation of irreplaceable wildlands like the Arctic Refuge and > Greater Yellowstone is a core American value. I have never been more > appreciative of the wisdom of that value than during these past few weeks. > When we are filled with grief and unanswerable questions it is often nature > that we turn to for refuge and comfort. In the sanctuary of a forest or the > vastness of the desert or the silence of a grassland, we can touch a > timeless force larger than ourselves and our all-too-human problems. This is > where the healing begins. Those who would sell out this natural heritage -- > this spiritual heritage -- would destroy a wellspring of American strength. > What's worse, their rush to exploit the wildness that feeds our souls won't > do a thing to solve our energy problems. There are plenty of sensible and > patriotic ways to guarantee our nation's energy security, but destroying the > Arctic Refuge is not one of them. Please tell that to your senators. They > urgently need to hear it because the pressure is on to move this pro-oil > bill to a vote in the next few weeks. It will take you only a minute to send > them an electronic message from NRDC's SaveBioGems website. > > Go to http://www.savebiogems.org/arctic/index.asp?src=ab0110a > > And please forward this message to your family and friends. Millions of > Americans need to know about this cynical attempt to promote the interests > of energy companies at the expense of everyone else. > > Sincerely yours, > Robert Redford > BioGems: Saving Endangered Wild Places > A project of the Natural Resources Defense Council > http://www.savebiogems.org - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ASlater Subject: (abolition-usa) Fwd: ALERT! Price-Anderson in House; Senate Energy Bill Date: 02 Nov 2001 17:34:46 -0500 >Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 15:18:17 -0500 >From: michael mariotte >Reply-To: nirsnet@nirs.org >Organization: NIRS >X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; U) >X-Accept-Language: en >To: nirsnet@nirs.org >Subject: ALERT! Price-Anderson in House; Senate Energy Bill >X-Loop-Detect: 1 > >Dear Friends: > >On Halloween, the House Commerce Committee approved reauthorization of >the Price-Anderson Act--the nuclear industry's unique scheme to avoid >liability for its actions (HR 2983). Unfortunately, there was no debate >about whether the Act should be reauthorized at all! Several amendments >were accepted by the Committee--some details are below. > >Commerce Committee Chairman Billy Tauzin (R-LA) is hoping to bring HR >2983 to the House floor for a vote next week, under suspension of the >rules, which means minimal debate and no amendments would be allowed. > >WHAT YOU CAN DO! >*Please call/e-mail/fax your Representatives and demand: 1) vote NO on >reauthorization of Price-Anderson; 2) Oppose allowing Price-Anderson to >be brought up under suspension of the rules. It is the height of >arrogance--and folly--for the nuclear industry and its backers to push a >major nuclear bill at this time without even debate, when National Guard >troops are being sent to new reactor sites daily and when every atomic >reactor is a potential and horrifying target. > >Because some Capitol Hill offices remain closed, you will want to call >your local offices as well. Do not bother mailing letters at this point, >they will not reach the members in time. > >*After you've contacted your member, please contact your friends and >colleagues and urge them to do the same. The key is to organize, >organize, organize. If your representatives are not hearing from >you--and many in both the House and Senate say they are not receiving >grassroots pressure on this issue--they will certainly vote for the >industry. > >*Contact your local media and let them know this is going on. A sample >letter to the editor (and sample letter to congressmembers for >fax/e-mail) will be posted on NIRS' website (www.nirs.org) later today >(Friday, November 2). > >Meanwhile, in the Senate, some Senate Republicans are continuing to seek >a quick vote on their energy bill (which includes Price-Anderson >reauthorization and oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge) >or, at the least, a Democratic alternative (which may also include >Price-Anderson reauthorization). Majority leader Tom Daschle (D-SD) said >yesterday that Congress may come back in session after >Thanksgiving--meaning that there would be that much more time for a vote >on an energy bill this session. > >Call your Senators (almost all are back in their offices) and urge them >to oppose efforts to attach any energy bill to unrelated legislation. >Urge them to oppose any energy bill with Price-Anderson reauthorization, >funding for nuclear power research and development, and oil drilling in >ANWR. Urge them to support increased funding for energy efficiency and >renewable energy technologies and increased automobile fuel efficiency >standards. > >Continue to collect signatures on the Petition for A Sustainable Energy >Future. And, again, make sure your local media are following and >understand this story. > >CONTACT INFORMATION: The Capitol Switchboard is 202-224-3121--you can >reach any member of Congress with this number. Local Congressional >offices are usually found in the blue pages of local phone books. If you >can't find your local number, call NIRS, we have them. > >Senate fax and e-mail information can be found at >http://prop1.org/prop1/senate.htm > >Unfortunately, we don't have a comparable list for the House. > > >Price-Anderson Amendments in the House. > >Amendments approved by the House Commerce Committee to Price-Anderson >included one by Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) that calls for the NRC to >create a system to make sure that vehicles transporting nuclear material >carry a list of what is being transported, that drivers receive >background checks and that no materials are brought to non-NRC-licensed >facilities. His amendment also calls for NRC to issue regulations a year >after enactment that identify >radioactive materials that are appropriate exception to the >transportation requirements. Markey's amendment also directs NRC and >other government entities to conduct a study to identify the threats to >NRC licensees in wake of the Sept. 11 attacks and other physical, >cyber, biochemical threats, air and water attacks and other scenarios. >Under the amendment, the president would be required to report to NRC >and Congress on the types of threats >identified in each area and that NRC should issues regulations based on >them. > An amendment by Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) says NRC will consult with >the assistant to the president for homeland security about location and >design of proposed >nuclear facilities to make sure it "provides for adequate protection of >public health and safety if subject to a terrorist attack." > An amendment by Rep. Charlie Norwood (R-GA), would make it easier to >build new Pebble Bed Modular Reactors (PBMR), by treating up to 1,300 MW >of their electricity as a single reactor, no matter how many of the 110 >MW or so reactors were built on one site. This is especially galling, >considering the PBMRs have no containment structure and would be sitting >ducks for terrorist groups. > Tauzin and Ranking member John Dingell (D-Mich) teamed up on a >compromise amendment that would penalize DOE contractors who engage in >"intentional misconduct." > >THANKS FOR YOUR HELP! > >Michael Mariotte >Nuclear Information and Resource Service > - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ASlater Subject: (abolition-usa) Fwd: by Nov 9 Tell DOE how much nuke waste to put in household Date: 02 Nov 2001 18:44:28 -0500 --=====================_171396274==_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable >Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 18:35:17 -0600 >From: Diane >Reply-To: dianed@nirs.org >Organization: Nuclear Information and Resource Service >X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U) >X-Accept-Language: en >To: dianed@igc.org >Subject: by Nov 9 Tell DOE how much nuke waste to put in household items >X-Loop-Detect: 1 > >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Diso-8859-1 >X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by mx.lan2wan.com id fA2NZ4Q13072 > >(apologies for multiple posting) > >Dept of Energy Comment deadline NOV 9 > >Here is quick action you can take to help stop and prevent nuke waste >getting dispersed and mixed into everything around us: > >A) Comment to the Department of Energy (DOE) by NOV 9, 2001 on their >environmental impact statement 'scoping' process. AND >B) even more importantly, SEND A COPY TO YOUR FEDERAL AND STATE elected >REPresentative and SENATORS so they know what you think of what DOE is >up to!! > > >ALERT: NOW is our chance (UNTIL NOV 9 2001) >To tell DOE How Much Radioactive Contamination from nuclear weapons >sites >we want Dispersed, =93Recycled,=94 Released into our daily-use items, raw >materials and regular trash=85 > >Comment deadline is now NOV. 9, 2001 >Send comments and resolutions by EMAIL to: >Metals.Disposition.PEIS@em.doe.gov >By Fax to: 301-903-9770 ATTN: Radmetals Disposition PEIS >(Send NIRS and your Congressmembers a copy too!) > >The US Department of Energy (DOE): > >1) has been =93releasing=94/dispersing some radioactively contaminated >materials into general commerce for decades: > >Mixed radioactive and hazardous wastes have gone to facilities designed >to take only hazardous materials. An early 1990=92s temporary moratorium >on releasing mixed wastes was subsequently silently lifted (allowing >contaminated materials out again). > >Radioactive concrete, metal, soil, plastics, chemicals, asphalt, >buildings and properties and more have been permitted to be released >from DOE controls on a =93case-by-case=94 basis at the discretion of the= DOE > >field office managers, regional DOE offices and, in some cases, DOE >Environmental Health officials at headquarters. > >Sometimes the materials would be released directly to unlicensed waste >facilities or recyclers; sometimes they would go to Nuclear Regulatory >Commission and NRC Agreement State-licensed processors who can then >release them. > >2) placed a moratorium on the release of volumetrically contaminated >metals in January 2000 and a suspension on the recycling of potentially >surface contaminated metals in July of 2000. > >Although these were steps in the right direction, some metals and all >other types of contaminated materials continue to be released. > >DOE wants to lift the moratorium and suspension and resume releasing >contaminated metals. > >3) has been using 1974 Atomic Energy Commission guidance (Regulatory >Guide 1.86) with DOE=92s own internal adaptations to justify releasing >radioactively contaminated materials and wastes into unregulated >commerce: > >DOE silently adopted revisions to its internal Order 5400.5 in the early > >1990s that allow DOE at various levels to =93authorize=94 the release from >controls of contaminated materials. (Chapters 3 and 4 of DOE internal >Order 5400.5) > >DOE considered but put off adding two more chapters to its internal >Order in late 2000, in an effort to justify lifting the moratorium and >suspension on radioactive metal release/recycling. > >4) decided to do a Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement on the >release of radioactive metals, the goal being to end the suspension on >their release-that is resume letting them out. > >Comment deadline is now NOV. 9, 2001 >Federal Register announcement of the proposed PEIS >66 FR 134: 36562-36566 Thursday July 12, 2001; > >FAX comments to 301-903-9770 ATTN: Radmetals Disposition PEIS > >MAIL comments to: Kenneth Picha Jr. EM-22 /Office of Technical Program >Integration/ Attn: Metals Disposition PEIS/Office of Envtal >Management/US Dept of Energy/ 1000 Independence Ave SW Washington, DC >20585-0113 > >EMAIL: Metals.Disposition.PEIS@em.doe.gov > >5) is only looking at the narrow issue of recycling metal from =93control= =94 > >areas in the Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement, and assuming >that its existing =91release=92 practices are acceptable. This must be >challenged. > > >NIRS Concerns: > >All options listed in the draft scope of the PEIS allow radioactive >metals out. >All options allow other radioactive materials out of DOE and contractor >sites into everyday commerce. >An option must be added that completely prohibits release of all >contaminated materials and wastes from DOE and contractor sites. > >PEIS should cover all radioactive waste and materials released for >disposal or recycle or reuse from any part of DOE sites...And should >prohibit such releases. > >Time-line is too short (even with extension to Nov. 9th) -Request >additional extension. > >Call on DOE to include evaluation of health effects, pain and suffering, > >costs and concerns by all exposed and potentially exposed members of the > >population in this and all future genertations. Demand projection of >synergistic health effects (from being exposed to radioactive and other >poisons simaltaneously). Demand evaluation, not dismissal impacts of >reduced immunity due to low, continuous doses. Demand whatever you think > >DOE should consider in evaluating the impacts of radioactive materials >randomly and routinely in contact with us, our kids and grandkids and >theirs, our pets, wildlife, our food, whatever scenarios you can >imagine. > >Public Meetings were nearly all in DOE areas and with minimal public >notice--Impacts will be on the rest of the country as well, so should >hear from other areas that will receive the wastes as garbage or daily >use items! > >**Demand DOE come clean on the bias already shown in this PEIS >process--by releasing the information on the contractors hired and the >approach being taken on this whole review. (DOE originally hired a >company that makes money from nuclear materials being released into >commerce to evaluate whether or not to allow the practice (SAIC)!! They >cancelled that contract but have refused to provide any information on >how that company was selected and what conflict-of -interest reviews >were done. They have since hired another contractor and THAT contract is > >being legally challenged--yet they proceed with this process regardless. > >To get on DOE's list for further notice on this PEIS contact > Metals Disposition PEIS > > > >More info: Diane D'Arrigo Nuclear Information and Resource Service 1424 >16th St NW Suite 404 Washington, DC 20036; 202 328-0002 ext 16; >dianed@nirs.org www.nirs.org (see second yellow URGENT icon for more >info and NIRS comments). > > > > > =20 --=====================_171396274==_ Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="dianed3.vcf" begin:vcard n:D'Arrigo;Diane tel;fax:202 462 2183 tel;work:202 328-0002 ext 16 x-mozilla-html:FALSE url:www.nirs.org org:Nuclear Information & Resource Service adr:;;1424 16th Street NW Suite 404;Washington;DC;20036;USA version:2.1 email;internet:dianed@nirs.org fn:Diane D'Arrigo end:vcard --=====================_171396274==_-- - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: marylia@earthlink.net (marylia) Subject: (abolition-usa) Urgent-Petition to Halt Bombing So Food Can Be Trucked Into Afghanistan Before Date: 04 Nov 2001 16:11:09 -0700 Dear friends: The following is time-urgent and is needed to save the lives of millions of civilians on the brink of starvation in Afghanistan. We at Tri-Valley CAREs have developed this petition to call for an IMMEDIATE halt to all bombing and military action in Afghanistan so that food can be trucked in NOW before winter makes that impossible -- and by all accounts heavy snows will likely occur by the end of this month. Please read the petition through and consider this situation seriously. We need you (and 4 friends, please) to sign and return the petition to us by fax or snail mail. We at Tri-Valley CAREs commit to sending your petition QUICKLY to 21 decision-makers -- see the end of the petition for the list. It is important that you take the extra moment to download and actually sign the petition, please. No email replies. Thank you. (Documentation quoted in the petition, below, is available on request.) In peace, Marylia Kelley PETITION TO PREVENT THE MASS STARVATION OF CHILDREN AND OTHER CIVILIANS IN AFGHANISTAN WHEREAS, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), the World Food Programme and other agencies have issued a joint statement warning that: * A humanitarian crises of stunning proportions is unfolding in Afghanistan; * More than 5 million Afghans now require humanitarian assistance to survive, including 3.8 million who depend on United Nations-delivered food rations (a number that is expected to rise to 5.5 million in November 2001); * Nearly 20 percent of those struggling to survive are children under the age of 5 years; and * Lack of safe access has created a situation where the United Nations World Food Programme has been forced to suspend operations in Afghanistan; WHEREAS, recent bombing attacks have damaged the warehouses of the International Red Cross as well as the United Nations World Food Programme, and the agencies' staff, laborers and truckers are now afraid to load, unload or transport food inside Afghanistan; WHEREAS, the United Nations has estimated that more than 50,000 tons of food must be delivered before the end of November 2001; WHEREAS, Oxfam International and other non-governmental organizations and relief workers have joined in a call for a pause in military action and an immediate undertaking to stave off mass starvation throughout Afghanistan by trucking in food before bitter winter snows make such an effort futile. THEREFORE, WE URGENTLY CALL FOR THE IMMEDIATE CESSATION OF ALL BOMBING AND MILITARY ACTION BY ALL PARTIES IN AFGHANISTAN TO PERMIT THE SAFE DELIVERY OF FOOD BY THE UNITED NATIONS WORLD FOOD PROGRAMME, THE INTERNATIONAL RED CROSS, OXFAM INTERNATIONAL AND OTHER RELIEF AGENCIES. Name (print or write clearly) Address/City/State Country 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Time is critical and winter is coming fast to Afghanistan. Help save lives. Please sign, share the petition with 4 friends, family members or coworkers and return it as soon as possible to: TRI-VALLEY CAREs, 2582 OLD FIRST STREET, LIVERMORE, CA 94550. Or, fax it to (925) 443-0177. (Documentation available on request.) We will immediately send a copy to each of the following: (1) President George Bush, (2) Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, (3) Secretary of State Colin Powell, (4) Your Senators, (5) Your Congressional Representative, and (6) All 15 countries who sit on the UN Security Council. (Donations are welcome, but not required.) Marylia Kelley Executive Director, Tri-Valley CAREs (Communities Against a Radioactive Environment) 2582 Old First Street Livermore, CA 94550 Phone: 1-925-443-7148 Fax: 1-925-443-0177 Web site: http://www.igc.org/tvc - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ellen Thomas Subject: (abolition-usa) Daybook-DC 11/5/01 - Nukes in Space etc. Date: 05 Nov 2001 09:11:06 -0500 --=====================_5109449==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, NucNews archives are posted through November 1, 2001. Here's an announcement for those in DC today: Nuclear Energy Research Advisory Committee Public meeting (Arlington, VA) = =97 10 a.m. =97 per Washington Times "Daybook" http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20011105-672568.htm The Nuclear Energy Research Advisory Committee (NERAC) holds a public= meeting. Topics include Generation IV technology, use of fisson reactors in space,= the role of nuclear energy in implementing President Bush's national energy= policy and future NERAC activities. Location: Doubletree Hotel, 300 Army Navy= Drive, Arlington. Contact: 202/586-5806. ___________________________________________________ Today's News and Archives: http://prop1.org/nucnews/briefslv.htm Submit URL/Article: mailto:NucNews@onelist.com OneList Archives: http://www.onelist.com/archive/NucNews (subscribe online) Other Excellent News-Collecting Sites - DOE Watch - http://www.egroups.com/group/doewatch Downwinders - http://www.egroups.com/group/downwinders Quick Route to U.S. Congress: http://www.senate.gov/senators/index.cfm (Senators' Websites) http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW.html (Representatives' Websites) http://thomas.loc.gov/ (Pending Legislation - Search) Online Petition to Abolish Nuclear Weapons - http://www.PetitionOnline.com/prop1/petition.html Subscribe to NucNews Briefs: mailto:prop1@prop1.org Distributed without payment for research and educational=20 purposes only, in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107. --=====================_5109449==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi, NucNews archives are posted through November 1, 2001.  Here's an announcement for those in DC today:

Nuclear Energy Research Advisory Committee Public meeting (Arlington, VA) =97 10 a.m. =97 per Washington Times "Daybook"

The Nuclear Energy Research Advisory Committee (NERAC) holds a public meeting. Topics include Generation IV technology, use of fisson reactors in space, the role of nuclear energy in implementing President Bush's national energy policy and future NERAC activities. Location: Doubletree Hotel, 300 Army Navy Drive, Arlington. Contact: 202/586-5806.

     ___________________________________________________

Today's News and Archives: http://prop1.org/nucnews/briefslv.htm
Submit URL/Article: mailto:NucNews@onelist.com
OneList Archives: http:/= /www.onelist.com/archive/NucNews (subscribe online)
Other Excellent News-Collecting Sites -
DOE Watch - http://www.egroups.com/group/doewatch
Downwinders - http://www.egroups.com/group/downwinders

Quick Route to U.S. Congress:
http://www.senate.gov/senators/index.cfm (Senators'= Websites)
http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW.html= (Representatives' Websites)
http://thomas.loc.gov/ (Pending Legislation -= Search)

Online Petition to Abolish Nuclear Weapons - http://www.PetitionOnline.com/prop1/petition.html

Subscribe to NucNews Briefs:  mailto:prop1@prop1.org

   Distributed without payment for= research and educational
purposes only, in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107.


 --=====================_5109449==_.ALT-- - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ASlater Subject: (abolition-usa) Fwd: Comm I: US rejects CTBT Date: 05 Nov 2001 15:55:21 -0500 >From: Jhwurst@aol.com >Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2001 11:54:45 EST >Subject: Comm I: US rejects CTBT >To: roched@sen.parl.gc.ca (Douglas Roche), djroche@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca, > mailbox@ipb.org (Colin Archer), MChrist@ippnw.org (Michael Christ), > robwcpuk@chch.planet.org.nz (Rob Green), > kate@chch.planet.org.nz (Kate Dewes), mccoy@pc.jaring.my (Ron McCoy), > bruna.nota@utoronto.ca (Bruna Nota), dkrieger@napf.org (David Krieger), > JGG786@aol.com, Jennifer.Simons@agra.com (Dr. Jennifer AllenSimons), > aslater@gracelinks.org (Alice Slater), > Mtheorin@europarl.eu.int (Maj-Britt Theorin), > fsbarros@if.ufrj.br (de Souza Barros), flick@igc.org (Felicity Hill), > alynw@attglobal.net (Alyn Ware), petweiss@igc.org (Peter Weiss), > org@oxfrg.demon.co.uk (Scilla Elworthy), mpi@ippnw.org (Suzy Pearce), > k.koster@inter.nl.net (Karel Koster), > CXJ15621@nifty.ne.jp (Hiro Umebayashi), > lars.g.lindskog@slmk.org (Lars G. Lindskog), > amuhl@datacomm.ch (Arthur Muhl), xanthe@ippnw.de (Xanthe Hall), > acc@internetegypt.com (Bahig Nassar), johnburroughs@earthlink.net, > mdatan@ippnw.org, lrotolo@ippnw.org (Laura Rotolo) >CC: Jhwurst@aol.com >X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138 >X-Loop-Detect: 1 > >The United States this morning was the only country to vote against a First >Committee draft DECISION (not resolution) on the CTBT. While Bush >adminstration hostility to the CTBT is nothing new, to reject even placing >the issue on the UN's agenda is a pretty stark sign of the comtempt the US >harbors for any kind of meaningful multilateral disarmament. The vote was 140 >to one. A draft decision is a purely procedural matter - shorn of political >statements, it merely asks that an item by carried over to the next year's >agenda. They are routinely approved without a vote. This was the case with >the New Agenda - its draft decision was adopted unanimously. > >The US representative said the US "does not support the CTBT" and does not >intend to re-submit it to the Senate. Again nothing new, but this is the >first time I can think of when US rejection went so far as want to push it >off the agenda. However, he went on to say the moratorium will be maintained >and that the US "understands its special responsibility under Article Six" of >the NPT. How the US can support the NPT yet reject the decisions of the >Review Conferences was left unexplained, of course. It will have to be >explained at the 2002 prepcom, if not sooner. > >Minutes after this decision was put to a vote, a second draft decision was >also voted on. The Mexican draft decision on the conference on eliminating >nuclear dangers was adopted 101 to seven with 34 abstentions. This is more >understandable since, while a procedural issue - placing the item on the >agenda - this is the first time nations have had a chance to comment on it. >Normally a new item is merely placed on the agenda by a state before the GA >begins. Therefore this procedural question became a political question. > >The First Committee is due to conclude Wednesday (two days early). Expect a >wrap-up soon. > >Jim Wurst > > > - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Lisa Ledwidge / IEER Subject: (abolition-usa) Environment-Security Connections: IEER presentation at EGA Date: 05 Nov 2001 16:27:52 -0600 --=====================_21407566==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Some people have requested a copy of IEER's presentation at the Environmental Grantmakers Association meeting, so we posted it on our web site: Two Case Studies of Environmental-Security Connections by Arjun Makhijani October 15, 2001 http://www.ieer.org/comments/egaarjun.html (Apologies for double postings.) Lisa Ledwidge Outreach Coordinator and Editor, Science for Democratic Action Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER) 2104 Stevens Ave. South | Minneapolis, MN 55404 USA phone: (612) 879-7517 | fax: (612) 879-7518 ieer@ieer.org | http://www.ieer.org --=====================_21407566==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Some people have requested a copy of  IEER's presentation at the Environmental Grantmakers Association meeting, so we posted it on our web site:

Two Case Studies of Environmental-Security Connections
by Arjun Makhijani
October 15, 2001
http://www.ieer.org/comments/egaarjun.html

(Apologies for double postings.)

Lisa Ledwidge
Outreach Coordinator and Editor, Science for Democratic Action
Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER)
2104 Stevens Ave. South |  Minneapolis, MN 55404  USA
phone:  (612) 879-7517  |  fax:  (612) 879-7518
ieer@ieer.org  |  http://www.ieer.org --=====================_21407566==_.ALT-- - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Crockett Williams" Subject: (abolition-usa) Star Wars Weapons Jeopardize the War on Terrorism, By Robert M. Bowman, Lt. Col., USAF, ret. Date: 05 Nov 2001 15:32:30 -0800 Star Wars Weapons Jeopardize the War on Terrorism By Robert M. Bowman, Lt. Col., USAF, ret. The World Trade Center is gone. The Pentagon is damaged. Thousands of Americans have died. We desperately need to find a way to make the American people secure from terrorist attack. And what are the president and Congress doing? Authorizing over 8 billion dollars for "Star Wars" -- an unworkable solution to a non-existent problem. In March I went to Washington, D.C., and met with members of Congress. Our purpose was to plan a strategy for dealing with Bush's resurrection of a Reaganesque "Star Wars" system. The ICBM "threats" justifying the system are totally phony. The only real threat to the American people is terrorism, something "Star Wars" cannot help with (even if it works). No terrorist is going to use such a high-tech, costly, complex, visible, traceable means of delivery. The real threat, I maintained, was from airplanes, ships, trucks, cargo containers, and suitcases. I asked them to withhold funding from "Star Wars" until the Administration can show that they're doing something about the real threat to the people of this country. A valiant few have tried, but alas ... too few. "Star Wars" marches on, and the coming budget-busting war on terrorism is too much, too late. The great irony is that, while "Star Wars" weapons are useless against terrorists (in fact useless as a defense of any kind), by increasing apparent U.S. military superiority and invulnerability, these weapons actually increase the fear and hatred of people in the developing nations toward our government and therefore increase the terrorist threat. Our unilateral abrogation of the ABM Treaty to build offensive "Star Wars" weapons disguised as defense also will drive a wedge between us and our allies (to say nothing of Russia and China) -- just at the time when we need their cooperation against terrorism. To make the American people secure, we most implement both short-term and long-term approaches to terrorism. In the short term, we need to protect this country from the terrorists who already hate us. In the long term, we need to avoid making more people hate us, so that existing terrorists are isolated and terrorism slowly dies out. The short term problem is one of intelligence and internal security. This does not just mean the airlines. Pilots in the past were trained to cooperate with hijackers and negotiate later. Never again. Terrorists know they will never get in another cockpit ... this was a one time deal, and they made the most of it. Now they will try other things. Smuggle bombs onto a cruise liner? Nukes on light aircraft? Sabotage a football stadium with a hundred thousand people in it? Poison water supplies? Who knows what else? We need a "red team" to think like terrorists and come up with possible scenarios so that they can be neutralized before they happen - not after. Improve intelligence. Track aliens on temporary visas. Freeze terrorist finances. But with all this, security will never be perfect. The long-term solution is to stop making new terrorists and render current ones impotent. That means avoiding indiscriminate retaliation. A massive strike which kills bin Laden will guarantee that thousands of new bin Ladens will rise up to take his place. We can have security or revenge -- not both. Only one thing has ever ended a terror campaign -- denying the terrorist organization the support of the larger community it represents. And the only way to do that is to listen to and alleviate the legitimate grievances of the people. This will require a foreign policy less obnoxious to the people of the region and less dangerous to the American people. This does not mean abandoning Israel. But it may mean withholding financial and military support until they withdraw from settlements in occupied territory and return to 1967 borders. It also means getting serious about conservation, efficiency, and renewable energy so that we are less dependent on oil sheiks. Then let Arab countries have leaders of their own choosing, not handpicked, CIA-installed dictators willing to cooperate with Western oil companies. Institute a Marshall Plan for development of the region. It would be less costly than the war currently being planned, and certainly less costly than the events of September 11th. It would also be cheaper than "Star Wars" weapons, and would actually contribute to the security of the American people rather than jeopardizing it. Providing security against terrorism will be neither easy nor cheap. But it will be much easier and less expensive if we return "Star Wars" to a quiet research program such as I directed in the 1970s. The battle against terror must be waged with intelligence and realism, not jingoism and anger. The American people deserve real security. Let's get on with it. ============================================================== Dr. Bowman directed the "Star Wars" programs under Presidents Ford and Carter and flew 101 combat mission in Vietnam. He is president of the Institute for Space and Security Studies. His PhD is in Aeronautics and Nuclear Engineering from Caltech. ============================================================== Dr. Robert M. Bowman 2066 Deercroft Dr, Viera, FL 32940 (321) 752-5955 isss@rmbowman.com Return to: Space and Security News Home Page www.webtrance.co.za (site) www.webtrance.co.za/bio.html (webcast) www.webtrance.co.za/usenet.htm (movie archive) www.webtrance.co.za/webtrance.html (alt.webtrance VID_FAQ) - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ASlater Subject: (abolition-usa) Fwd: Sunday London Times October 21, 2001 Date: 07 Nov 2001 14:55:17 -0500 >From: "Scott Cullen" >To: "Tina G" , > , > "pam slater" , > , > "jay gould" , > "janet lehr" , > "dana stone" , > "BOB" , > "barbara layton" , > "ASlater" , > "alec" , > "Alan Yoss" , > "rav" >Subject: Sunday London Times October 21, 2001 >Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2001 22:30:53 -0500 >Organization: STAR Foundation >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 >X-Loop-Detect: 1 > >Sunday Times (London, UK) >October 21 2001 > > >NUCLEAR MYSTERY: Crashed plane's target may have been reactor > >=A9 =3D caption Mission aborted: the downed plane's flight path took it >close to five >nuclear plants Photograph: Gary Tramontina > >Nicholas Rufford, David Leppard and Paul Eddy > > >The hijackers who forced a fourth passenger jet to crash during the >September 11 attacks in America may have been >intending to use it to bomb a nuclear power station to cause a >Chernobyl-type disaster. > >The FBI is studying a report that the four terrorists who seized the >plane may have been attempting to steer it towards a >cluster of nuclear power stations on the east coast of America. The most >likely target was Three Mile Island, site of >America's most serious nuclear accident in 1979. > >United Airlines flight 93 crashed into a field near the tiny town of >Shanksville, in Pennsylvania, 90 minutes after taking off from >Newark, New Jersey. All 44 passengers and crew on board died. > >Until this weekend it had been assumed that the hijackers of the plane, >a Boeing 757, were planning to fly it either to the >presidential retreat at Camp David, or to Washington and crash it into >the White House or the Congress and Senate buildings >on Capitol Hill. But security officials have now revealed that within a >week of the attacks, the FBI sent a report to MI5 >saying that a "credible source" had said that the terrorists might have >been planning to hit a nuclear plant. > >Had it breached the plant's reactor vessel, such a strike could have >caused an incident on the scale of the Chernobyl nuclear >plant in Ukraine, which spread radioactive material over thousands of >square miles in 1986. > >US security sources say that Three Mile Island, which is part-owned by >British Energy, was the subject of surveillance by >some of the hijackers and their associates in the months before the >terrorist attacks. One security official said: "Early on in the >investigation we did receive a report from the FBI that the plane may >have been heading for a nuclear power station. This >was based on their analysis that Pittsburgh is near several power >stations. > >"There is some plausibility to this and we're not trying to dismiss it. >But it may well be that nobody will ever know where the >plane was going." > >The "nuclear meltdown" assessment has not been independently confirmed >but was taken seriously enough by the FBI to >pass to European governments, including Britain and France. > >The analysis is based on a study of flight 93's flight path and the fact >that there are five nuclear power stations in the area. >Experts say that the plane does not appear to have been hijacked until >it was passing over West Virginia, some 200 miles >beyond Washington. It then made a series of >sharp turns before going into a steep descent. Aviation experts say that >at this point there were three nuclear power stations >between the plane and Washington and directly in its line of flight: >Three Mile Island, Peach Bottom and Hope Creek. > >Investigators cannot understand why the plane would have descended so >early, unless its intended target was much nearer >than Washington. The descent could have been an error by one of the >hijackers, but if so, they cannot understand why the >plane did not then climb again once control was regained. > >America has since tightened security around nuclear stations and has >taken steps to withdraw >maps on the internet showing the location of nuclear plants. A French >government minister said last week that fighters would >shoot down aircraft heading for its nuclear plants. A missile defence >system had been positioned at the Le Havre nuclear reprocessing plant. > >In Britain, security around all nuclear sites has also been increased. >David Blunkett, the home secretary, has given new >powers to the 500-strong police force that guards the sites. Atomic >Energy Authority police will be able to patrol an extra 13 >civil nuclear sites, including Sizewell, Hinkley Point and Dungeness. > >Engineering experts are divided over whether concrete containment >shields around nuclear power stations could withstand a >direct hit from a large passenger aircraft, especially one carrying >200,000lb of fuel, as was flight 93, enough to reach its >destination of San Francisco. > >The containment buildings generally have an outer structure, which for >much of the dome is 3ft-thick concrete containing large >amounts of reinforcing steel. Inside is a steel "lining" 1in-4in thick. > >There are usually two more concrete walls close to the reactor, each 1ft >thick and with reinforced steel bars. But these walls >do not enclose the top of the reactor completely. The reactor vessel >itself is about 4in-6in thick and made of high-carbon >steel. > >All reactors are designed to withstand impact by a light plane. Experts >say it is unclear whether a larger modern jet loaded >with fuel, deliberately flown at high speed, could break open the >reactor vessel. The resultant fire could, however, cause >enough damage to allow radioactive material into >the air. > >The drama aboard flight 93 as a small group of passengers tried to seize >control of the plane from the hijackers during its final >few minutes has become an emblem of American heroism during the events >of September 11. > >Delayed 40 minutes in taking off from Newark's congested airport, the >plane was in the early stages of its journey when its >passengers started hearing that other aircraft had been hijacked and at >least one had flown into the twin towers of the World >Trade Center. > >Todd Beamer, one of the passengers, called an emergency operator on an >onboard telephone after he and fellow passengers >learnt of the first attack. He explained that flight 93 had also been >hijacked. He said there were three hijackers - two with >knives and one with what he thought was a bomb strapped to his waist. In >fact, there were four, and by this time the fourth >was almost certainly flying the plane. > >Beamer, who was married with two young sons, told the operator: "We're >going to do something. I know I'm not going to get >out of this." He explained that some of passengers had decided to jump >on the terrorist thought to have the bomb. > >With the telephone left on, he could be heard saying: "Are you guys >ready? Let's roll." The operator heard screams and a >few minutes later the line went dead. > >The FBI is looking into whether another United Airlines flight, >scheduled to leave Kennedy International Airport for San >Francisco, was a target of hijackers on September 11. When the plane was >grounded because of the attacks, four Middle >Eastern-looking men refused to return to their seats and hurriedly left >as soon as its doors opened. > >Copyright 2001 Times Newspapers Ltd. > =20 - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ellen Thomas Subject: (abolition-usa) Putin will be at White House Tuesday 11/13 Date: 08 Nov 2001 13:21:54 -0500 --=====================_483829==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Hi. NucNews, D.U., Activists, Energy, and Military archives are posted through November 5, 2001. See http://prop1.org/nucnews/briefslv.htm. Russia's president, Vladimir Putin, will be visiting with President Bush at the White House on Tuesday, November 13th, to discuss the ABM Treaty, the war, etc. See http://www.washingtontimes.com/world/20011108-13705276.htm. Photos of depleted uranium babies in Iraq photographs require investigation and compensation. See http://www.answering-christianity.com/iraqi_torture.htm Be sure to support U.S. Representative Cynthia McKinney's legislation against depleted uranium: HR 3155 - http://prop1.org/nucnews/2001nn/0110nn/011017nn.htm#135 You can easily contact Congressional leaders at the Proposition One Lobby Center, http://prop1.org/prop1/letter.htm. Ellen Thomas ___________________________________________________ Today's News and Archives: http://prop1.org/nucnews/briefslv.htm Submit URL/Article: mailto:NucNews@onelist.com OneList Archives: http://www.onelist.com/archive/NucNews (subscribe online) Other Excellent News-Collecting Sites - DOE Watch - http://www.egroups.com/group/doewatch Downwinders - http://www.egroups.com/group/downwinders Quick Route to U.S. Congress: http://www.senate.gov/senators/index.cfm (Senators' Websites) http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW.html (Representatives' Websites) http://thomas.loc.gov/ (Pending Legislation - Search) Online Petition to Abolish Nuclear Weapons - http://www.PetitionOnline.com/prop1/petition.html Subscribe to NucNews Briefs: mailto:prop1@prop1.org Distributed without payment for research and educational purposes only, in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107. --=====================_483829==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Hi. NucNews, D.U., Activists, Energy, and Military archives are posted through November 5, 2001.  See http://prop1.org/nucnews/briefslv.htm.

Russia's president, Vladimir Putin, will be visiting with President Bush at the White House on Tuesday, November 13th, to discuss the ABM Treaty, the war, etc.  See http://www.washingtontimes.com/world/20011108-13705276.htm.

Photos of depleted uranium babies in Iraq photographs require investigation and compensation.  See http://www.answering-christianity.com/iraqi_torture.htm

Be sure to support U.S. Representative Cynthia McKinney's legislation against depleted uranium:  HR 3155 - http://prop1.org/nucnews/2001nn/0110nn/011017nn.htm#135

You can easily contact Congressional leaders at the Proposition One Lobby Center, http://prop1.org/prop1/letter.htm.

Ellen Thomas





     ___________________________________________________

Today's News and Archives: http://prop1.org/nucnews/briefslv.htm
Submit URL/Article: mailto:NucNews@onelist.com
OneList Archives: http://www.onelist.com/archive/NucNews (subscribe online)
Other Excellent News-Collecting Sites -
DOE Watch - http://www.egroups.com/group/doewatch
Downwinders - http://www.egroups.com/group/downwinders

Quick Route to U.S. Congress:
http://www.senate.gov/senators/index.cfm (Senators' Websites)
http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW.html (Representatives' Websites)
http://thomas.loc.gov/ (Pending Legislation - Search)

Online Petition to Abolish Nuclear Weapons - http://www.PetitionOnline.com/prop1/petition.html

Subscribe to NucNews Briefs:  mailto:prop1@prop1.org

   Distributed without payment for research and educational
purposes only, in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107.


 --=====================_483829==_.ALT-- - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Pamela Meidell Subject: (abolition-usa) FEED THE WOLF: 2001 Abolition 2000 Report Card Released Date: 08 Nov 2001 11:12:29 -0800 Dear Nuclear Abolitionists and Friends, This year's Abolition 2000 Report Card, attached, was released at the United Nations on October 24, 2001 (UN Day). It was personally handed out to each member of the First Committee, and made available at several meetings, including one on Terrorism and Disarmament. Please distribute widely and make use of it wherever you can. As we say in the report card, "in a dark time, the eye begins to see." We hope that the eyes of the world will begin to see the crucial need to abolish nuclear weapons. We would be pleased to receive any feedback. Thank you. In peace, Janet Bloomfield and Pamela Meidell P.S. Apologies for any cross postings. Pamela Meidell Director The Atomic Mirror "Reflecting and Transforming our Nuclear World through the Arts" P.O. Box 220 Port Hueneme, CA 93044 tel: 805 985 5073 fax: 805 985 7563 email: pamela@atomicmirror.org "Unless we insist that politics is imagination and mind, we will learn that imagination and mind are politics, and of a kind we will not like." Lionel Trilling - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Susan Shaer Subject: (abolition-usa) Abolition 2000 Report Card Released Date: 08 Nov 2001 14:46:24 -0500 Where do we find the report card? Susan Shaer At 11:12 AM 11/8/2001 -0800, you wrote: >Dear Nuclear Abolitionists and Friends, > >This year's Abolition 2000 Report Card, attached, was released at the >United Nations on October 24, 2001 (UN Day). It was personally handed out >to each member of the First Committee, and made available at several >meetings, including one on Terrorism and Disarmament. Please distribute >widely and make use of it wherever you can. As we say in the report card, >"in a dark time, the eye begins to see." We hope that the eyes of the world >will begin to see the crucial need to abolish nuclear weapons. We would be >pleased to receive any feedback. Thank you. > >In peace, >Janet Bloomfield and Pamela Meidell > >P.S. Apologies for any cross postings. > > >Pamela Meidell >Director >The Atomic Mirror >"Reflecting and Transforming our Nuclear World through the Arts" >P.O. Box 220 >Port Hueneme, CA 93044 >tel: 805 985 5073 >fax: 805 985 7563 >email: pamela@atomicmirror.org > >"Unless we insist that politics is imagination and mind, we will learn that >imagination and mind are politics, and of a kind we will not like." >Lionel Trilling > > >- > To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" > with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. > For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send > "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. Susan Shaer WAND Executive Director WAND, Women's Action for New Directions. Our mission is to empower women to act politically to reduce militarism and violence and to redirect excessive military resources toward unmet human and environmental needs. 781 643 6740 fax 781 643 6744 www.wand.org WAND is the only national peace organization linking women legislators across the country with local women activists as well as women in Congress in order to address issues of militarism, violence and human needs. - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Boyle, Francis" Subject: (abolition-usa) Criminality of Nuclear Deterrence Date: 09 Nov 2001 16:06:36 -0600 This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C1696A.CCAB1AE0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Dear Friends: Just a short note to let you know that i recently signed a contract with Clarity Press for my next book entitled The Criminality of Nuclear Deterrence. We hope to have it out by Spring/Summer 2002. I will keep you posted. Best regards, FAB. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954(voice) 217-244-1478(fax) fboyle@law.uiuc.edu ------_=_NextPart_001_01C1696A.CCAB1AE0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"

Dear Friends:
    Just a short note to let you know that i recently signed a contract with Clarity Press for my next book entitled The Criminality of Nuclear Deterrence. We hope to have it out by Spring/Summer 2002. I will keep you posted. Best regards, FAB.
 
Francis A. Boyle
Law Building
504 E. Pennsylvania Ave.
Champaign, IL 61820 USA
217-333-7954(voice)
217-244-1478(fax)
 
 
------_=_NextPart_001_01C1696A.CCAB1AE0-- - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "jelinker" Subject: (abolition-usa) Cheers from Northern California! Date: 09 Nov 2001 23:17:17 -0800 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_00FA_01C16974.AC92A8E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thanks sincerely, John E. Linker Member, American Nuclear Society Environmental Engineer/Chemist Santa Rosa, CA http://jelinker.homestead.com/jelinker.html ----- Original Message -----=20 abolition-europe@vlberlin. comlink. de (E-mail) ; = abolition-religious@igc. org (E-mail) ; abolition-usa@lists. xmission. = com (E-mail) ; Globenet (E-mail) ; Jane Tallents (E-mail) ; TP2000 = (E-mail)=20 Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 2:06 PM Dear Friends: Just a short note to let you know that i recently signed a contract = with Clarity Press for my next book entitled The Criminality of Nuclear = Deterrence. We hope to have it out by Spring/Summer 2002. I will keep = you posted. Best regards, FAB. =20 Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954(voice) 217-244-1478(fax) fboyle@law.uiuc.edu ------=_NextPart_000_00FA_01C16974.AC92A8E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Thanks=20 sincerely,
 

John E. = Linker
Member, American Nuclear Society
Environmental=20 Engineer/Chemist
Santa Rosa, CA
http://jelinker.homestead.com/jelinker.html
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Boyle, = Francis=20
To: abolition-caucus@egroups. com = (E-mail) ;=20 Abolition Caucus (E-mail) ; abolition-europe@vlberlin. = comlink.=20 de (E-mail) ; abolition-religious@igc. org = (E-mail) ; abolition-usa@lists. xmission. = com=20 (E-mail) ; Globenet (E-mail) ; Jane = Tallents=20 (E-mail) ; TP2000 (E-mail)
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 2:06 PM
Subject: (abolition-usa) Criminality of Nuclear=20 Deterrence

Dear=20 Friends:
   =20 Just a short note to let you know that i recently signed a contract with = Clarity=20 Press for my next book entitled The Criminality of Nuclear Deterrence. = We hope=20 to have it out by Spring/Summer 2002. I will keep you posted. Best = regards,=20 FAB.
 
Francis A. Boyle
Law Building
504 E. Pennsylvania Ave.
Champaign, IL 61820 USA
217-333-7954(voice)
217-244-1478(fax)
fboyle@law.uiuc.edu
 
 
------=_NextPart_000_00FA_01C16974.AC92A8E0-- Sign Up for NetZero Platinum Today Only $9.95 per month! http://my.netzero.net/s/signup?r=platinum&refcd=PT97 - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Boyle, Francis" Subject: (abolition-usa) RE: [abolition-caucus] Criminality of Nuclear Deterrence Date: 10 Nov 2001 10:56:26 -0600 This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C16A08.A2B9C210 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" i have been successfully arguing this point all over the world for the past 20 years--most recently in Scotland against the UK Trident 2 Force. fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954(voice) 217-244-1478(fax) fboyle@law.uiuc.edu -----Original Message----- Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 10:43 PM comlink. de (E-mail); abolition-religious@igc. org (E-mail); abolition-usa@lists. xmission. com (E-mail); Globenet (E-mail); Jane Tallents (E-mail); TP2000 (E-mail); Boyle, Francis Thanks for the notice. That is a very difficult case to make unless you specify unique circumstances. I am interested because I spent 15 years (1956 - 1971) building the nuclear deterrence. We called it filling the missile gap. Can you show that filling the missile gap was a criminal act? Was it criminal for NATO to decide to defend Europe with nuclear weapons? Good luck -- you will need it. Edward Perry Palm Springs, CA. 92262-6838 ed.perry@verizon.net ----- Original Message ----- (E-mail)> (E-mail) ; Abolition Caucus (E-mail) ; abolition-europe@vlberlin. comlink. de (E-mail) ; abolition-religious@igc. org (E-mail) ; abolition-usa@lists. xmission. com (E-mail) ; Globenet (E-mail) ; Jane Tallents (E-mail) ; TP2000 (E-mail) Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 2:06 PM Dear Friends: Just a short note to let you know that i recently signed a contract with Clarity Press for my next book entitled The Criminality of Nuclear Deterrence. We hope to have it out by Spring/Summer 2002. I will keep you posted. Best regards, FAB. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954(voice) 217-244-1478(fax) fboyle@law.uiuc.edu To subscribe to the Abolition Global Caucus, send an email from the account you wish to be subscribed to: " abolition-caucus-subscribe@egroups.com " Do not include a subject line or any text in the body of the message. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service . Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT To subscribe to the Abolition Global Caucus, send an email from the account you wish to be subscribed to: "abolition-caucus-subscribe@egroups.com" Do not include a subject line or any text in the body of the message. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service . ------_=_NextPart_001_01C16A08.A2B9C210 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
i have been successfully arguing this point all over the world for the past 20 years--most recently in Scotland against the UK Trident 2 Force. fab
 
Francis A. Boyle
Law Building
504 E. Pennsylvania Ave.
Champaign, IL 61820 USA
217-333-7954(voice)
217-244-1478(fax)
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Edward Perry [mailto:ed.perry@verizon.net]
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 10:43 PM
To: abolition-caucus@egroups. com (E-mail); abolition-europe@vlberlin. comlink. de (E-mail); abolition-religious@igc. org (E-mail); abolition-usa@lists. xmission. com (E-mail); Globenet (E-mail); Jane Tallents (E-mail); TP2000 (E-mail); Boyle, Francis
Subject: Re: [abolition-caucus] Criminality of Nuclear Deterrence

Thanks for the notice. That is a very difficult case to make unless you specify unique circumstances.
 
I am interested because I spent 15 years (1956 - 1971) building the nuclear deterrence. We called it filling the missile gap. Can you show that filling the missile gap was a criminal act?
 
Was it criminal for NATO to decide to defend Europe with nuclear weapons?
 
Good luck -- you will need it.
 
Edward Perry    Palm Springs, CA.    92262-6838        ed.perry@verizon.net
 
 
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 2:06 PM
Subject: [abolition-caucus] Criminality of Nuclear Deterrence

Dear Friends:
    Just a short note to let you know that i recently signed a contract with Clarity Press for my next book entitled The Criminality of Nuclear Deterrence. We hope to have it out by Spring/Summer 2002. I will keep you posted. Best regards, FAB.
 
Francis A. Boyle
Law Building
504 E. Pennsylvania Ave.
Champaign, IL 61820 USA
217-333-7954(voice)
217-244-1478(fax)
 
 


To subscribe to the Abolition Global Caucus, send an email from the account you wish to be subscribed to: "abolition-caucus-subscribe@egroups.com"


Do not include a subject line or any text in the body of the message.

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT

To subscribe to the Abolition Global Caucus, send an email from the account you wish to be subscribed to: "abolition-caucus-subscribe@egroups.com"


Do not include a subject line or any text in the body of the message.

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C16A08.A2B9C210-- - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: fdpeace@earthlink.net Subject: (abolition-usa) support for de-alerting Date: 12 Nov 2001 09:14:47 +0000 Recently, Congressional Representative Rush Holt (D-NJ) and Senator Jon Corzine (D-NJ) appeared at a press conference in support of De-Alerting (taking off hair trigger alert)nuclear weapons, and both were also lead sponsors of bills to encourage initiation of the process of de-alerting. ---Frank Dworak Pax Christi USA - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ellen Thomas Subject: (abolition-usa) 9 pm tonight - History Channel: "America's Lost Bombs: The Date: 12 Nov 2001 12:18:55 -0500 --=====================_12011980==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by pooky.zilch.net id fACHKEi24749 [If you have cable and a VCR and will tape this for me, I'd love to see i= t.=20 Thanks ... Ellen Thomas, NucNews Moderator - mailto:prop1@prop1.org] The world premiere of a 2-hour, primetime documentary special: "America's= Lost Bombs": The True Story of Broken Arrows" will air on The History Channel, Monday, November 12th at 9PM Eastern & Pacific. The program tackles the e= lusive and secretive history of America's nuclear weapons accidents -- most of w= hich have remained shrouded in secrecy since the first =93Broken Arrow=94 occu= rred in the early 1950=92s. The program, over a year in the making, will reveal n= ever before heard first hand accounts from the military men who survived thes= e harrowing disasters. And in some cases coming to close for comfort to th= e ultimate nuclear nightmare. The program reveals new information along wit= h formerly secret film and photos never before seen in public. Longabardi Eric, Producer/Journalist pager:(310) 307-3954 home:Tel & Fax (818) 980-9352 work:Tel (818) 980-9351 Los Angeles CA bagcam@pacbell.net ___________________________________________________ Today's News and Archives: http://prop1.org/nucnews/briefslv.htm Submit URL/Article: mailto:NucNews@onelist.com OneList Archives: http://www.onelist.com/archive/NucNews (subscribe onlin= e) Other Excellent News-Collecting Sites - DOE Watch - http://www.egroups.com/group/doewatch Downwinders - http://www.egroups.com/group/downwinders Quick Route to U.S. Congress: http://www.senate.gov/senators/index.cfm (Senators' Websites) http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW.html (Representatives' Websites) http://thomas.loc.gov/ (Pending Legislation - Search) Online Petition to Abolish Nuclear Weapons - http://www.PetitionOnline.com/prop1/petition.html Subscribe to NucNews Briefs: mailto:prop1@prop1.org Distributed without payment for research and educational=20 purposes only, in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107. --=====================_12011980==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by pooky.zilch.net id fACHKEi24749 [If you have cable and a VCR and will tape this for me, I'= d love to see it.  Thanks ... Ellen Thomas, NucNews Moderator - mailto:prop1@prop1.= org]


The world premiere of a 2-hour, primetime documentary special: "America's Lost Bombs": The True Story of Broken Arrows" will air on The History Channel, Monday, November 12th at 9PM Eastern & Pacific. The program tackles the elusive and secretive history of America's nuclear weapons accidents -- most of which have remained shrouded in secrecy since the first =93Broken Arrow=94 occurred in the ea= rly 1950=92s. The program, over a year in the making, will reveal never befor= e heard first hand accounts from the military men who  survived these harrowing disasters.  And in some cases coming to close for comfort to the ultimate nuclear nightmare. The program reveals new information along with formerly secret film and photos never before seen in public.

Longabardi Eric, Producer/Journalist
pager:(310) 307-3954
home:Tel & Fax (818) 980-9352
work:Tel  (818) 980-9351
Los Angeles CA
bagcam@pacbell.net


     ___________________________________________________

Today's News and Archives: http= ://prop1.org/nucnews/briefslv.htm
Submit URL/Article: mailto:NucNews@= onelist.com
OneList Archives: htt= p://www.onelist.com/archive/NucNews (subscribe online)
Other Excellent News-Collecting Sites -
DOE Watch - http://www.egroups.com/group/doewatch
Downwinders - http://www.egroups.com/group/downwinders

Quick Route to U.S. Congress:
http://www.senate.gov/senators/index.cfm (Senators' Web= sites)
= http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW.html (Representatives' Websites)=
http://thomas.loc.g= ov/ (Pending Legislation - Search)

Online Petition to Abolish Nuclear Weapons - http://www.PetitionOnline.com/prop1/petition.html

Subscribe to NucNews Briefs:  mailto:prop1@prop1.org

   Distributed without payment for res= earch and educational
purposes only, in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107.


 --=====================_12011980==_.ALT-- - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ASlater Subject: (abolition-usa) Fwd: [movimientoporlapaz] This Isn't the Speech I Expected to Date: 12 Nov 2001 12:28:25 -0500 > > Dear Friends, Below is a must-read speech by Bill Moyers about the state of the world today and how we can move forward. Regards, Alice > > Click here: This Isn't the > Speech I Expected to Give Today Alice Slater Global Resource Action Center for the Environment (GRACE) 215 Lexington Ave., Room 1001 New York, NY 10016 tel: (212) 726-9161 fax: (212) 726-9160 email: aslater@gracelinks.org http://www.gracelinks.org GRACE is a member of Abolition 2000, a global network for the elimination nuclear weapons. - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ASlater Subject: (abolition-usa) Fwd: action on threat reduction Date: 12 Nov 2001 16:13:49 -0500 > > X-Sender: andrew@californiapeaceaction.org@mail.megapathdsl.net > Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 14:43:29 -0800 > To: National List > From: Andrew Page > Subject: action on threat reduction > X-Original-Envelope-From: andrew@californiapeaceaction.org > X-Loop-Detect: 1 > > Urgent Action Alert > Congress and the President Must Fund Non-Proliferation Programs > > President Bush recently warned the country that Osama bin Laden and Al-Quaeda > are seeking nuclear weapons, yet neither the President nor Congress has taken > any action to address this threat. In fact, Congress just approved a budget > that cuts overall funding for non-proliferation programs by $69 million. > > Funding was cut for programs that prevent terrorists from acquiring nuclear > weapons by safeguarding nuclear materials in Russia and by creating jobs for > former Soviet nuclear scientists. Congress deserves some credit, in that > their budget provides $29 million more for non-proliferation programs than > the President had requested. > > In stark contrast, funding for nuclear weapons programs was increased by $300 > million, and funding for missile defense will be between $7.9 and $8.3 > billion this year. > > Appalled by the failure to address the most immediate nuclear threat to US > faces, several lawmakers have called for funds from the $40 billion emergency > anti-terrorism supplemental to be allocated to efforts to secure nuclear, > biological and chemical weapons and materials in Russia and other vulnerable > locations. > > Currently, the administration has allocated no funding for such activities, > and has promised to veto any attempts to increase the $40 billion > supplemental funding package. > > The debate on this funding package is supposed to begin within the week. It > is essential that our Senators and Representatives take action to provide > legitimate security for our country. > > Action: > > Call your Senators and your Representative today. Urge them to call for > increased funding for securing Weapons of Mass Destruction in the > supplemental funding package. > > Capitol Hill Switchboard 202-224-3121 > ______________________________________ > Andrew Page > Northern California Political Director > California Peace Action > andrew@californiapeaceaction.org > 510.849.2272 > "We can no longer afford to worship the God of hate or bow before the alter > of retaliation...History is cluttered with the wreckage of nations and > individuals that pursued this self-defeating path of hate." - Martin Luther > King Jr. - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ASlater Subject: (abolition-usa) Fwd: Fw: Local Power News: San Francisco Passes Solar Power Date: 12 Nov 2001 16:49:06 -0500 >From: "Bill Smirnow" >To: "Downwinders List" , > "Nucnews List" >Subject: Fw: Local Power News: San Francisco Passes Solar Power Iniatiatives >Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2001 02:53:28 -0500 >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6700 >X-Loop-Detect: 1 > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Paul Fenn" >To: >Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 9:30 AM >Subject: Local Power News: San Francisco Passes >Solar Power Iniatiatives > > >> AMERICAN LOCAL POWER NEWS FLASH >> For more, visit our site at > >> >_________________________________________________ >> San Francisco Voters Pass "Solar City Charter" >With Proposition H >> Unlimited Revenue Bond Authority Gives Green >Light to 50MW Solar Power >> Facility >> >> On November 6, San Francisco voters approved a >ballot measure giving The >> City unlimited revenue bond authority to build >solar, wind and conservation >> on residences, businesses and government >buildings. >> >> Proposition H, written as the financial vehicle >for a proposed 50 MW San >> Francisco Solar Power Facility, amends the city >charter to give the Board >> of Supervisors authority to issue revenue bonds >at will to develop >> renewable energy facilities and implement >conservation in both the public >> and private sectors. Proposition B, which also >passed on Tuesday, is >> restricted to city government facilities and is >limited to $100 million. >> >> For more information, Call Paul Fenn at 510 451 >1727. >> >> NEW ADDRESS: >> >> Paul Fenn >> Local Power >> 4281 Piedmont Avenue >> Oakland, CA 94611 >> 510 451 1727 >> 925 377 0736 >> http://www.local.org >> This message has been sent to you >> as a subscriber to the American Local Power News >> ________________________________________________ >> To unsubscribe send an email to: >> majordomo-local@list.local.org >> and in the message body put: >> unsubscribe power your-email-address >> ________________________________________________ >> Ask for Paul Fenn or Julia Peters >> American Local Power Project >> American Local Power News >> 1615 Broadway, Office 1005 >> Oakland, California 94612 >> http://www.local.org >> paulfenn@local.org >> jpeters@local.org >> Tel 510 451 1727 >> Fax 510 451 1728 > - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ASlater Subject: (abolition-usa) Fwd: Report on U.N. Test Ban Conference Date: 12 Nov 2001 18:23:52 -0500 >X-Authentication-Warning: drizzle.com: majordom set sender to owner-bananas@drizzle.com using -f >Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 18:38:52 -0500 >From: Bob Schaeffer >X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en]C-CCK-MCD (Win98; U) >X-Accept-Language: en >To: ANA Membership >Subject: Report on U.N. Test Ban Conference >Sender: owner-bananas@drizzle.com >X-Loop-Detect: 1 > > RUSSIA SAYS TEST BAN IMPASSE COULD BRING CRISIS > Sunday, November 11, 2001 > Reuters > > United Nations - Russia, challenging U.S. objections, on Sunday >warned of ``dangerous trends toward disrupting'' a global treaty banning >nuclear tests and said this could lead to a crisis and the uncontrolled >spread of nuclear weapons. > In strongly-worded statements to a U.N. conference that the >Americans boycotted, Russian officials dismissed U.S. concerns that the >Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty would undermine the safety of U.S. and >Russian nuclear arsenals and they offered to develop new verification >measures that go beyond treaty requirements. > In one statement, President Vladimir Putin said Moscow has always >considered the treaty a ``most important instrument'' in limiting >nuclear weapons and preserving strategic stability. He expressed concern >the pact has not yet taken effect and urged its quick ratification by >the United States and others. > In another statement, senior Russian official Igor Sergeyev said: >``There are dangerous trends toward disrupting (the treaty). This may >result in a crisis of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty regime and an >uncontained spread of the nuclear weapons.'' > He did not mention the United States directly in this regard. >Washington signed the pact, but it has not ratified it and the Bush >administration, which refused to even send a representative to the >conference, has said it had no plans to do so. > The aim of the conference is to review progress toward ratification >of the CTBT, which would ban all nuclear blasts, whether in the >atmosphere, in space or underground. > The pact was opened for signature in 1996. Since then 161 states >have signed it and 85 of those ratified it. > Still, the treaty has not yet entered into force because it needs >ratification by 44 states deemed nuclear arms-capable. > To date, 31 of those 44 countries including avowed nuclear powers >France, Russia and Britain have signed and ratified the pact. So 13 more >must ratify before it can take hold. > In that group, India, Pakistan and North Korea have neither signed >nor ratified the treaty while the United States, China and eight others >have signed but not ratified. > In his written statement distributed by the Russian mission to the >U.N., Putin reaffirmed Russia's intention to stand by its nuclear >disarmament and non-proliferation commitments and said this is why it >ratified the CTBT promptly. > ``We are convinced that both the early entry into force of the >treaty and making it universal in nature meet the interests of the world >community,'' he said. > CTBT skeptics say it is impossible to assure the reliability and >safety of nuclear weapons without tests. > But Sergeyev said Russia is convinced ``present-day science and >technology provide a sufficient set of measures to assure the >realiability and safety of nuclear weapons.'' Opponents also say it is >difficult if not impossible to verify the pact. Sergeyev said the >verification regime being developed under the CTBT is unprecedented and >makes it ``absolutely impossible to hide any violation of the treaty,'' >Nevertheless, ``we are prepared to suggest, to the United States in the >first place, considering the possibility to develop additional >verification measures for nuclear test ranges going far beyond the >treaty provisions,'' he said. > This could include the exchange of geological data and results of >certain experiments, installation of additional sensors and other >measures, he added. > - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John Burroughs Subject: (abolition-usa) "A call to arms control", op-ed in Washington Times Date: 12 Nov 2001 18:27:23 -0500 --=====================_34195676==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Washington Times, November 12, 2001 A CALL TO ARMS CONTROL Jim Wurst It seems like some distant past (in fact it was July of this year) when the United States tied the U.N. conference on curbing small arms into knots by insisting it was a threat to the Second Amendment. That same month, the United States turned its back on 10 years of negotiations on a protocol on compliance with the ban on biological weapons, saying the agreement would put national security and confidential business information at risk. In February, during a U.N. debate on a proposed international conference to combat terrorism, the U.S. delegate said such a conference would have no practical benefits. Conservatives welcomed these and similar moves, including rejections of agreements on the nuclear test ban, global warming and the International Criminal Court, arguing that "parchment barriers" cannot provide real safety or advantage. The Bush administration has now discovered multilateralism when it comes to combating terrorism, working with the U.N. Security Council to create instant global law requiring states to suppress financing of terrorist operations and deny haven to terrorists. At two upcoming conferences, it would be a historic mistake and disservice to the victims of terrorism to ignore vital issues of arms control and disarmament. "It is hard to imagine how the tragedy of September 11 could have been worse," U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan said during the recent debate on terrorism. "Yet the truth is that a single attack involving a nuclear or biological weapon could have killed millions. While the world was unable to prevent the September 11 attacks, there is much we can do to help prevent future terrorist acts carried out with weapons of mass destruction." One good place to start is at the Nov. 19-26 conference in Geneva, which will review implementation of the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention. The treaty bans development and possession of the weapons but lacks any verification mechanisms. Most countries, including the United States, are parties. No doubt prompted in part by the anthrax incidents, the Bush administration is now proposing that governments adopt national legislation criminalizing biological weapons development with provisions for prosecution or extradition. It is also urging the United Nations to establish procedures for investigating suspicious outbreaks or allegations of biological weapons use and other treaty compliance concerns. These are important elements of the compliance protocol the United States repudiated in July. But the Bush administration must accept the necessity of embedding these requirements in a formal international agreement rather than in easily disregarded ad hoc arrangements, and of reviving other essential elements of the protocol, including regular inspections of pharmaceutical, "biodefense" and other facilities that could be put to weapons purposes. Another important forum is the Nov. 11-13 U.N. conference on the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. While there about a dozen countries whose ratification of the treaty is needed for it to become legally binding, U.S. approval is far and away the most important. Other approvals will come sooner or later once the United States commits, including from India and Pakistan. Following a spectacularly abbreviated and uninformed "debate" in the fall of 1999, the Senate rejected ratification. Now credible concerns are heard concerning destabilization of nuclear-armed Pakistan and efforts of the al Qaeda network to obtain nuclear explosive materials. In this context, the insanity of the United States standing in the way of a global test-ban regime =97 equipped with seismological and other means capable of detecting militarily significant nuclear explosions anywhere in the world =97 becomes all too evident. While on record opposing ratification and not even scheduled to attend next week's conference, the administration says it will continue the U.S. moratorium on tests, and after September 11 rebuffed suggestions from the Energy Department that readiness for resumption of testing be boosted. However, the Bush administration has not even attempted to reconcile its opposition to the test-ban treaty with the U.S. promises in 1995 and 2000 to the parties to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty to ratify the treaty and eliminate nuclear arsenals. At the heart of issues relating to biological and nuclear weapons is the simple belief that while it is acceptable, even desirable, that a few "responsible" countries possess weapons of mass destruction, everyone else must be shackled. This is logically, morally and legally unsustainable. The United States must lead the way in stripping the veil of legitimacy from these weapons for their global control and elimination to be successful. Jim Wurst is program director for the New York-based Lawyers' Committee on Nuclear Policy. (http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20011112-22134912.htm) Copyright (c) 2001 News World Communications, Inc. All rights reserved.=20 =20 John Burroughs, Executive Director=20 Lawyers' Committee on Nuclear Policy=20 211 E. 43d St., Suite 1204=20 New York, New York 10017 USA=20 tel: +1 212 818 1861 fax: 818 1857=20 e-mail: johnburroughs@lcnp.org website: www.lcnp.org=20 --=====================_34195676==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Washington Times, November 12, 2001

A CALL TO ARMS CONTROL

Jim Wurst

It seems like some distant past (in fact it was July of this
year) when the United States tied the U.N. conference on
curbing small arms into knots by insisting it was a threat
to the Second Amendment. That same month, the United States
turned its back on 10 years of negotiations on a protocol on
compliance with the ban on biological weapons, saying the
agreement would put national security and confidential
business information at risk. In February, during a U.N.
debate on a proposed international conference to combat
terrorism, the U.S. delegate said such a conference would
have no practical benefits.

      Conservatives welcomed these and similar moves,
including rejections of agreements on the nuclear test ban,
global warming and the International Criminal Court, arguing
that "parchment barriers" cannot provide real safety or
advantage.

      The Bush administration has now discovered
multilateralism when it comes to combating terrorism,
working with the U.N. Security Council to create instant
global law requiring states to suppress financing of
terrorist operations and deny haven to terrorists. At two
upcoming conferences, it would be a historic mistake and
disservice to the victims of terrorism to ignore vital
issues of arms control and disarmament.

      "It is hard to imagine how the tragedy of September 11
could have been worse," U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan
said during the recent debate on terrorism. "Yet the truth
is that a single attack involving a nuclear or biological
weapon could have killed millions. While the world was
unable to prevent the September 11 attacks, there is much we
can do to help prevent future terrorist acts carried out
with weapons of mass destruction."

      One good place to start is at the Nov. 19-26
conference in Geneva, which will review implementation of
the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention. The treaty bans
development and possession of the weapons but lacks any
verification mechanisms. Most countries, including the
United States, are parties. No doubt prompted in part by the
anthrax incidents, the Bush administration is now proposing
that governments adopt national legislation criminalizing
biological weapons development with provisions for
prosecution or extradition. It is also urging the United
Nations to establish procedures for investigating suspicious
outbreaks or allegations of biological weapons use and other
treaty compliance concerns.

      These are important elements of the compliance
protocol the United States repudiated in July. But the Bush
administration must accept the necessity of embedding these
requirements in a formal international agreement rather than
in easily disregarded ad hoc arrangements, and of reviving
other essential elements of the protocol, including regular
inspections of pharmaceutical, "biodefense" and other
facilities that could be put to weapons purposes.

      Another important forum is the Nov. 11-13 U.N.
conference on the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. While there
about a dozen countries whose ratification of the treaty is
needed for it to become legally binding, U.S. approval is
far and away the most important. Other approvals will come
sooner or later once the United States commits, including
from India and Pakistan. Following a spectacularly
abbreviated and uninformed "debate" in the fall of 1999, the
Senate rejected ratification. Now credible concerns are
heard concerning destabilization of nuclear-armed Pakistan
and efforts of the al Qaeda network to obtain nuclear
explosive materials. In this context, the insanity of the
United States standing in the way of a global test-ban
regime  =97 equipped with seismological and other means
capable of detecting militarily significant nuclear
explosions anywhere in the world =97 becomes all too evident.

      While on record opposing ratification and not even
scheduled to attend next week's conference, the
administration says it will continue the U.S. moratorium on
tests, and after September 11 rebuffed suggestions from the
Energy Department that readiness for resumption of testing
be boosted. However, the Bush administration has not even
attempted to reconcile its opposition to the test-ban treaty
with the U.S. promises in 1995 and 2000 to the parties to
the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty to ratify the treaty and
eliminate nuclear arsenals.

      At the heart of issues relating to biological and
nuclear weapons is the simple belief that while it is
acceptable, even desirable, that a few "responsible"
countries possess weapons of mass destruction, everyone else
must be shackled. This is logically, morally and legally
unsustainable. The United States must lead the way in
stripping the veil of legitimacy from these weapons for
their global control and elimination to be successful.

Jim Wurst is program director for the New York-based
Lawyers' Committee on Nuclear Policy.
(http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20011112-22134912.htm= )

Copyright (c) 2001 News World Communications, Inc. All
rights reserved.
        &= nbsp;         &n= bsp;     
        &= nbsp;         &n= bsp;     John Burroughs, Executive Director
        &= nbsp;         &n= bsp;     Lawyers' Committee on Nuclear Policy
        &= nbsp;         &n= bsp;     211 E. 43d St., Suite 1204
        &= nbsp;         &n= bsp;     New York, New York 10017 USA
        &= nbsp;         &n= bsp;     tel: +1 212 818 1861 fax: 818 1857
        &= nbsp;         &n= bsp;     e-mail: johnburroughs@lcnp.org
         =           &= nbsp;    website: www.lcnp.org=20 --=====================_34195676==_.ALT-- - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Joseph Gerson Subject: (abolition-usa) Question Date: 13 Nov 2001 13:06:03 -0500 Dear John, I'm a HDS student currently working with Joe at AFSC. We're organizing a New England-wide conference on the aftermath on Sept. 11. Could you recommend any particulary good resources, in addition to those included in your post- Sept. 11 newsletter, around the International Court and legal alternatives to the current war? Thank you in anticipation of your help in this matter. Yours sincerely, Nick Godfrey -----Original Message----- Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 6:27 PM Washington Times, November 12, 2001 A CALL TO ARMS CONTROL Jim Wurst It seems like some distant past (in fact it was July of this year) when the United States tied the U.N. conference on curbing small arms into knots by insisting it was a threat to the Second Amendment. That same month, the United States turned its back on 10 years of negotiations on a protocol on compliance with the ban on biological weapons, saying the agreement would put national security and confidential business information at risk. In February, during a U.N. debate on a proposed international conference to combat terrorism, the U.S. delegate said such a conference would have no practical benefits. Conservatives welcomed these and similar moves, including rejections of agreements on the nuclear test ban, global warming and the International Criminal Court, arguing that "parchment barriers" cannot provide real safety or advantage. The Bush administration has now discovered multilateralism when it comes to combating terrorism, working with the U.N. Security Council to create instant global law requiring states to suppress financing of terrorist operations and deny haven to terrorists. At two upcoming conferences, it would be a historic mistake and disservice to the victims of terrorism to ignore vital issues of arms control and disarmament. "It is hard to imagine how the tragedy of September 11 could have been worse," U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan said during the recent debate on terrorism. "Yet the truth is that a single attack involving a nuclear or biological weapon could have killed millions. While the world was unable to prevent the September 11 attacks, there is much we can do to help prevent future terrorist acts carried out with weapons of mass destruction." One good place to start is at the Nov. 19-26 conference in Geneva, which will review implementation of the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention. The treaty bans development and possession of the weapons but lacks any verification mechanisms. Most countries, including the United States, are parties. No doubt prompted in part by the anthrax incidents, the Bush administration is now proposing that governments adopt national legislation criminalizing biological weapons development with provisions for prosecution or extradition. It is also urging the United Nations to establish procedures for investigating suspicious outbreaks or allegations of biological weapons use and other treaty compliance concerns. These are important elements of the compliance protocol the United States repudiated in July. But the Bush administration must accept the necessity of embedding these requirements in a formal international agreement rather than in easily disregarded ad hoc arrangements, and of reviving other essential elements of the protocol, including regular inspections of pharmaceutical, "biodefense" and other facilities that could be put to weapons purposes. Another important forum is the Nov. 11-13 U.N. conference on the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. While there about a dozen countries whose ratification of the treaty is needed for it to become legally binding, U.S. approval is far and away the most important. Other approvals will come sooner or later once the United States commits, including from India and Pakistan. Following a spectacularly abbreviated and uninformed "debate" in the fall of 1999, the Senate rejected ratification. Now credible concerns are heard concerning destabilization of nuclear-armed Pakistan and efforts of the al Qaeda network to obtain nuclear explosive materials. In this context, the insanity of the United States standing in the way of a global test-ban regime - equipped with seismological and other means capable of detecting militarily significant nuclear explosions anywhere in the world - becomes all too evident. While on record opposing ratification and not even scheduled to attend next week's conference, the administration says it will continue the U.S. moratorium on tests, and after September 11 rebuffed suggestions from the Energy Department that readiness for resumption of testing be boosted. However, the Bush administration has not even attempted to reconcile its opposition to the test-ban treaty with the U.S. promises in 1995 and 2000 to the parties to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty to ratify the treaty and eliminate nuclear arsenals. At the heart of issues relating to biological and nuclear weapons is the simple belief that while it is acceptable, even desirable, that a few "responsible" countries possess weapons of mass destruction, everyone else must be shackled. This is logically, morally and legally unsustainable. The United States must lead the way in stripping the veil of legitimacy from these weapons for their global control and elimination to be successful. Jim Wurst is program director for the New York-based Lawyers' Committee on Nuclear Policy. ( http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20011112-22134912.htm ) Copyright (c) 2001 News World Communications, Inc. All rights reserved. John Burroughs, Executive Director Lawyers' Committee on Nuclear Policy 211 E. 43d St., Suite 1204 New York, New York 10017 USA tel: +1 212 818 1861 fax: 818 1857 e-mail: johnburroughs@lcnp.org website: www.lcnp.org - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John Burroughs Subject: (abolition-usa) Putin and Bush: Below the Surface Date: 14 Nov 2001 10:03:17 -0500 Institute for Public Accuracy 915 National Press Building, Washington, D.C. 20045 (202) 347-0020 * http://www.accuracy.org * ipa@accuracy.org ___________________________________________________ 5:00 PM Eastern Time -- Tuesday, November 13, 2001 Interviews Available: Putin and Bush: Below the Surface At his news conference with President Vladimir Putin this afternoon, President Bush talked of a shared commitment to "peace and progress" along with "free markets and the rule of law." As the two leaders continue to meet this week, the following analysts are available for interviews: DAVID KOTZ, (413) 545-0739, (413) 584-2547, dmkotz@econs.umass.edu Co-author of "Revolution From Above: The Demise of the Soviet System" and professor of economics at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, Kotz said today: "There are reasons to be wary of the newly developed closer relationship between the Putin and Bush administrations.... The tactical importance of Russian help for the administration's war in Afghanistan has led Bush to softpedal any criticism of the brutal Russian military tactics in Chechnya. This reinforces the impression that American criticism of 'evil' in the world depends strongly on the context -- that is, on whether the perpetrator is a government that the U.S. desires to befriend or to oppose. Even worse, implicit American acceptance of Russian brutality in Muslim Chechnya lends support to the charge that the U.S. is leading a war against Islam. Russia's recent Chechnya experience has lessons for the United States. Following several apartment bombings in Russia attributed to Chechen terrorists, Russian forces re-entered Chechnya behind brutal artillery bombardments. The years of lawlessness and chaos in Chechnya during the period of de facto independence had made many Chechens ready to welcome the Russians back. However, Russia's military tactics outraged and alienated the local population, undermining the Russians' aim of effectively regaining control of the breakaway province. There is a danger that the U.S. may be making similar miscalculations, if American military tactics outrage Muslims around the world, dissipating the sympathy for America and the support for anti-terrorist action engendered by the Sept. 11 attacks." JAY TRUMAN, (208) 776-5903, hermit@downwinders.org, http://www.downwinders.org Director of the Downwinders organization, Truman is an authority on nuclear weapons. He said today: "Bush and Putin are outlining reductions in the number of deployed nuclear weapons, but at the same time, Bush is leaving the door open for an arms race. As Bush was speaking, the U.S. government was boycotting the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty conference in New York. Weapons cuts and eliminating the ability to produce weapons should go hand in hand. What we say and what we do are different -- that's why we have an arms race in South Asia." JOHN BURROUGHS, (212) 818-1861, (718) 548-8749, lcnp@lcnp.org, http://www.lcnp.org Burroughs is executive director of the Lawyers' Committee on Nuclear Policy. He said today: "Bush's announced intention is to maintain about 2,000 operational long-range nuclear weapons for the next decade.... [This] definitely does not fulfill the legal obligation under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty of the United States and other nuclear-armed countries to eliminate their nuclear arsenals." BRUCE GAGNON, (352) 337-9274, globalnet@mindspring.com, http://www.space4peace.org International coordinator of the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space, Gagnon said today: "Bush's statement that we have 'different points of view on ABM' reflects the reality that the U.S. still intends to 'break out' of the ABM treaty and ultimately deploy the destabilizing and costly Star Wars program. The U.S. intends to 'control and dominate' space. A new space-based arms race will ensue." For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy: Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020 or (202) 332-5055; David Zupan, (541) 484-9167 - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Crockett Williams" Subject: (abolition-usa) Bush & Putin Behind the Scenes Date: 13 Nov 2001 21:36:38 -0800 For a more effective, integrated approach, you might want to include info about "behind the scenes" connections between the US and Russia vis a vis illegal money laudering and drug industry mega-profit picture which seems= to be compromising folks to the very tops of each government. See my letter= to Helen Thomas below for details and reasons for suggesting, eg, Ruppert an= d Fitts for speaking at such events as yours below. Institute for Public Accuracy 915 National Press Building, Washington, D.C. 20045 (202) 347-0020 * http://www.accuracy.org * ipa@accuracy.org ___________________________________________________ 5:00 PM Eastern Time -- Tuesday, November 13, 2001 Interviews Available: Putin and Bush: Below the Surface At his news conference with President Vladimir Putin this afternoon, President Bush talked of a shared commitment to "peace and progress" along with "free markets and the rule of law." As the two leade= rs continue to meet this week, the following analysts are available for interviews: DAVID KOTZ, (413) 545-0739, (413) 584-2547, dmkotz@econs.umass.edu Co-author of "Revolution From Above: The Demise of the Soviet System" and professor of economics at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, Kot= z said today: "There are reasons to be wary of the newly developed closer relationship between the Putin and Bush administrations.... The tactical importance of Russian help for the administration's war in Afghanistan ha= s led Bush to softpedal any criticism of the brutal Russian military tactic= s in Chechnya. This reinforces the impression that American criticism of 'evil' in the world depends strongly on the context -- that is, on whethe= r the perpetrator is a government that the U.S. desires to befriend or to oppose. Even worse, implicit American acceptance of Russian brutality in Muslim Chechnya lends support to the charge that the U.S. is leading a wa= r against Islam. Russia's recent Chechnya experience has lessons for the United States. Following several apartment bombings in Russia attributed = to Chechen terrorists, Russian forces re-entered Chechnya behind brutal artillery bombardments. The years of lawlessness and chaos in Chechnya during the period of de facto independence had made many Chechens ready t= o welcome the Russians back. However, Russia's military tactics outraged an= d alienated the local population, undermining the Russians' aim of effectively regaining control of the breakaway province. There is a dange= r that the U.S. may be making similar miscalculations, if American military tactics outrage Muslims around the world, dissipating the sympathy for America and the support for anti-terrorist action engendered by the Sept. 11 attacks." JAY TRUMAN, (208) 776-5903, hermit@downwinders.org, http://www.downwinders.org Director of the Downwinders organization, Truman is an authority on nucle= ar weapons. He said today: "Bush and Putin are outlining reductions in the number of deployed nuclear weapons, but at the same time, Bush is leaving the door open for an arms race. As Bush was speaking, the U.S. government was boycotting the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty conference in New York. Weapons cuts and eliminating the ability to produce weapons should go han= d in hand. What we say and what we do are different -- that's why we have a= n arms race in South Asia." JOHN BURROUGHS, (212) 818-1861, (718) 548-8749, lcnp@lcnp.org, http://www.lcnp.org Burroughs is executive director of the Lawyers' Committee on Nuclear Policy. He said today: "Bush's announced intention is to maintain about 2,000 operational long-range nuclear weapons for the next decade.... [Thi= s] definitely does not fulfill the legal obligation under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty of the United States and other nuclear-armed countries to eliminate their nuclear arsenals." BRUCE GAGNON, (352) 337-9274, globalnet@mindspring.com, http://www.space4peace.org International coordinator of the Global Network Against Weapons and Nucle= ar Power in Space, Gagnon said today: "Bush's statement that we have 'different points of view on ABM' reflects the reality that the U.S. stil= l intends to 'break out' of the ABM treaty and ultimately deploy the destabilizing and costly Star Wars program. The U.S. intends to 'control and dominate' space. A new space-based arms race will ensue." For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy: Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020 or (202) 332-5055; David Zupan, (541) 484-91= 67 - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.co= m" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. Is Bush trying to protect dad? -- "Out of The Loop" Bush Dynasty Unravelling? [fwd] Sent to Helen Thomas, columnist for Hearst Newspapers; national med= ia list, etc. Dear Ms. Thomas, et. al., I think you have asked here the "64 trillion-dollar question" and, given your wide recognition as the "Dean of White House Reporters" as a result = of your tenure formerly with UPI, your simply asking this question may becom= e an historical turning point should the media actually publish the answers available from researchers like former Los Angeles Police Department investigator Michael C. Ruppert, former GHW Bush HUD official Catherine Austin Fitts, and former major TV network producer Daniel Hopsicker, all = of whom have experienced severe oppression for their attempts to publicize t= he related info/answers they have developed over the past decade or so. What is GW Bush trying to hide with this secrecy order? When his dad was Reagan's Vice President, Bush added a new phrase to the now popular lexic= on when regarding the "Iran-Contra Affair" he said "I was out of the loop". This is where you might start. Convincing evidence shows that he was not only "in the loop" but was perhaps one of the "loopmasters". For starters I suggest that you check the copious and well documented articles by Ruppert at his website http://www.copvcia.com, recent 3-part article by Catherine Austin Fitts at http://www.narconews.com (her websit= e is http://www.solari.com), Hopsicker's website http://www.madcowprod.com where you will find on-balance dirt on the Clinton camp as well, and rela= ted info at http://www.cia-drugs.org If you do, I guarantee that you and other media folks will have a career high experience with the details available relevant to how and why we are now in a war crisis situation to protect the globalizing economy and stoc= k market fueled by covert illegal drug industry profits (in conjunction wit= h petroleum energy industry, see Stan Goff articles at narconews.com) fostering almost unfathomable levels of widespread corruption to the high= est levels of our government and its elected officials, military, law enforcement, and intelligence agencies. I am copying this to key folks for their direct advice to you on the answ= er to your question. David Crockett Williams an American Peace Movement member http://groups.yahoo.com/group/an-american-peace-movement ---------thanks to truthout.com for forwarding below article: http://seattlep-i.nwsource.com/opinion/45766_helen7.shtml OPINION Is Bush trying to protect dad? Thursday, November 8, 2001 By HELEN THOMAS HEARST NEWSPAPERS WASHINGTON -- It's easy to see why President Bush wants to keep his administration's current secrets, especially in wartime. But why is he trying to hide historic White House documents of the Reagan administration that former President Ronald Reagan agreed in writing to release to the public? Reagan issued an order in 1989 that called for disclosure of most of his official papers 12 years after he left office. Until 1978 American presidents had complete control over the release of their internal communications. But after Watergate and the struggle with President Richard Nixon over th= e release of his records and tape recordings, Congress passed the 1978 Presidential Records Act, which provided for the release to the public of presidential papers 12 years after the chief executive leaves office. Reagan's records were supposed to be released in January, and historians were eagerly awaiting them. But because of delays ordered by White House counsel Albert R. Gonzales, researchers and the public may never get to s= ee them. Welcome to the handy excuse of "national security." It is being used to cover any past, current or future questionable government activities unde= r a new order Bush has signed. The six-page document requires anyone seeking papers of past presidents and vice presidents to demonstrate a "specific need" for those papers before they can be produced. And any release then will be at the discretion of the sitting president -- even if a past president wants the information released. Bush's father was vice presiden= t under Reagan. Amazingly, the current president's press secretary, Ari Fleischer, told reporters the aim of the order was to introduce an "orderly process" for releasing the documents. And Gonzalez said White House officials recogniz= e "the importance, for historical reasons, of releasing as much information= as we can." He even added that "there may be reasons that it's inappropriate= or harmful to the country not to release certain information." Yet the order is clearly protective of the president's father and officia= ls who are back at the White House in top jobs after serving in the Bush I administration between 1989 and 1993. Gonzales said the order will put the incumbent president "in a better position to decide whether or not the release of documents of a former president does, in fact, jeopardize the national security of this country= ." Gonzales said anyone who would challenge a decision under the order could= go to court. But he admitted that the legal battle would take years. Thanks a lot. Knowledge is power. Why shouldn't the American people know what was done = in their name? Aren't presidents supposed to trust the public with the facts= in an open and democratic society? Or am I dreaming? Some 68,000 pages of confidential messages between Reagan and his adviser= s were closely reviewed by his presidential library staff and cleared for release. But now the White House has seen fit to put a permanent hold on their disclosure to the public. Remember the Iran-Contra scandal of the late 1980s in which Reagan's aide= s sold arms covertly to Iran and used the proceeds to illegally fund the Contra rebels in Nicaragua? It led to congressional hearings and criminal indictments that tainted the Reagan-Bush administration in its final year= s. The new far-reaching order, obviously designed to block historic revelations, covers most records and state secrets in the White House fil= es. You can be sure they will stay secret if this order is upheld in the cour= ts. The Bush order declares that documents subject to release after 12 years that are not covered by "constitutionally-based privileges" will fall int= o the category of freedom-of-information requests. That will permit the Archivist of the United States to withhold them, too. It's a shame that a former president will no longer have the last word on release of his official papers if the sitting president disagrees with th= e disclosure. The Bush order said that "absent compelling circumstances," the incumbent president or a future president would have the right to determine whether= he or she agrees with the former president's decision. Secrecy is endemic in government, but this order goes counter to the American tradition of government by the people and for the people. True, it's wartime and information is important. But so is truth, and tru= st is a two-way street. The American people have always been willing to give government the benef= it of the doubt until those in charge lose their credibility. Witness the Vietnam War and the Watergate scandal in which Lyndon B. Johnson and Nixo= n, respectively, lost the trust of the American people. Historians and write= rs are still digging out the deceptions of those eras. Is the Bush White House trying to protect the reputations of prominent political players -- especially George H. W. Bush -- through suppression = of historic data? If so, that would deny the American people a chance to hol= d their past public servants accountable, albeit belatedly. We have a right to know what our history is, warts and all. =A9 1998-2001 Seattle Post-Intelligencer - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Alan Haber Subject: Re: (abolition-usa) "A call to arms control"/crawford Date: 15 Nov 2001 01:29:34 -0500 thank you john for forwarding this "call"=20 my own confession, as the great crawford ranch summit commences: i lament my failure sufficiently to persevere to gather a global movement presence there, to advance such calls for peace as this, and many others, in the face of the masters of war, and in the eye and ear of the so called media waiting there for news. my attention, as others, was hijacked by the hijacking and beside trying to keep my woodshop and work functioning and bread on the table, the needs of a rapidly growing outreaching peace movement here and on going campaigns like keeping space for peace, israel and palestine, and a writing project and megiddo have over occupied my attention.=20 i am also disappointed that the organized peace and justice, anti-nuclear, anti-militarist, pro-international law, cooperation etc. organizations did not somehow pick up on this golden opportunity for a humanitarian, non-governmental network effort to take the message to the man on this occasion.=20 there should have been some funding, some process in the movement-network-coalition-campaign to say let's go for it. and there should be in the future for whatever some future it might be, some it of direct action or dramatic intervention. =20 mostly i'm sorry i didn't do more to keep focused and it would have been interesting in the current setting to try to get a message to the man.=20 as the press agents applaud massive "reductions" in nuclear weapons, the voice for "abolition" should be raised, that these weapons don't benefit, get rid of them all, and don't start in their place new weapons systems, star wars weapons, moving the money to control space to control the entire earth, bases for a military encirclement of china, etc. give it up, go for an end of war and a real alliance for peace and justice. people all over are struggling for answers. many, maybe most know in their heart of hearts that things aren't right. there is a hunger for a picture of an alternative, a positive practical program, increasing security, prosperity and freedom, more effective than militarism and murder, called war. the culture of peace has been trumped by blood and violence. armed struggle was almost a thing of the past. maybe this grand alliance against terrorism could become a real global force for democracy and liberation, turning on its masters as it were, and limiting the military front, and increasing the political and diplomatic forces. i try and keep hopeful, but it looks like hard hearted thin lipped fascists making their move in washington, abridging rights, ignoring freedoms, making an us or them, for us or against us division in the world, asserting domination, chilling politics and foreboding dark times indeed. anyhow i thought i would write something in contributing to the great crawford texas summit. i prey the powers that be have a turn of heart and actually consider what they might do for peace.=20 hoping you, and all on this list, are well. maybe our network should have a conference call soon.=20 alan haber John Burroughs wrote: >=20 > ----------------------------------------------------------- > Washington Times, November 12, 2001 >=20 > A CALL TO ARMS CONTROL >=20 > Jim Wurst > ----------------------------------------------------------- >=20 > It seems like some distant past (in fact it was July of this > year) when the United States tied the U.N. conference on > curbing small arms into knots by insisting it was a threat > to the Second Amendment. That same month, the United States > turned its back on 10 years of negotiations on a protocol on > compliance with the ban on biological weapons, saying the > agreement would put national security and confidential > business information at risk. In February, during a U.N. > debate on a proposed international conference to combat > terrorism, the U.S. delegate said such a conference would > have no practical benefits. >=20 > Conservatives welcomed these and similar moves, > including rejections of agreements on the nuclear test ban, > global warming and the International Criminal Court, arguing > that "parchment barriers" cannot provide real safety or > advantage. >=20 > The Bush administration has now discovered > multilateralism when it comes to combating terrorism, > working with the U.N. Security Council to create instant > global law requiring states to suppress financing of > terrorist operations and deny haven to terrorists. At two > upcoming conferences, it would be a historic mistake and > disservice to the victims of terrorism to ignore vital > issues of arms control and disarmament. >=20 > "It is hard to imagine how the tragedy of September 11 > could have been worse," U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan > said during the recent debate on terrorism. "Yet the truth > is that a single attack involving a nuclear or biological > weapon could have killed millions. While the world was > unable to prevent the September 11 attacks, there is much we > can do to help prevent future terrorist acts carried out > with weapons of mass destruction." >=20 > One good place to start is at the Nov. 19-26 > conference in Geneva, which will review implementation of > the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention. The treaty bans > development and possession of the weapons but lacks any > verification mechanisms. Most countries, including the > United States, are parties. No doubt prompted in part by the > anthrax incidents, the Bush administration is now proposing > that governments adopt national legislation criminalizing > biological weapons development with provisions for > prosecution or extradition. It is also urging the United > Nations to establish procedures for investigating suspicious > outbreaks or allegations of biological weapons use and other > treaty compliance concerns. >=20 > These are important elements of the compliance > protocol the United States repudiated in July. But the Bush > administration must accept the necessity of embedding these > requirements in a formal international agreement rather than > in easily disregarded ad hoc arrangements, and of reviving > other essential elements of the protocol, including regular > inspections of pharmaceutical, "biodefense" and other > facilities that could be put to weapons purposes. >=20 > Another important forum is the Nov. 11-13 U.N. > conference on the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. While there > about a dozen countries whose ratification of the treaty is > needed for it to become legally binding, U.S. approval is > far and away the most important. Other approvals will come > sooner or later once the United States commits, including > from India and Pakistan. Following a spectacularly > abbreviated and uninformed "debate" in the fall of 1999, the > Senate rejected ratification. Now credible concerns are > heard concerning destabilization of nuclear-armed Pakistan > and efforts of the al Qaeda network to obtain nuclear > explosive materials. In this context, the insanity of the > United States standing in the way of a global test-ban > regime =97 equipped with seismological and other means > capable of detecting militarily significant nuclear > explosions anywhere in the world =97 becomes all too evident. >=20 > While on record opposing ratification and not even > scheduled to attend next week's conference, the > administration says it will continue the U.S. moratorium on > tests, and after September 11 rebuffed suggestions from the > Energy Department that readiness for resumption of testing > be boosted. However, the Bush administration has not even > attempted to reconcile its opposition to the test-ban treaty > with the U.S. promises in 1995 and 2000 to the parties to > the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty to ratify the treaty and > eliminate nuclear arsenals. >=20 > At the heart of issues relating to biological and > nuclear weapons is the simple belief that while it is > acceptable, even desirable, that a few "responsible" > countries possess weapons of mass destruction, everyone else > must be shackled. This is logically, morally and legally > unsustainable. The United States must lead the way in > stripping the veil of legitimacy from these weapons for > their global control and elimination to be successful. >=20 > Jim Wurst is program director for the New York-based > Lawyers' Committee on Nuclear Policy. > ----------------------------------------------------------- > (http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20011112-22134912.htm) >=20 > Copyright (c) 2001 News World Communications, Inc. All > rights reserved. >=20 > John Burroughs, Executive Director > Lawyers' Committee on Nuclear Policy > 211 E. 43d St., Suite 1204 > New York, New York 10017 USA > tel: +1 212 818 1861 fax: 818 1857 > e-mail: johnburroughs@lcnp.org > website: www.lcnp.org - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Thomas Subject: (abolition-usa) Americans Will Get A Chance to Quiz Putin TONIGHT 7:30 pm EST Date: 15 Nov 2001 10:53:59 -0500 --=====================_266154157==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Americans Will Get A Chance to Quiz Putin NPR's Exclusive Chat Includes a Caller Q&A E-mail questions to Putin at mailto:putin@npr.org By Frank Ahrens Washington Post Staff Writer Wednesday, November 14, 2001; Page C01 http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A24478-2001Nov13?language=printer Vladimir Putin will grant an exclusive interview to National Public Radio tomorrow night, hours before the visiting Russian leader concludes his summit with President Bush and flies home. After the one-on-one with NPR's Robert Siegel, Putin will answer telephone and e-mail questions from listeners, following the lead of Bill Clinton, who fielded caller questions on a Moscow radio and television talk show during his visit last year to Russia. "It's a great coup," said Kevin Klose, NPR president and former Moscow bureau chief for The Washington Post from 1977 to 1981. Klose was instrumental in closing the deal with Putin's people, which has been in the works for the past month. "This is the first time, aside from Khrushchev's travels across the U.S., for the serious possibility of voice-to-voice exchange" with a Russian chief of state, Klose said. "It's amazing -- the president of the Russian Federation being questioned directly by individual citizens of the United States." Klose read Putin's October speech to NATO in Brussels, in which he said the Sept. 11 terror attacks radically shifted global politics and will bring Russia into closer cooperation with the West. Afterward, Klose made his pitch to the Russian Embassy in Washington. "We told them that, if this summit is truly a waypoint on this path, then the way to present that most seriously to the people of the U.S. is through NPR," Klose said. Putin sat for an interview with ABC's Barbara Walters earlier this month at the Kremlin, but this is his only one-on-one interview during his trip here. The interview and listener questions should occupy about an hour, Klose said. There are no ground rules for the interview, he added. A call late yesterday to the Russian Embassy press office was not returned. Veteran "All Things Considered" host Siegel -- who was NPR's first foreign correspondent 21 years ago -- drew the assignment for the interview, which will be held at NPR's Manhattan studios at 7:30 p.m. One interpreter will translate questions into Russian for Putin, and another will translate Putin's answers into English. "They told me last Thursday, 'You're doing the interview with Putin,'" Siegel said. "I was quite surprised and quite delighted." Siegel is boning up by reading "First Person," a collection of interviews with Putin; plowing through a "tremendous number of clips" and picking the brains of former and current NPR Moscow correspondents. The news dictates that Siegel will ask the Russian president about the U.S.-Russian alliance in the Afghanistan campaign, the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, possible Russian membership in NATO, Putin's history as a KGB officer and so on. But Siegel wants to get personal, too. "I am curious about the man," Siegel said. "He is a very controlled, smart person, someone who seems to have navigated the bureaucracy incredibly shrewdly. And he's a very tough guy. He's someone who's learned discipline by fighting, by judo." Listeners can submit e-mail questions to Putin at mailto:putin@npr.org. -- http://www.npr.org/ -- The first-ever U.S. meeting between Presidents George Bush and Vladimir Putin has focused on arms reductions, anti-terrorism measures, and the two leaders' deepening rapport. To cap his three-day visit, Putin will answer Americans' questions in a national call-in show on NPR, Thursday Nov. 15 at 7:30pm ET, 4:30pm PT. mailto:putin@npr.org ___________________________________________________ Today's News and Archives: http://prop1.org/nucnews/briefslv.htm Submit URL/Article: mailto:NucNews@onelist.com OneList Archives: http://www.onelist.com/archive/NucNews (subscribe online) Other Excellent News-Collecting Sites - DOE Watch - http://www.egroups.com/group/doewatch Downwinders - http://www.egroups.com/group/downwinders Quick Route to U.S. Congress: http://www.senate.gov/senators/index.cfm (Senators' Websites) http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW.html (Representatives' Websites) http://thomas.loc.gov/ (Pending Legislation - Search) Online Petition to Abolish Nuclear Weapons - http://www.PetitionOnline.com/prop1/petition.html Subscribe to NucNews Briefs: mailto:prop1@prop1.org Distributed without payment for research and educational purposes only, in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107. --=====================_266154157==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Americans Will Get A Chance to Quiz Putin

NPR's Exclusive Chat Includes a Caller Q&A
E-mail questions to Putin at mailto:putin@npr.org

By Frank Ahrens
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, November 14, 2001; Page C01

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A24478-2001Nov13?language=printer

Vladimir Putin will grant an exclusive interview to National Public Radio tomorrow night, hours before the visiting Russian leader concludes his summit with President Bush and flies home.

After the one-on-one with NPR's Robert Siegel, Putin will answer telephone and e-mail questions from listeners, following the lead of Bill Clinton, who fielded caller questions on a Moscow radio and television talk show during his visit last year to Russia.

"It's a great coup," said Kevin Klose, NPR president and former Moscow bureau chief for The Washington Post from 1977 to 1981. Klose was instrumental in closing the deal with Putin's people, which has been in the works for the past month. "This is the first time, aside from Khrushchev's travels across the U.S., for the serious possibility of voice-to-voice exchange" with a Russian chief of state, Klose said. "It's amazing -- the president of the Russian Federation being questioned directly by individual citizens of the United States."

Klose read Putin's October speech to NATO in Brussels, in which he said the Sept. 11 terror attacks radically shifted global politics and will bring Russia into closer cooperation with the West. Afterward, Klose made his pitch to the Russian Embassy in Washington.

"We told them that, if this summit is truly a waypoint on this path, then the way to present that most seriously to the people of the U.S. is through NPR," Klose said. Putin sat for an interview with ABC's Barbara Walters earlier this month at the Kremlin, but this is his only one-on-one interview during his trip here.

The interview and listener questions should occupy about an hour, Klose said. There are no ground rules for the interview, he added.

A call late yesterday to the Russian Embassy press office was not returned.

Veteran "All Things Considered" host Siegel -- who was NPR's first foreign correspondent 21 years ago -- drew the assignment for the interview, which will be held at NPR's Manhattan studios at 7:30 p.m. One interpreter will translate questions into Russian for Putin, and another will translate Putin's answers into English.

"They told me last Thursday, 'You're doing the interview with Putin,'" Siegel said. "I was quite surprised and quite delighted."

Siegel is boning up by reading "First Person," a collection of interviews with Putin; plowing through a "tremendous number of clips" and picking the brains of former and current NPR Moscow correspondents.

The news dictates that Siegel will ask the Russian president about the U.S.-Russian alliance in the Afghanistan campaign, the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, possible Russian membership in NATO, Putin's history as a KGB officer and so on.

But Siegel wants to get personal, too.

"I am curious about the man," Siegel said. "He is a very controlled, smart person, someone who seems to have navigated the bureaucracy incredibly shrewdly. And he's a very tough guy. He's someone who's learned discipline by fighting, by judo."

Listeners can submit e-mail questions to Putin at mailto:putin@npr.org.

--

http://www.npr.org/ --

The first-ever U.S. meeting between Presidents George Bush and Vladimir Putin has focused on arms reductions, anti-terrorism measures, and the two leaders' deepening rapport. To cap his three-day visit, Putin will answer Americans' questions in a national call-in show on NPR, Thursday Nov. 15 at 7:30pm ET, 4:30pm PT.

mailto:putin@npr.org


     ___________________________________________________

Today's News and Archives: http://prop1.org/nucnews/briefslv.htm
Submit URL/Article: mailto:NucNews@onelist.com
OneList Archives: http://www.onelist.com/archive/NucNews (subscribe online)
Other Excellent News-Collecting Sites -
DOE Watch - http://www.egroups.com/group/doewatch
Downwinders - http://www.egroups.com/group/downwinders

Quick Route to U.S. Congress:
http://www.senate.gov/senators/index.cfm (Senators' Websites)
http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW.html (Representatives' Websites)
http://thomas.loc.gov/ (Pending Legislation - Search)

Online Petition to Abolish Nuclear Weapons - http://www.PetitionOnline.com/prop1/petition.html

Subscribe to NucNews Briefs:  mailto:prop1@prop1.org

   Distributed without payment for research and educational
purposes only, in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107.


 --=====================_266154157==_.ALT-- - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John Burroughs Subject: (abolition-usa) Acronym CTBT conference summary Date: 16 Nov 2001 09:50:05 -0500 High Level CTBT Meeting "Successful" despite US Boycott. Rebecca Johnson, The Acronym Institute for Disarmament Diplomacy The Conference on Facilitating the Entry into Force of the CTBT closed on Tuesday November 13, 2001 after unanimously adopting its final declaration. The declaration, which had been negotiated over many months in Vienna, highlighted the importance of the CTBT for non-proliferation and international security, stressing that the conduct of nuclear explosions "constitutes a serious threat to global efforts towards nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation". The Declaration called on all states that have not yet signed or ratified the Treaty to do so as soon as possible. Pending entry into force, all were enjoined to maintain the current moratoria on nuclear testing. The Conference (known also as the Article XIV Conference, after the entry-into-force provision in the CTBT), was postponed from September 25. It was opened on November 11 by UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, who said "If anyone thinks that [the CTBT and the Conference] have been overshadowed or marginalised by the events of 11 September and their aftermath=85 those events should have made it clear to everyone that we cannot afford further proliferation of nuclear weapons." Annan concluded, telling the meeting "we have a fleeting opportunity to render this troubled world a safer place, free of the threat of nuclear weapons. We must not let it pass."=20 Ambassador Olga Pellicer, speaking on behalf of the Conference President, Miguel Mar=EDn Bosch, Deputy Foreign Minister of Mexico, told an end-of-conference press briefing that the meeting had been "a success, because of high level attendance, with more than 50 Foreign Ministers, all of whom reiterated their support for the CTBT=85 and its verification= system." The CTBT Conference, which ran for two and a half days, was attended by 108 states which have signed the Treaty and a small number of observers and non-governmental organisations. Of the 80 national or group statements made in support of the test ban treaty, 52 were made by Foreign Ministers or equivalent senior government officials. The United States, however, was conspicuously absent. During the three months prior to the meeting, some 13 additional states had ratified the CTBT, bringing the total number of ratifiers to 87. On the last day of the conference, Libya, which refused to vote in favour of the Treaty in 1996 and therefore attended the Article XIV Conference as an observer, announced that it had decided to accede and would be signing the Treaty forthwith. Press coverage on Monday hooked stories about the CTBT Conference, held in the shadow of the high level UN General Assembly debate among state presidents and foreign ministers, the war against terrorism, and a further plane crash in New York, on the US boycott. Ironic, therefore, that the test ban meeting was given unexpected (but much-needed) visibility through the actions of the United States, whose boycott had been intended to convey its view that the CTBT is irrelevant.=20 Just a week earlier, the United States had shocked the UN First Committee (Security and Disarmament) by forcing a vote on a simple procedural decision to retain the CTBT on the UN General Assembly agenda next year. Such decisions are usually treated as formalities and sent forward on the basis of consensus, regardless of whether a government is for or against the subject. After forcing the vote, the United States was the sole country to oppose. A US representative explained that he asked for the vote because his country "did not support the CTBT", a treaty that Eisenhower advocated but failed to deliver in the 1950s, and President Clinton signed with John F. Kennedy's pen on September 24 1996. All others voted in favour, including India, which had previously voted against the CTBT in the UN General Assembly when it was adopted in September 1996. =20 The United States failed to inform the UN Department for Disarmament Affairs or the CTBT Organisation Preparatory Commission in Vienna of its decision to boycott the Entry-into Force Conference until the last possible moment, despite the presence of Secretary of State Colin Powell and numerous senior officials at other meetings in the UN over the same time period. After the CTBT Conference opened on Sunday November 11, Rick Grenell, a US State Department Official, confirmed "We're just not going to engage". =20 In keeping with diplomatic tradition, few statements criticised the United States directly, though some expressed 'regret' at its deliberate absence; privately many - most notably from the US' own allies in Europe and Asia - were furious at this latest example of US contempt for multilateral treaties and arms control. An earlier announcement (August 21, 2001) by Washington that it would withhold support for, and not to participate in, some of the activities by the CTBTO not related to the International Monitoring System (IMS), was likewise derided as petty and unbecoming of a major power. =20 In general, the statements emphasised the importance of the CTBT to international security, non-proliferation and nuclear disarmament and supported the work of the CTBTO Preparatory Commission and its Executive Secretary, Wolfgang Hoffmann in establishing an effective verification system. Many related the CTBT to commitments in the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), particularly the NPT agreements of May 2000, where the United States had joined consensus. Almost all underlined the necessity of maintaining the moratorium against nuclear tests, currently observed by all five nuclear weapon states and, after they each conducted a series of nuclear explosions in May 1998, by India and Pakistan, though neither has yet signed the CTBT. Among the weapon states, Britain, France and Russia have ratified, while the United States and China have signed but not ratified.=20 Amongst all the positive statements about the CTBT, there appeared to be few new or concrete proposals for facilitating entry into force. Few even wanted to name the 13 states whose failure to sign and/or ratify now impedes the CTBT's entry into force. The NGOs, however, in their statement to the Conference, explicitly called on India, Pakistan and North Korea to sign and ratify the CTBT, and urged Algeria, China, Colombia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, Israel and the United States to ratify without further delay. Like the governments, the NGOs stressed the vital importance of preventing any future testing, for fear of destroying the test ban norm and setting off a "dangerous international action-reaction cycle of military and nuclear confrontation". The NGOs proposed that the Conference "should commit its participants to condemn any future testing and call upon governments, businesses and people from around the world to respond to any future test by withholding military sales, trade and other business support from the testing countries." To ensure that the testing moratorium is maintained, it would be necessary for potential violators to realise that the penalties and costs would be significant. In addition to the US Boycott, two developments were particularly= noteworthy: * Russia proposed additional confidence-building measures with the United States after entry into force, referring to "the possibility to develop additional verification measures for nuclear test ranges going far beyond the Treaty provisions=85 [which] could include the exchange of geological data and results of certain experiments, installation of additional sensors, and other measures." * On the negative side, possibly responding to the US lack of commitment and announced withholding of funds, a few states, notably Brazil and Argentina, raised questions about their financial contributions to the CTBTO, particularly the "burden" of verification costs on the non-nuclear weapon states while the treaty remained in limbo.=20 This brief, preliminary report, written as the Conference ended, will be expanded with further analysis and published on our website and in Disarmament Diplomacy over the next couple of weeks. See the website for the final declaration and NGO statement. Other documents can be found at The Acronym Institute 288 St Paul's Road London N1 2LH, England UK website: office tel: +44 (0) 20 7688 0450=20 (tel: Rebecca Johnson) (0) 20 7503 8857 office fax: +44 (0) 20 7688 0451 (fax: Rebecca Johnson) (0) 20 7503 9153 - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ellen Thomas Subject: (abolition-usa) Please come! Louise Franklin-Ramirez Tribute December 4th, 7 Date: 17 Nov 2001 11:46:46 -0500 --=====================_11737197==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Please come! Louise Franklin-Ramirez Tribute December 4th, 7 PM Please note two important events for December. (1) Tribute to Louise Franklin-Ramirez, Tuesday, December 4, 2001, 7PM, University of the District of Columbia Auditorium (Connecticut and Van Ness Metro and barrier-free) (2) Welcome for Victims of Hiroshima and Nagasaki Wednesday, December 5, 2001, 7 PM, La Casa, 3166 Mt. Pleasant St., Washington DC A high level Hibakusha delegation led by Professor Saturo Konishi is visiting the National Capital Area to voice concern about the proposed National Missile Defense program and to demand the total abolition of nuclear weapons. They will be visiting with Congress, the Bush Administration and Peace Activists. == About Louise Franklin-Ramirez: Pioneer for Peace Louise Franklin-Ramirez, 96, is a lifelong resident of the Metropolitan Washington area who has been active in civil rights, social justice and peace since she was a teenager. During World War One, at age 12, she helped raise money for the victims of the Armenian Holocaust; in the mid-1930s she protested the sale of scrap metal to Japan and Germany; in the 1940s she worked to desegregate the D.C. teachers union; in the 1950s she fought against McCarthyism; in the 1960s and 70s she was a Freedom Rider and protested the Vietnam War; and since the 1950s she worked to abolish nuclear weapons and supported the rights of radiation victims. She has raised consciousness about the needs of native people, and has supported an endless variety of activists, helping to promote their various (always nonviolent) causes. During the 1990s Louise was arrested numerous times for her activism, most recently in 1999 at age 94. Co-founder of the Hiroshima-Nagasaki Peace Committee of the DC Metropolitan Area Gray Panthers, Louise has fostered awareness of the dangers of nuclear weapons and nuclear facilities in important ways. With her husband, John Steinbach, Louise organizes the annual Hiroshima/Nagasaki Community Commemoration in August at the Lincoln Memorial, and hosts annual delegations of A-Bomb survivors to tell their story around the DC area. Louise Franklin-Ramirez is perhaps best known for her map and database of "Deadly Nuclear Radiation Hazards, USA" (http://prop1.org/prop1/radiated/drh.htm), considered by many to be the most comprehensive catalog of contaminated and potentially contaminated radioactive sites ever published. Born September 28, 1905, Ms. Franklin-Ramirez is a graduate of D.C. Public Schools and received her B.A. from the University of D.C. and her M.A. from Columbia University. She was a reading consultant for D.C. public and was the author of the "Basal Progressive Choice Reading Program," an early phonetics curriculum designed to teach learning disabled and dyslexic children. Franklin-Ramirez also owned and operated Georgetown Toys and Crafts, specializing in "developmental" toys. Ms. Franklin-Ramirez is a founding member of "Women Strike for Peace," "Gray Panthers," and "Unity In the Community" in Prince William County. In 1998, she was the recipient of the Lewis Mumford Peace Award and the Prince William County Human Rights Award, and in 1999 she received the prestigious " Courage of Conscience Award" from the Peace Abbey in Sherborne, Mass. The Tribute is sponsored by Gray Panthers, UDC Office of Alumni Affairs, Proposition One Committee, and Piscataway Indian Nation Edited by: Ellen Thomas --=====================_11737197==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Please come! Louise Franklin-Ramirez Tribute December 4th, 7 PM

Please note two important events for December.

(1) Tribute to Louise Franklin-Ramirez,
Tuesday, December 4, 2001, 7PM,
University of the District of Columbia Auditorium
(Connecticut and Van Ness Metro and barrier-free)

(2) Welcome for Victims of Hiroshima and Nagasaki
Wednesday, December 5, 2001, 7 PM,
La Casa, 3166 Mt. Pleasant St., Washington DC

A high level Hibakusha delegation led by Professor Saturo Konishi is visiting the National Capital Area to voice concern about the proposed National Missile Defense program and to demand the total abolition of nuclear weapons. They will be visiting with Congress, the Bush Administration and Peace Activists.

==

About Louise Franklin-Ramirez: Pioneer for Peace

Louise Franklin-Ramirez, 96, is a lifelong resident of the Metropolitan Washington area who has been active in civil rights, social justice and peace since she was a teenager.

During World War One, at age 12, she helped raise money for the victims of the Armenian Holocaust; in the mid-1930s she protested the sale of scrap metal to Japan and Germany; in the 1940s she worked to desegregate the D.C. teachers union; in the 1950s she fought against McCarthyism; in the 1960s and 70s she was a Freedom Rider and protested the Vietnam War; and since the 1950s she worked to abolish nuclear weapons and supported the rights of radiation  victims.  She has raised consciousness about the needs of native  people, and has supported an endless variety of activists, helping to promote their various (always nonviolent) causes.

During the 1990s Louise was arrested numerous times for her activism, most recently in 1999 at age 94.

Co-founder of the Hiroshima-Nagasaki Peace Committee of the DC Metropolitan Area Gray Panthers, Louise has fostered awareness of the dangers of nuclear weapons and nuclear facilities in important ways.  With her husband, John Steinbach, Louise organizes the annual Hiroshima/Nagasaki Community Commemoration in August at the Lincoln Memorial, and hosts annual delegations of A-Bomb survivors to tell their story around the DC area.

Louise Franklin-Ramirez is perhaps best known for her map and database of "Deadly Nuclear Radiation Hazards, USA" (http://prop1.org/prop1/radiated/drh.htm), considered by many to be the most comprehensive catalog of contaminated and potentially contaminated radioactive sites ever published. 

Born September 28, 1905, Ms. Franklin-Ramirez is  a graduate of D.C. Public Schools and received her B.A. from the University of D.C. and her M.A. from Columbia University. She was a reading consultant for D.C. public and was the author of the "Basal Progressive Choice Reading Program," an early phonetics curriculum designed to teach learning disabled and dyslexic children. Franklin-Ramirez also owned and operated Georgetown Toys and Crafts, specializing in "developmental" toys.

Ms. Franklin-Ramirez is a founding member of "Women Strike for Peace," "Gray Panthers," and "Unity In the Community" in Prince William County.   In  1998, she was the recipient of the Lewis Mumford Peace Award and the Prince William County Human Rights Award, and in 1999 she received the prestigious " Courage of Conscience Award" from the Peace Abbey in Sherborne, Mass.

The Tribute is sponsored by Gray Panthers, UDC Office of Alumni Affairs, Proposition One Committee, and Piscataway Indian Nation

Edited by:  Ellen Thomas <prop1@prop1.org>

 --=====================_11737197==_.ALT-- - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ChadAmherst@aol.com Subject: Re: (abolition-usa) Sign letter to change US bioweapons policy Date: 18 Nov 2001 17:50:06 EST can you give me Colin Powell's e-mail address. I plan to write him as well as my Senators - Kennedy and Kerry. Chad Johnson . E-mail address: chadamherst@aol.com - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John Burroughs Subject: (abolition-usa) InterPress story on CTBT and Bush-Putin talks Date: 19 Nov 2001 10:45:58 -0500 DISARMAMENT: US Supports Weapons Cut While Opposing International Agreements by Jim Wurst UNITED NATIONS, 14 Nov (IPS) - The United States' two-track arms control policy of pursuing unilateral initiatives while avoiding international arrangements has been highlighted by its near-simultaneous rejection of an international treaty banning nuclear test explosions and agreement on deep cuts in its nuclear weapons arsenal. More than one hundred nations committed to the permanent end of the testing of nuclear weapons concluded a conference at the UN on Tuesday, calling for all states to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), which was completed in 1996 but still is not international law. Treaty supporters are grappling with ways to achieve this goal in the face of the increasing resistance of the United States. The Bush administration has always been hostile to the CTBT, which was negotiated by the Clinton administration but rejected by a Republican-controlled Senate in 1998. But on the same day, President George W. Bush and President Vladimir Putin of Russia announced that they would reduce their stocks of long- range nuclear weapons by two-thirds within ten years. Each side has some 7,000 such weapons; the new levels would be around 1,700 to 2,200. Bush sounded like a dove when he said, "The current levels of our nuclear forces do not reflect today's strategic realities." However, these cuts will not be codified in a treaty but would instead be a series of unilateral cuts. While this may seem immaterial, arms control advocates point out that the Pentagon and National Security Council are filled with officials who prefer unilateral steps since there will be no way to prove that the cuts have been made and that the reductions can be abandoned and reversed at any time. In contrast, the CTBT would be legally-binding and will have a vast inspection system to verify compliance. Not only did the US boycott the CTBT conference but also took the unprecedented step of requesting that its nameplate be removed from its seat in the conference room. This attempted diplomatic snub was rejected by the UN which said since the meeting was for all signatories of the treaty seats would be reserved for all of them. This was the latest step by the US to distance itself from the treaty. Last week during a General Assembly meeting on disarmament, the US was the only country to vote against a simple procedural resolution to place the CTBT on the GA's agenda next year. The vote was 140 to one; even other countries that have not ratified the treaty, including India, Pakistan and Israel, do not want to eliminate the treaty from the agenda. Governments and NGOs argue that much is at stake in an effective test ban. Non-nuclear states test to become nuclear weapons powers and the nations that already have them test to modernise and make them more useable. A test ban prevents both these developments from occurring. The threat of terrorism adds another dimension to the debate. As a statement to the conference by more than two dozen NGOs put it, "Failure to act may lead to a cascade of proliferation events that will enable a future terrorist to use nuclear weapons... The states presently resisting the CTBT are undermining their own security as well as the security of the entire world." Like all treaties, a set number of countries are needed for a convention to become international law; but the CTBT is unique in that it specifies 44 states with nuclear weapons or are capable of producing them that must ratify the treaty in order for it to enter into force. In other words, any one of the 44 can block the treaty taking effect. Thirteen of the 44, including the US, China, India, Pakistan, Israel, Egypt, Iran and North Korea, have not ratified. Clearly regional politics plays its part: Egypt wants Israel to become a party to the CTBT and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (Israel is the only state in the Middle East not to be a party to this treaty, thus the only state in the region with an uninspected nuclear reactor) while Israel ties its ratification to its "sovereign equality" in the region. But only the US has made taken a total about face from supporting the treaty to trying to push it off the international agenda. There is a special irony then in the fact that the US continues to pay for the operation of the Vienna-base agency in charge of monitoring the treaty. In order to check against cheating, this agency is establishing a network of more than 300 sites scattered around the world to detect nuclear explosions underground, under water and in the air (about one-third are now functioning). The US is home to 16 such sites. Monitoring sites also exist in other states that have not ratified the treaty including Israel, Pakistan and China. This apparent contradiction can be explained by the fact that all signatories are entitled to share all data, thus the international system becomes an extension of a state's national monitoring system. The US says it will not pay for the more intrusive on-site inspections, but since these inspections can not take place until the treaty enters into force, it is a moot point. (ENDS/IPS/JW) - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Sally Light Subject: (abolition-usa) Abolition 2000 France's new brochure - English version Date: 19 Nov 2001 18:12:39 +0000 Friends, The following English version of a new, 4-page brochure created by a coalition of French organizations may be of interest to the English-speaking members of Abolition 2000 and other peace networks. For further information., please contact Dominique Lalanne at . Sally Light and Dominique Lalanne _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ ABOLITION 2000 FRANCE October 2001 WHAT ARMS RACE? This autumn is a true turning point. While the attacks of September 11 in the United States renew our concern about security, the revived technologies of the American missile defense and of the French program of modernizing its nuclear arsenal seem to be responses from another age. This 4-page paper, sent by the French members of the Abolition 2000 network, provides some elements of analysis of the situation. There is a great risk that the missile defense that would “protect America” against the outside aggressions of “rogue states” will be put into place if Europeans do not significantly disagree. In the months to come, French public opinion will play an important role. This paper, if circulated widely, will be a helpful contribution in encouraging discussion. In France, the current defense budget marks an increased military investment (more than six billion francs). It is the start of an expansion previewed under the new Legislation of Military Programming 2003-2008 that will be submitted this autumn to members of Parliament: new submarines, new missiles, new nuclear warheads, and the Megajoule Laser for pure fusion research. This 4-page paper presents the scale of this program. The debate about our national security, about the choices of responses to the conflicts that confront us, is it a debate that we will eternally avoid? Do the grave attacks of this autumn shake up our certitudes? Do we really believe that nuclear arms are an appropriate response in the modern world? It is our duty to ask these questions of our fellow citizens. Signatories : Action des Citoyens pour le Désarmement Nucléaire (Citizens’ Action for Nuclear Disarmament) Maison des associations, 31 rue du Cormier, 17100 Saintes Tél : 05 46 74 08 60 e-mail: ACDN.FRANCE@wanadoo.fr Appel des Cent pour la Paix (Appeal of Century for Peace) 17-19 place de l'Argonne, Paris 75019 Tél : 01 42 09 23 78 Fax: 01 42 09 23 50 e-mail: appel100@worldnet.fr Association des Médecins Français pour la Prévention de la Guerre nucléaire (Association of French Doctors for the Prevention of Nuclear War) 5 rue Las Cases, Paris 75007 Tél: 01 64 32 69 72 Fax: 01 60 96 30 95 e-mail: amfpgn@club-internet.fr Ligue Internationale des Femmes pour la Paix et la Liberté (Women’s Int’l League for Peace & Freedom) 114 rue de Vaugirard, Paris 75006 Tél : 01 48 78 39 85 Fax : 01 40 82 99 55 e-mail: s.m.fernex@wanadoo.fr Mouvement de la Paix (Peace Movement) 139 bd. Victor Hugo, 93400 Saint-Ouen Tél : 01 40 12 09 12 Fax : 01 40 11 57 87 e-mail : mvtpaix@globenet.org Stop Essais pour l'Abolition des armes nucléaires (Stop Testing for Nuclear Abolition) 114 rue de Vaugirard, 75006 Paris Tel: 01 64 40 32 79 Fax: 01 64 40 38 65 e-mail: stop.essais@wanadoo.fr On behalf of: Action des Citoyens pour le Désarmement Nucléaire Appel des Cent pour la Paix Appel des Cent/Mouvement de la Paix - Marne Assemblée Internationale des Citoyens pour arręter la prolifération des armes Association Française des Juristes Démocrates Association des Médecins Français pour la Prévention de la Guerre nucléaire Association Nationale des Cheminots Anciens Combattants Association Républicaine des Anciens Combattants Association pour la Protection des Rayonnements Ionisants Campagne internationale pour la Paix et la Démocratie Choisir la cause des femmes Comité national d'Education pour le Désarmement et la paix Comité National pour l'Indépendance et le Développement Convergence Ecologie, Solidarité, Droit, solidarité Enseignants pour la Paix Fédération Démocratique Internationale des Femmes France-Amérique Latine Jeunesse Ouvričre Chrétienne Jeunesse Ouvričre Chrétienne Féminine Jour de la Terre Ligue Communiste Révolutionnaire Ligue internationale des femmes pour la paix et la Liberté Maison de Vigilance de Taverny Mouvement de la Jeunesse Communiste, Mouvement de la Paix Mouvement de la Paix - Rennes Mouvement pour une Alternative Non-violente NATO Alert Network France Pax Christi France Réseau 56 Sortir du Nucléaire Stop Essais pour l'Abolition des armes nucléaires Syndicat National de l'Enseignement Secondaire Union Démocratique Bretonne Union des Femmes Françaises Femmes Solidaires Union des Juifs pour la Résistance et l'Entraide Union Nationale des Retraités et Personnes Agées Union Pacifiste de France (les) Verts City of Saintes, France City of Les Gonds, France ___________________________________________________________________ NUCLEAR DETERRENCE IN VARIABLE CIRCUMSTANCES. AND IS IT A WOODEN SWORD? From the right to the left, from Pierre Lelouche (RPR) to Paul Quiles (PS), everyone is demanding a discussion about nuclear deterrence. We, NGOs of the Abolition 2000 network, have known well for a long time the menace of the American national missile defense (NMD), and, indeed, prior to the sheep-like vote of Parliament on the Legislation of Military Programming. The problems of nuclear deterrence This was born with the declaration of President De Gaulle in November 1959: "Since France might possibly face ruin, from any point in the world, our Army must have an instant readiness to respond anywhere". Consequently, deterrence relies on two dogmas and one practical strategy: 1) Only nuclear arms are in charge of defending "France's vital interests." 2) Strategic nuclear forces are to deter the major nuclear powers (a strategy of "from weakness to strength"), and since it's impossible to limit them to gradual counter-attacks within military or battle zones, the targets are exclusively civilian. In practice, and in keeping with policy, these targets were all situated in the Soviet Union. The end of the nuclear arms race between the two super powers, the collapse of the Soviet Union, and the pitiful state of its nuclear arsenal, has shaken these grand certainties. Two camps have formed: that with the false belief that things have changed to where one can lower one's guard, and that which has invented another adversary, the "rogue states" (this term comes from the pen of Deputy Lecanuet, in proposing the strategy of deterrence of strength to weakness (or to madness). This struggle has continued along with its typical truisms, "one never knows" or "that which always serves." It was the Prime Minister who actually, on October 22, 1999, finally admitted that the "emperor has no clothes" when he said, "Our land, which has no declared enemy or aggressive designs or hostility toward anyone, wields a powerful stature in the service of the world's prosperity and security." And what does that mean? Nothing has changed, deterrence against persons endures as a "deterrence machine" which keeps going just in case (in case of what? Who knows?). AND IS NUCLEAR DETERRENCE OBSOLETE? It is the current thesis of the American administration that the principle of "mutual assured destruction," long considered fundamental to American nuclear deterrence, is without purpose: "it is over." But, given that its hegemonous situation is temporary, and, considering, moreover, that nuclear proliferation is nearly inescapable, the US wants to change this into another, new deterrence combining missile defense and offensive nuclear arms. Consequently, the actual number of nuclear warheads is excessive (and, further, they are inappropriate), and unilaterally violates treaties, particularly the ABM treaty and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. This "update" is from President Quiles in a March 28, 2001, interview: "..the fact is that we know that in reality NMD does not mean no more deterrence." WHAT ALTERNATIVE SHOULD WE PROPOSE? It's assumed that there's a clear response to the significance of "our vital interests" and of the false and dangerous alternative of the US' missile defense. Those who trust our convictions know upon thorough reflection that the army lies very close to "our vital interests." If these interests are our country's hope for survival, then the solution is national military defense. In fact, since the Third Republic, this has never been the case - from 1870 to 1914, someone dissociated from these vital interests proclaimed: 1- to protect ourselves against Germany and to regain Alsace-Lorraine, 2- a need of daily military activities, 3- to wage war in the colonies for the defense of economic interests and enterprises. The result was Germany's uncontrolled invasion facing a French army specially trained for guerilla combat. This disassociation paid a high price in human lives, but our leaders learned no lesson from this. In these times, our rulers still dissociate "our vital interests" from the daily functions of the armies, confident in this "Maginot Line" as in 1940, but this schizophrenia is a conduit to disaster. If we still entrust our vital interests to nuclear deterrence, outside of a unique strategy, isn't this a reoffense on the road toward disaster? And if our vital interests also include our survival, aren't peace and a society without violence more just? "To make progress towards disarmament, to build Europe's security and defense, to consolidate an international system ruled by the standards of law" are the official goals of France. Even though underlying these words there are important differences between the executive branch and our NGOs, can't one believe success is possible, since our interests don't lie outside of those of other peoples, and since we are building another security based on equal rights for all (under treaties), and on cooperation without discrimination? How can conflicts be defused if, behind the scenes, there are weapons of mass destruction being developed exclusively intended for civilians? If France wants to be an example, why doesn't it follow the path of South Africa, whose prestige and effectiveness in the service of peace increased greatly after its decision to renounce nuclear weapons? Missile Defense We do not allow mixing our voice with those anti-NMD concerns of returning quickly to the "good old days" of nuclear deterrence, with the survival of the planet at stake. We should not allow our anti-NMD campaign to dissociate from the campaign FOR nuclear abolition. It's possible for us to establish our priorities for a unique campaign. We must convince the American people, the principle victims of this crazy project, that those who will be on the missile defense's front line are civilian targets that are not protected by a "shield" concentrated on ballistic attack. At the same time, there is a growing temptation to use terrorism or miniature nuclear weapons ("mini-nukes") that would pass under this shield. We must convince the Americans one by one, that our goal of nuclear abolition - and the importance which must be accorded to treaties and international law - are needed for their protection, security and safety. We must base all our actions in France on that international strategy without the loss of our autonomous view on the subject and without slowing down our push to reject nuclear deterrence, a dying concept. If the majority of American citizens comprehend that the peoples of the world are not a threat, that they are their friends, then Bush's project will be put in danger. AND DETERRENCE OF "GRAND PAPA?" We must be done with, not even think about, the idea that we don't need emergency measures now. We also must take care that while we eradicate this insanity that's in the minds of our rulers, that a new form of unspeakable blackmail is not invented. This is immense and difficult, but who will carry it out if not our public opinion, and we in service to it? Abraham Behar Association of French Doctors for the Prevention of Nuclear War ____________________________________________________________________________ COMMENTS ON THE LEGISLATION FOR FRENCH MILITARY PROGRAMMING FOR 2003-2008 A reading of the plan of the legislation for military programming for 2003-2008, adopted at the end of July by the Counsel of Ministers in accord with the President of the Republic, raises these questions: “Why do these arms programs exist? For what missions? Against what threats? In the service of what national security? To build what international security? To prevent what conflicts? To build a lasting peace with what United Nations?” The responses provided are not satisfactory. Because we have a different conception about the security of France in today’s world, we reject that “the renewal and modernization of nuclear forces are the principle objectives of the next legislation for military programming,” as it’s written. What threats? The threats brought up: trafficking, ethnic problems, proliferation, terrorism - are problems labeled those requiring political choices: to find a political solution, to “simply protect” against their consequences, to contain them. This is what one will have with nuclear arms, with “Leclerc” tanks, with missiles without restoring peace instead of finding a way to prevent potential wars. It is totally incoherent to seek to create purely military solutions to these ideological, cultural, social and political problems. What international security? The only thoughts concerned with international security in the document presenting the legislation are those raised to support France “elaborating and consolidating the legal instruments indispensable to control proliferation, by superiority and by arms reduction conforming with the objectives of general and complete disarmament.” The second reference is the reminder that “France is particularly attached to enforcing the Charter of the United Nations and to respecting the authority of the Security Counsel, guaranteeing peace and international security.” These reminders are totally insufficient. What is the value attached to “legal instruments” next to “the renewal and modernization of nuclear forces are the principle objectives of the next legislation for military programming”? What is the value of the UN that Lionel Jospin proclaimed in his speech in Rio de Janeiro when he said that it is the institution better adapted for a globalized world that seeks permanently resolute action for his reform - broadening and democratization of the Security Counsel, a better role for the General Assembly, a place for the NGOs? In the same manner, to promote the central role of the UN does not assume the cessation of delegitimization with the growing number of interventions of non-multilateral structures like the G7, “contact groups,” etc. Militarization for what security? In fact, the main characteristic of the military programming legislation is that all the large arms programs, nuclear or conventional, created before the fall of the Berlin Wall, are now at almost half their previous budgets. The programs come out of the evolution of European defense, the interventions of the Balkans, and are outmoded “dinosaurs” that thus are given by this labyrinthine system 525 billion French francs(80 billion euros) in six years, the equivalent of the previous legislation (528 billion) and representing a small reduction from the legislations of the years 1985-1990. We need to see that France is in the process of completely renewing its nuclear arsenal, not only maintaining its current level, but also improving it. “The primary, new part of this legislation is a renewed interest in promoting nuclear power,” writes J.D. Merchet in the July 1, 2001 edition of “Liberation.” The nuclear programs are not at just a “strictly enough” level as the legislation proclaims, because today, “strictly enough” refers to the new crisis in international security. Faced with this, “strictly enough” deviates from mere stockpiling of weapons, and indirectly discourages respect for disarmament treaties and non-proliferation treaties. Lateral “modernizations,” “stuck” with enforcing Article VI of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, are the ingredients that would renew inciting other states’ desires to jump into the nuclear arena. How and when would one use atomic arms against threats today? Did not Minister Vedrine explain to the Americans at a meeting of NATO that the NMD project is ineffective against terrorists carrying an atomic bomb or chemical weapon in a suitcase? The tragic attack in New York is a cruel confirmation of that. Is it not the same for French nuclear arms? Even more serious, the legislation envisages the same direction of the American so-called missile “defense,” by announcing that “France is preparing by the year 2010 a new capacity to protect selected sites by means of deploying an outside theater of operations, opposing ballistic missiles.” Now, all the experts say that the missile defense projects known as “theater are a forerunner or a “Trojan Horse” of the American global programs. Time for Something New! The legislation does not break with the old ways of military security. It is not consistent with certain speeches on the prevention of conflicts, such as real peace seeking, or on the place and role of the UN, pledged by Lionel Jospin or Jacques Chirac. The main fault of this legislation is that it does not concretely advance the concept of a way to put into place global security for France and Europe in today’s world, for the prevention of conflicts, to integrate efforts favoring peaceful cooperation, and helping sustainable development. We do not want to accept military programming legislation that does not also discuss and define a true politic of global security, prevention of conflicts, actions to control the sale of arms, and the reassertion of the value of the UN. Daniel Durand National Secretary of the Peace Movement - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Sally Light Subject: (abolition-usa) Slightly revised version of French A2000 brochure. Date: 20 Nov 2001 07:45:52 +0000 Friends, Yesterday, we posted the following English translation of a new, 4-page brochure created by a coalition of French organizations which may be of interest to the English-speaking members of Abolition 2000 and other peace networks. Here is a slightly revised version. For further information, please contact Dominique Lalanne at . Sally Light and Dominique Lalanne _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ ABOLITION 2000 FRANCE October 2001 WHAT ARMS RACE? This autumn is a true turning point. While the attacks of September 11 in the United States renew our concern about security, the revived technologies of the American missile defense and of the French program of modernizing its nuclear arsenal seem to be responses from another age. This 4-page paper, sent by the French members of the Abolition 2000 network, provides some elements of analysis of the situation. There is a great risk that the missile defense that would “protect America” against the outside aggressions of “rogue states” will be put into place if Europeans do not significantly disagree. In the months to come, French public opinion will play an important role. This paper, if circulated widely, will be a helpful contribution in encouraging discussion. In France, the current defense budget marks an increased military investment (more than six billion francs). It is the start of an expansion previewed under the new Legislation of Military Programming 2003-2008 that will be submitted this autumn to members of Parliament: new submarines, new missiles, new nuclear warheads, and the Megajoule Laser for pure fusion research. This 4-page paper presents the scale of this program. The debate about our national security, about the choices of responses to the conflicts that confront us, is it a debate that we will eternally avoid? Do the grave attacks of this autumn shake up our certitudes? Do we really believe that nuclear arms are an appropriate response in the modern world? It is our duty to ask these questions of our fellow citizens. Signatories : Action des Citoyens pour le Désarmement Nucléaire (Citizens’ Action for Nuclear Disarmament) Maison des associations, 31 rue du Cormier, 17100 Saintes Tél : 05 46 74 08 60 e-mail: ACDN.FRANCE@wanadoo.fr Appel des Cent pour la Paix (Appeal of Century for Peace) 17-19 place de l'Argonne, Paris 75019 Tél : 01 42 09 23 78 Fax: 01 42 09 23 50 e-mail: appel100@worldnet.fr Association des Médecins Français pour la Prévention de la Guerre nucléaire (Association of French Doctors for the Prevention of Nuclear War) 5 rue Las Cases, Paris 75007 Tél: 01 64 32 69 72 Fax: 01 60 96 30 95 e-mail: amfpgn@club-internet.fr Ligue Internationale des Femmes pour la Paix et la Liberté (Women’s Int’l League for Peace & Freedom) 114 rue de Vaugirard, Paris 75006 Tél : 01 48 78 39 85 Fax : 01 40 82 99 55 e-mail: s.m.fernex@wanadoo.fr Mouvement de la Paix (Peace Movement) 139 bd. Victor Hugo, 93400 Saint-Ouen Tél : 01 40 12 09 12 Fax : 01 40 11 57 87 e-mail : mvtpaix@globenet.org Stop Essais pour l'Abolition des armes nucléaires (Stop Testing for Nuclear Abolition) 114 rue de Vaugirard, 75006 Paris Tel: 01 64 40 32 79 Fax: 01 64 40 38 65 e-mail: stop.essais@wanadoo.fr On behalf of: Action des Citoyens pour le Désarmement Nucléaire Appel des Cent pour la Paix Appel des Cent/Mouvement de la Paix - Marne Assemblée Internationale des Citoyens pour arręter la prolifération des armes Association Française des Juristes Démocrates Association des Médecins Français pour la Prévention de la Guerre nucléaire Association Nationale des Cheminots Anciens Combattants Association Républicaine des Anciens Combattants Association pour la Protection des Rayonnements Ionisants Campagne internationale pour la Paix et la Démocratie Choisir la cause des femmes Comité national d'Education pour le Désarmement et la paix Comité National pour l'Indépendance et le Développement Convergence Ecologie, Solidarité, Droit, solidarité Enseignants pour la Paix Fédération Démocratique Internationale des Femmes France-Amérique Latine Jeunesse Ouvričre Chrétienne Jeunesse Ouvričre Chrétienne Féminine Jour de la Terre Ligue Communiste Révolutionnaire Ligue internationale des femmes pour la paix et la Liberté Maison de Vigilance de Taverny Mouvement de la Jeunesse Communiste, Mouvement de la Paix Mouvement de la Paix - Rennes Mouvement pour une Alternative Non-violente NATO Alert Network France Pax Christi France Réseau 56 Sortir du Nucléaire Stop Essais pour l'Abolition des armes nucléaires Syndicat National de l'Enseignement Secondaire Union Démocratique Bretonne Union des Femmes Françaises Femmes Solidaires Union des Juifs pour la Résistance et l'Entraide Union Nationale des Retraités et Personnes Agées Union Pacifiste de France (les) Verts City of Saintes, France City of Les Gonds, France ___________________________________________________________________ NUCLEAR DETERRENCE IN VARIABLE CIRCUMSTANCES. AND IS IT A WOODEN SWORD? From the right to the left, from Pierre Lelouche (RPR) to Paul Quiles (PS), everyone is demanding a discussion about nuclear deterrence. We, NGOs of the Abolition 2000 network, have known well for a long time the menace of the American national missile defense (NMD), and, indeed, prior to the sheep-like vote of Parliament on the Legislation of Military Programming. The problems of nuclear deterrence This was born with the declaration of President De Gaulle in November 1959: "Since France might possibly face ruin, from any point in the world, our Army must have an instant readiness to respond anywhere". Consequently, deterrence relies on two dogmas and one practical strategy: 1) Only nuclear arms are in charge of defending "France's vital interests." 2) Strategic nuclear forces are to deter the major nuclear powers (a strategy of "from weakness to strength"), and since it's impossible to limit them to gradual counter-attacks within military or battle zones, the targets are exclusively civilian. In practice, and in keeping with policy, these targets were all situated in the Soviet Union. The end of the nuclear arms race between the two super powers, the collapse of the Soviet Union, and the pitiful state of its nuclear arsenal, has shaken these grand certainties. Two camps have formed: that with the false belief that things have changed to where one can lower one's guard, and that which has invented another adversary, the "rogue states" (this term comes from the pen of Deputy Lecanuet, in proposing the strategy of deterrence of strength to weakness (or to madness). This struggle has continued along with its typical truisms, "one never knows" or "that which always serves." It was the Prime Minister who actually, on October 22, 1999, finally admitted that the "emperor has no clothes" when he said, "Our land, which has no declared enemy or aggressive designs or hostility toward anyone, wields a powerful stature in the service of the world's prosperity and security." And what does that mean? Nothing has changed, deterrence against persons endures as a "deterrence machine" which keeps going just in case (in case of what? Who knows?). AND IS NUCLEAR DETERRENCE OBSOLETE? It is the current thesis of the American administration that the principle of "mutual assured destruction," long considered fundamental to American nuclear deterrence, is without purpose: "it is over." But, given that its hegemonous situation is temporary, and, considering, moreover, that nuclear proliferation is nearly inescapable, the US wants to change this into another, new deterrence combining missile defense and offensive nuclear arms. Consequently, the actual number of nuclear warheads is excessive (and, further, they are inappropriate), and unilaterally violates treaties, particularly the ABM treaty and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. This "update" is from President Quiles in a March 28, 2001, interview: "..the fact is that we know that in reality NMD does not mean no more deterrence." WHAT ALTERNATIVE SHOULD WE PROPOSE? It's assumed that there's a clear response to the significance of "our vital interests" and of the false and dangerous alternative of the US' missile defense. Those who trust our convictions know upon thorough reflection that the army lies very close to "our vital interests." If these interests are our country's hope for survival, then the solution is national military defense. In fact, since the Third Republic, this has never been the case - from 1870 to 1914, someone dissociated from these vital interests proclaimed: 1- to protect ourselves against Germany and to regain Alsace-Lorraine, 2- a need of daily military activities, 3- to wage war in the colonies for the defense of economic interests and enterprises. The result was Germany's uncontrolled invasion facing a French army specially trained for guerilla combat. This disassociation paid a high price in human lives, but our leaders learned no lesson from this. In these times, our rulers still dissociate "our vital interests" from the daily functions of the armies, confident in this "Maginot Line" as in 1940, but this schizophrenia is a conduit to disaster. If we still entrust our vital interests to nuclear deterrence, outside of a unique strategy, isn't this a reoffense on the road toward disaster? And if our vital interests also include our survival, aren't peace and a society without violence more just? "To make progress towards disarmament, to build Europe's security and defense, to consolidate an international system ruled by the standards of law" are the official goals of France. Even though underlying these words there are important differences between the executive branch and our NGOs, can't one believe success is possible, since our interests don't lie outside of those of other peoples, and since we are building another security based on equal rights for all (under treaties), and on cooperation without discrimination? How can conflicts be defused if, behind the scenes, there are weapons of mass destruction being developed exclusively intended for civilians? If France wants to be an example, why doesn't it follow the path of South Africa, whose prestige and effectiveness in the service of peace increased greatly after its decision to renounce nuclear weapons? Missile Defense We do not allow mixing our voice with those anti-NMD concerns of returning quickly to the "good old days" of nuclear deterrence, with the survival of the planet at stake. We should not allow our anti-NMD campaign to dissociate from the campaign FOR nuclear abolition. It's possible for us to establish our priorities for a unique campaign. We must convince the American people, the principle victims of this crazy project, that those who will be on the missile defense's front line are civilian targets that are not protected by a "shield" concentrated on ballistic attack. At the same time, there is a growing temptation to use terrorism or miniature nuclear weapons ("mini-nukes") that would pass under this shield. We must convince the Americans one by one, that our goal of nuclear abolition - and the importance which must be accorded to treaties and international law - are needed for their protection, security and safety. We must base all our actions in France on that international strategy without the loss of our autonomous view on the subject and without slowing down our push to reject nuclear deterrence, a dying concept. If the majority of American citizens comprehend that the peoples of the world are not a threat, that they are their friends, then Bush's project will be put in danger. BACK TO THE DARK AGES? We must be done with, not even think about, the idea that we don't need emergency measures now. We also must take care that while we eradicate this insanity that's in the minds of our rulers, that a new form of unspeakable blackmail is not invented. This is immense and difficult, but who will carry it out if not our public opinion, and we in service to it? Abraham Behar Association of French Doctors for the Prevention of Nuclear War ____________________________________________________________________________ COMMENTS ON THE LEGISLATION FOR FRENCH MILITARY PROGRAMMING FOR 2003-2008 A reading of the plan of the legislation for military programming for 2003-2008, adopted at the end of July by the Counsel of Ministers in accord with the President of the Republic, raises these questions: “Why do these arms programs exist? For what missions? Against what threats? In the service of what national security? To build what international security? To prevent what conflicts? To build a lasting peace with what United Nations?” The responses provided are not satisfactory. Because we have a different conception about the security of France in today’s world, we reject that “the renewal and modernization of nuclear forces are the principle objectives of the next legislation for military programming,” as it’s written. What threats? The threats brought up: trafficking, ethnic problems, proliferation, terrorism - are problems labeled those requiring political choices: to find a political solution, to “simply protect” against their consequences, to contain them. This is what one will have with nuclear arms, with “Leclerc” tanks, with missiles without restoring peace instead of finding a way to prevent potential wars. It is totally incoherent to seek to create purely military solutions to these ideological, cultural, social and political problems. What international security? The only thoughts concerned with international security in the document presenting the legislation are those raised to support France “elaborating and consolidating the legal instruments indispensable to control proliferation, by superiority and by arms reduction conforming with the objectives of general and complete disarmament.” The second reference is the reminder that “France is particularly attached to enforcing the Charter of the United Nations and to respecting the authority of the Security Counsel, guaranteeing peace and international security.” These reminders are totally insufficient. What is the value attached to “legal instruments” next to “the renewal and modernization of nuclear forces are the principle objectives of the next legislation for military programming”? What is the value of the UN that Lionel Jospin proclaimed in his speech in Rio de Janeiro when he said that it is the institution better adapted for a globalized world that seeks permanently resolute action for his reform - broadening and democratization of the Security Counsel, a better role for the General Assembly, a place for the NGOs? In the same manner, to promote the central role of the UN does not assume the cessation of delegitimization with the growing number of interventions of non-multilateral structures like the G7, “contact groups,” etc. Militarization for what security? In fact, the main characteristic of the military programming legislation is that all the large arms programs, nuclear or conventional, created before the fall of the Berlin Wall, are now at almost half their previous budgets. The programs come out of the evolution of European defense, the interventions of the Balkans, and are outmoded “dinosaurs” that thus are given by this labyrinthine system 525 billion French francs(80 billion euros) in six years, the equivalent of the previous legislation (528 billion) and representing a small reduction from the legislations of the years 1985-1990. We need to see that France is in the process of completely renewing its nuclear arsenal, not only maintaining its current level, but also improving it. “The primary, new part of this legislation is a renewed interest in promoting nuclear power,” writes J.D. Merchet in the July 1, 2001 edition of “Liberation.” The nuclear programs are not at just a “strictly enough” level as the legislation proclaims, because today, “strictly enough” refers to the new crisis in international security. Faced with this, “strictly enough” deviates from mere stockpiling of weapons, and indirectly discourages respect for disarmament treaties and non-proliferation treaties. Lateral “modernizations,” “stuck” with enforcing Article VI of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, are the ingredients that would renew inciting other states’ desires to jump into the nuclear arena. How and when would one use atomic arms against threats today? Did not Minister Vedrine explain to the Americans at a meeting of NATO that the NMD project is ineffective against terrorists carrying an atomic bomb or chemical weapon in a suitcase? The tragic attack in New York is a cruel confirmation of that. Is it not the same for French nuclear arms? Even more serious, the legislation envisages the same direction of the American so-called missile “defense,” by announcing that “France is preparing by the year 2010 a new capacity to protect selected sites by means of deploying an outside theater of operations, opposing ballistic missiles.” Now, all the experts say that the missile defense projects known as “theater are a forerunner or a “Trojan Horse” of the American global programs. Time for Something New! The legislation does not break with the old ways of military security. It is not consistent with certain speeches on the prevention of conflicts, such as real peace seeking, or on the place and role of the UN, pledged by Lionel Jospin or Jacques Chirac. The main fault of this legislation is that it does not concretely advance the concept of a way to put into place global security for France and Europe in today’s world, for the prevention of conflicts, to integrate efforts favoring peaceful cooperation, and helping sustainable development. We do not want to accept military programming legislation that does not also discuss and define a true politic of global security, prevention of conflicts, actions to control the sale of arms, and the reassertion of the value of the UN. Daniel Durand National Secretary of the Peace Movement - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Patricia Watson Subject: (abolition-usa) DU Date: 24 Nov 2001 13:22:17 -0400 Who can answer this student's questions? Patricia Watson, editor, Peacework >Status: U >From: "Alex" >To: >Subject: DU >Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2001 19:10:35 -0600 >MIME-Version: 1.0 >X-Priority: 3 >X-MSMail-Priority: Normal >X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 > > I am curious as to why the United States Military insists on using DU >in the battlefield. It seems to me that these weapons must be incredibly >effective or the government would have stopped using them. Is there a >viable military alternative to DU? If so, how effective in comparison to >DU would the alternative be? On a side note, it seems that DU would only >be dispersed in the battlefields of Iraq. Do the people of Iraq frequent >these battlefields, for this seems to be the only logical explination of >how they get these diseases? How much uranium does it take to cause >these kind of casualties/malformations? Is there a certain exposure >time/level that needs to be attained before these problems will occur? Is >DU always 60% as radioactive as naturally occuring uranium or is this >just the "high" estimate? Thanks so very much, Alex King Student > - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: fdpeace@earthlink.net Subject: Re: (abolition-usa) DU Date: 26 Nov 2001 10:09:23 -0800 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------ACEED510370948C584906E36 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Patricia, I am Pax Christi USA's representative to the US Network to Abolish Nuclear Weapons. The attachment is one of a few short educational pieces I composed on that wide subject. It focuses on uranium and can help steer your student friend to additional material on DU. ---Regards Frank Dworak Patricia Watson wrote: > > Who can answer this student's questions? > > Patricia Watson, editor, Peacework > > >Status: U > >From: "Alex" > >To: > >Subject: DU > >Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2001 19:10:35 -0600 > >MIME-Version: 1.0 > >X-Priority: 3 > >X-MSMail-Priority: Normal > >X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 > > > > I am curious as to why the United States Military insists on using DU > >in the battlefield. It seems to me that these weapons must be incredibly > >effective or the government would have stopped using them. Is there a > >viable military alternative to DU? If so, how effective in comparison to > >DU would the alternative be? On a side note, it seems that DU would only > >be dispersed in the battlefields of Iraq. Do the people of Iraq frequent > >these battlefields, for this seems to be the only logical explination of > >how they get these diseases? How much uranium does it take to cause > >these kind of casualties/malformations? Is there a certain exposure > >time/level that needs to be attained before these problems will occur? Is > >DU always 60% as radioactive as naturally occuring uranium or is this > >just the "high" estimate? Thanks so very much, Alex King Student > > > > - > To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" > with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. > For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send > "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. --------------ACEED510370948C584906E36 Content-Type: application/msword; name="M9-Depleted Uranium.doc" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline; filename="M9-Depleted Uranium.doc" 0M8R4KGxGuEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPgADAP7/CQAGAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABAAAALAAAAAAA AAAAEAAALgAAAAEAAAD+////AAAAACsAAAD///////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ///////////////////////////////////spcEANyAJBAAA8BK/AAAAAAAAEAAAAAAABAAA HBcAAA4AYmpialUWVRYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAJBBYAIiIAADd8AAA3fAAAHBMAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD//w8AAAAAAAAAAAD//w8AAAAAAAAAAAD//w8A AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGwAAAAAADYBAAAAAAAANgEAADYBAAAAAAAANgEAAAAAAAA2AQAA AAAAADYBAAAAAAAANgEAABQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAEoBAAAAAAAAigMAAAAAAACKAwAAAAAAAIoD AAAAAAAAigMAAAwAAACWAwAADAAAAEoBAAAAAAAAsw0AALYAAACuAwAAAAAAAK4DAAAAAAAA rgMAAAAAAACuAwAAAAAAAK4DAAAAAAAArgMAAAAAAACuAwAAAAAAAK4DAAAAAAAAMg0AAAIA AAA0DQAAAAAAADQNAAAAAAAANA0AAAAAAAA0DQAAAAAAADQNAAAAAAAANA0AACQAAABpDgAA IAIAAIkQAACOAAAAWA0AABUAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANgEAAAAAAACuAwAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACuAwAAAAAAAK4DAAAAAAAArgMAAAAAAACuAwAAAAAAAFgNAAAAAAAA ggQAAAAAAAA2AQAAAAAAADYBAAAAAAAArgMAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAK4DAAAAAAAAbQ0AABYA AACCBAAAAAAAAIIEAAAAAAAAggQAAAAAAACuAwAAagAAADYBAAAAAAAArgMAAAAAAAA2AQAA AAAAAK4DAAAAAAAAMg0AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAIIEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAArgMAAAAAAAAyDQAAAAAAAIIEAACwCAAA ggQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADINAAAAAAAANgEAAAAAAAA2AQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMg0AAAAAAACuAwAA AAAAAKIDAAAMAAAAACjmUEW8wAFKAQAAQAIAAIoDAAAAAAAAGAQAAGoAAAAyDQAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAMg0AAAAAAACDDQAAMAAAALMNAAAAAAAAMg0AAAAAAAAXEQAAAAAAAIIEAAAAAAAA FxEAAAAAAAAyDQAAAAAAAIIEAAAAAAAASgEAAAAAAABKAQAAAAAAADYBAAAAAAAANgEAAAAA AAA2AQAAAAAAADYBAAAAAAAAAgDZAAAAOS4gIERlcGxldGVkIFVyYW5pdW0NDU5vdmVtYmVy IDMsIDIwMDANDVdoZW5ldmVyIGNvdW50cmllcyBoYXZlIGRlc2lnbmVkIHRhbmtzIHdpdGgg aGVhdmllciBhcm1vciwgdGhlaXIgb3Bwb25lbnRzIGhhdmUgZm91bmQgbmV3IHdlYXBvbnMg dG8gcGVuZXRyYXRlIGl0LiBIaXN0b3J5IHdhcyByZXBlYXRlZCB3aGVuIHRoZSBTb3ZpZXRz IGJ1aWx0IHRoZSBoZWF2aWx5LWFybW9yZWQgVC03MiB0YW5rOyB0aGUgVW5pdGVkIFN0YXRl cyByZXNwb25kZWQgd2l0aCByb2RzIG9mIGRlcGxldGVkIHVyYW5pdW0gKERVKSBpbiBpdHMg YW50aS10YW5rIHNoZWxscy4gIFRoZSBzaGVsbHMgYXJlIHJlbWFya2FibHkgZWZmZWN0aXZl LiBBdHRlc3RpbmcgdG8gdGhhdCBjbGFpbSB3ZXJlIDEsNDAwIElyYXFpIHRhbmtzIGxlZnQg c21vbGRlcmluZyBpbiB0aGUgZGVzZXJ0Lg0NRFUgaXMgYW4gZXh0cmVtZWx5IGRlbnNlIG1h dGVyaWFsLiBJdCBpcyBhbHNvIHB5cm9waG9yaWMuIFRoYXQgbWVhbnMgaXQgY2FuIGJ1cm4g b24gaW1wYWN0LiBIb3dldmVyLCB1cCB0byA3MCBwZXJjZW50IG9mIGl0IGlzIHJlbGVhc2Vk IGluIGFuIGFlcm9zb2wgYXMgZmluZSB1cmFuaXVtIG94aWRlIGR1c3Qgd2hpY2ggY2FuIGJl IGluaGFsZWQuIE1vcmUgdGhhbiBoYWxmIG9mIHRoZXNlIHBhcnRpY2xlcyBhcmUgc21hbGwg ZW5vdWdoIHRvIGVtYmVkIGluIHRoZSBkZWVwZXN0IGFpcndheXMgb2YgdGhlIGx1bmdzIHdo ZXJlIHRoZXkgYXJlIG5vdCBlYXNpbHkgZXhwZWxsZWQuICBUaGF0knMgd2hlcmUgdGhlIGx1 bmdzIG1ha2UgZXhjaGFuZ2VzIHdpdGggYmxvb2QuIFVuZm9ydHVuYXRlbHkgZm9yIGZyaWVu ZHMgYW5kIGZvZXMgYXMgd2VsbCBhcyBub25jb21iYXRhbnRzIHdobyBpbmhhYml0IHRoZSBi YXR0bGUgc2l0ZXMsIERVIGlzIGJvdGggY2hlbWljYWxseSB0b3hpYyBhbmQgcmFkaW9hY3Rp dmUuICANDVRoZSB0ZXJtIJNkZXBsZXRlZJQgbmVlZHMgZXhwbGFuYXRpb24uIFVyYW5pdW0g b3JlIGlzIGRlcGxldGVkIHdoZW4gdGhlIGlzb3RvcGUgVS0yMzUgaXMgZXh0cmFjdGVkIGlu IHRoZSBtYWtpbmcgb2YgZnVlbCBmb3IgbnVjbGVhciByZWFjdG9ycyBhbmQgbnVjbGVhciB3 ZWFwb25zLiBUaGUgcmVtYWluaW5nIHdhc3RlIGlzIHN0aWxsIHVyYW5pdW0sIGNoaWVmbHkg cmFkaW9hY3RpdmUgVS0yMzgsIHdoaWNoIGhhcyBhIGhhbGYgbGlmZSBvZiA0LjUgYmlsbGlv biB5ZWFycy4gIFRoZSBVbml0ZWQgU3RhdGVzIGlzIHJlcG9ydGVkIHRvIGhhdmUgb3ZlciBv bmUgYmlsbGlvbiBwb3VuZHMgb2YgdGhpcyB1cmFuaXVtIHdhc3RlIHdoaWNoIHRoZSBnb3Zl cm5tZW50IGdpdmVzIGF3YXkgdG8gYXJtcyBtYW51ZmFjdHVyZXJzLg0NRFUgcHJpbWFyaWx5 IGVtaXRzIGFscGhhIGFuZCBiZXRhIHBhcnRpY2xlcyBhcyBpdCBkZWNheXMuIEFsdGhvdWdo IHRoZXNlIHBhcnRpY2xlcyBoYXZlIGxpbWl0ZWQgcmFuZ2UgaW4gZGlyZWN0IGNvbnRhY3Qg d2l0aCBza2luLCBwcm9sb25nZWQgY29udGFjdCBjYW4gY2F1c2UgaGFybS4gIEluIG9uZSBo b3VyLCB0aGUgZG9zZSBmcm9tIGNvbnRhY3Qgd2l0aCBhIHNvbGlkIHBpZWNlIG9mIERVIGNh biBleGNlZWQgdGhlIGF2ZXJhZ2UgcmFkaWF0aW9uIHJlY2VpdmVkIGZyb20gbmF0dXJhbCBz b3VyY2VzIG92ZXIgYSB3aG9sZSB5ZWFyLiAgQnV0IGNvbnRhY3Qgd2l0aCB0aGUgc2tpbiBp cyBub3QgdGhlIG1ham9yIGRhbmdlciBvZiBEVTsgZmFyIGdyZWF0ZXIgcmlzayBjb21lcyBm cm9tIGdldHRpbmcgRFUgaW5zaWRlIHRoZSBodW1hbiBib2R5Lg0NIE1vcmUgdGhhbiBvbmUg aHVuZHJlZCBVLlMuIHNvbGRpZXJzIGhhdmUgRFUgc2hyYXBuZWwgZW1iZWRkZWQgaW4gdGhl aXIgYm9kaWVzLCBwcmltYXJpbHkgYXMgYSByZXN1bHQgb2YgZnJpZW5kbHkgZmlyZS4gT3Ro ZXIgc29sZGllcnMgd2hvIGNsaW1iZWQgb3ZlciBhbmQgaW4gYXJtb3JlZCB2ZWhpY2xlcyBk aXNhYmxlZCBieSBEVSBzaGVsbHMgcHJvYmFibHkgaW5oYWxlZCBvciBpbmdlc3RlZCBEVSBk dXN0LiBCaWxsIE1lc2xlciwgd3JpdGluZyBmb3IgdGhlIE5hdGlvbiBtYWdhemluZSwgY2l0 ZWQgYSBzdHVkeSBieSB0aGUgT3BlcmF0aW9uIERlc2VydCBTaGllbGQvRGVzZXJ0IFN0b3Jt IEFzc29jaWF0aW9uIHdoaWNoIGZvdW5kIHRoYXQgb3V0IG9mIDEwLDA1MSBHdWxmIFdhciB2 ZXRlcmFucyB3aG8gaGF2ZSByZXBvcnRlZCBteXN0ZXJpb3VzIGlsbG5lc3NlcywgODIgcGVy Y2VudCBoYWQgZW50ZXJlZCBjYXB0dXJlZCBlbmVteSB2ZWhpY2xlcy4gQW5vdGhlciAzLDAw MCB0cm9vcHMgd2VyZSBleHBvc2VkIHRvIGRhcmsgY2xvdWRzIG9mIERVIHBhcnRpY2xlcyBy ZWxlYXNlZCBieSBmaXJlIGF0IGFuIGFtbW8gZHVtcCBpbiBEb2hhLCB0d2VsdmUgbWlsZXMg ZnJvbSBLdXdhaXQgQ2l0eS4gVGhlIFBlbnRhZ29uIGhhZCBjbGFpbWVkIHRoYXQgb25seSBh IHNtYWxsIG51bWJlciBvZiB0cm9vcHMgd2l0aCBpbmNhcGFjaXRhdGluZyBzeW1wdG9tcyCW IGFib3V0IHNpeHR5IJYgd2VyZSBleHBvc2VkIHRvIGRhbmdlcm91cyBsZXZlbHMgb2YgRFUu IFRoZSBhcm15IGtub3dzIGlmIERVIGlzIGZvdW5kIHRvIGJlIGNhdXNpbmcgdGhlIGFpbG1l bnRzLCB0aGUgZmluYW5jaWFsIGltcGxpY2F0aW9ucyBvZiBsb25nLXRlcm0gZGlzYWJpbGl0 eSBwYXltZW50cyBhbmQgaGVhbHRoLWNhcmUgY29zdHMgd291bGQgYmUgaHVnZS4NDUl0IGlz IGhhcmQgdG8gbGVhcm4gdGhlIHRydXRoIGFib3V0IGRlcGxldGVkIHVyYW5pdW0uIFdoeSB3 ZXJlIGl0cyBkYW5nZXJzIHdpdGhoZWxkIGZyb20gdHJvb3BzIHdobyB3ZXJlIGJlaW5nIGV4 cG9zZWQgdG8gaXQ/IElzIGl0LCBhcyBzb21lIHBlb3BsZSBzdXNwZWN0LCBhIGNvbnRyaWJ1 dGluZyBjYXVzZSBvZiBHdWxmIFdhciBTeW5kcm9tZT8gSGFzIHRoZSBtaWxpdGFyeSBjb3Zl cmVkIHVwIGl0cyBlZmZlY3RzIGFuZCB3cml0dGVuIG9mZiBpdHMgdmljdGltcyB0byBwcmVz ZXJ2ZSB0aGUgb3B0aW9uIG9mIHVzaW5nIGl0IGFnYWluPyANDVRoZSBsYXJnZXN0IGxlZ2Fj eSBvZiBEVSB3ZWFwb25zIG1heSBiZSB0aGVpciBwb3N0LXdhciBlZmZlY3RzIG9uIGNpdmls aWFuIHBvcHVsYXRpb25zIGluIGNvbnRhbWluYXRlZCBhcmVhcy4gQW55b25lIHdobyBpbmdl c3RzIERVLCBlLmcuIGNoaWxkcmVuIGFuZCBhbmltYWxzIHdobyBpbmFkdmVydGVudGx5IGNv bnN1bWUgY29udGFtaW5hdGVkIHNvaWwsIGlzIGF0IHJpc2suICBEZXBlbmRpbmcgb24gdGhl IGFtb3VudHMgaW5nZXN0ZWQsIHRoZSByYWRpYXRpb24gbWF5IGNhdXNlIGNhbmNlcnMuIFRo ZSBtYWluIGNoZW1pY2FsbHkgaW5kdWNlZCBlZmZlY3Qgb2YgaW5nZXN0aW5nIERVIG9yYWxs eSBpcyBraWRuZXkgZHlzZnVuY3Rpb24uIElyYXFpIGNpdGl6ZW5zIGhhdmUgYmVlbiBleHBl cmllbmNpbmcgc2hhcnBseSBlbGV2YXRlZCByYXRlcyBvZiBjYW5jZXIsIGxldWtlbWlhLCBt aXNjYXJyaWFnZXMsIGFuZCBiaXJ0aCBkZWZlY3RzIGluIHJlZ2lvbnMgd2hlcmUgRFUgd2Fz IHVzZWQuIElzIERVIGEgbWFqb3IgY2F1c2F0aXZlIGFnZW50PyAgVGhlIGFuc3dlciBpcyB1 bmNlcnRhaW4sIGJ1dCBzdXNwaWNpb25zIHJlbWFpbiBoaWdoLCB3aXRoIGdvb2QgcmVhc29u Lg0NQW4gZXN0aW1hdGVkIDMwMCBtZXRyaWMgdG9ucyBvZiBEVSB3ZXJlIGxlZnQgc2NhdHRl cmVkIGluIEt1d2FpdCwgSXJhcSBhbmQgU2F1ZGkgQXJhYmlhLiAgSW4gYWRkaXRpb24sIGFz IE5BVE+ScyBTZWNyZXRhcnktR2VuZXJhbCByZXBvcnRzLCAzMSwwMDAgRFUgcm91bmRzIHdl cmUgZmlyZWQgaW4gYXBwcm94aW1hdGVseSAxMDAgbWlzc2lvbnMgdGhyb3VnaG91dCBLb3Nv dm8uIERyYWdvbpJzIHRlZXRoIG5vdyBsaWUgaW4gdGhlaXIgc29pbC4gDQ1UaGUgVU6ScyBI dW1hbiBSaWdodHMgQ29tbWlzc2lvbiwgdGhyb3VnaCBpdHMgU3ViY29tbWlzc2lvbiBvbiBQ cmV2ZW50aW9uIG9mIERpc2NyaW1pbmF0aW9uIGFuZCBQcm90ZWN0aW9uIG9mIE1pbm9yaXRp ZXMsIGhhcyBhZG9wdGVkIHJlc29sdXRpb25zIHdoaWNoIGluZGljdCBEVSB3ZWFwb25yeSBh cyAid2VhcG9ucyBvZiBtYXNzIG9yIGluZGlzY3JpbWluYXRlIGRlc3RydWN0aW9uIiBpbmNv bXBhdGlibGUgd2l0aCBpbnRlcm5hdGlvbmFsIGh1bWFuaXRhcmlhbiBvciBodW1hbiByaWdo dHMgbGF3LiBOZXZlcnRoZWxlc3MsIEJyaXRhaW4sIEZyYW5jZSwgYW5kIFJ1c3NpYSBhcmUg bm93IGFkZGluZyBEVSB0byB0aGVpciBhcm1zLCBhbmQgdGhlIFVuaXRlZCBTdGF0ZXMgaGFz IHNvbGQgRFUgd2VhcG9ucyB0byBJc3JhZWwsIFNhdWRpIEFyYWJpYSwgS3V3YWl0LCBCYWhy YWluLCBHcmVlY2UsIFR1cmtleSwgVGhhaWxhbmQsIFRhaXdhbiwgYW5kIEtvcmVhLiANLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLQ1Tb21lIHNvdXJjZXM6IA0xLiAgQmlsbCBNZXNsZXIuIHRocmVlIEZl YXR1cmUgU3RvcmllcyBpbiB0aGUgTmF0aW9uIGF0IGh0dHA6Ly9wYXN0LnRoZW5hdGlvbi5j b20sIDE5OTYgdG8gMTk5OTcuDTIuICBVTkVQIFByZXNzIFJlbGVhc2UuIE5BVE8gQ29uZmly bXMgdG8gdGhlIFVOIFVzZSBvZiBEZXBsZXRlZCBVcmFuaXVtIER1cmluZyB0aGUgS29zb3Zv IENvbmZsaWN0IGF0IGh0dHA6Ly93d3cuZ3JpZC51bmVwLmNoL2J0Zi9wcmVzc3JlbGVhc2Vz L3VuZXAyMTAzMjAwMC5odG1sDTMuICBVTkVQL1VOQ0hTIEJhbGthbnMgVGFzayBGb3JjZSAo QlRGKSByZXBvcnQ7IFRoZSBwb3RlbnRpYWwgZWZmZWN0cyBvbiBodW1hbiBoZWFsdGggYW5k IHRoZSBlbnZpcm9ubWVudCBhcmlzaW5nIGZyb20gcG9zc2libGUgdXNlIG9mIGRlcGxldGVk IHVyYW5pdW0gZHVyaW5nIHRoZSAxOTk5IEtvc292byBjb25mbGljdC4gT2N0b2JlciAxOTk5 Lg0AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAQAACgEAACyBQAAYhAAAGcQAAAcFwAA/QD99/0AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAKNgiBQ0oWAF0IgQAEQ0oWAAUABAAAFQQAABYEAAAnBAAA KAQAALIFAACzBQAAugcAALsHAABXCQAAWAkAAAQLAAAFCwAApA4AAKUOAADcDwAA3Q8AAEIS AABDEgAAQxMAAEQTAAAxFQAAQhUAAFEVAACzFQAAVRYAABwXAAD9AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA+wAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAPsAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD7AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA+QAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPsAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAD7AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA+wAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPsAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD7AAAAAAAA AAAAAAAA+wAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPsAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD3AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA+wAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAPsAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD7AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA+wAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPsAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAD7AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA+wAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPsAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD7AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA +wAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPsAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD7AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA+wAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABDwAAARAA AAEAAAABAQAAGgAEAAAcFwAA/gAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACAQEBIAAxkGgBH7DQLyCw4D0hsAgH IrAIByOQoAUkkKAFJbAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAUABEACgABAGkADwADAAAAAAAAAAAAOAAAQPH/AgA4AAwABgBOAG8AcgBtAGEA bAAAAAIAAAAYAENKGABfSAEEYUoYAG1ICQRzSAkEdEgJBDIAAUABAAIAMgAMAAkASABlAGEA ZABpAG4AZwAgADEAAAAIAAEABiQBQCYABgA1CIFcCIEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPABBQPL/ oQA8AAwAFgBEAGUAZgBhAHUAbAB0ACAAUABhAHIAYQBnAHIAYQBwAGgAIABGAG8AbgB0AAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAACoAQkABAPIAKgAMAAkAQgBvAGQAeQAgAFQAZQB4AHQAAAACAA8ABABDShQA LgBQQAEAAgEuAAwACwBCAG8AZAB5ACAAVABlAHgAdAAgADIAAAACABAABABDShYAAAAAABwT AAAFAAAiAAAAAP////8AAAAAFQAAABYAAAAnAAAAKAAAALIBAACzAQAAugMAALsDAABXBQAA WAUAAAQHAAAFBwAApAoAAKUKAADcCwAA3QsAAEIOAABDDgAAQw8AAEQPAAAxEQAAQhEAAFER AACzEQAAVRIAAB4TAAAIAAAAATAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAICYAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAICYAAAA ADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAICYAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAICYAAAAEDAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAICYAAAA ADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAICYAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAICYAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAICYAAAA ADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAICYAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAICYAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAICYAAAA ADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAICYAAAADzAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAICYAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAICYAAAA ADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAICYAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAICYAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAICYAAAA ADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAICYAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAICYAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAICYAAAA ADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAICYAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAICYAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAICYAAAA ADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAICYAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAICaAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAIAABAAA HBcAAA4AAAAABAAAHBcAAA8AAAAABAAAHBcAABAAAAAAAAAA4QEAAOsBAAD2BwAA/AcAABQP AAAaDwAAcg8AAH8PAABaEQAAYBEAAAYSAAAMEgAAWRIAAFkSAAD9EgAAAxMAAB4TAAAHABwA BwAcAAcAHAAHABwABwAcAAcAHAAHAAQABwAcAAcAAAAAAMsAAADaAAAAXwIAAGkCAACrBAAA tAQAABoFAAAlBQAAWQgAANQIAADKDwAA2w8AAGIRAABnEQAAWRIAAFkSAAAeEwAABwAzAAcA MwAHADMABwAzAAcAMwAHADMABwAzAAcABAAHAP//FAAAABEARgByAGEAbgBjAGkAcwAgAFMA LgAgAEQAdwBvAHIAYQBrAF4AQwA6AFwATQB5ACAARABvAGMAdQBtAGUAbgB0AHMAXABJAHMA cwB1AGUAcwBcAE0AaQBsAGkAdABhAHIAaQBzAG0AXABOAHUAYwBsAGUAYQByACAAVwBlAGEA cABvAG4AcwBcAEUAZAB1AGMAYQB0AGkAbwBuAGEAbAAgAE0AZQBzAHMAYQBnAGUAcwBcAE0A OQAtAEQAZQBwAGwAZQB0AGUAZAAgAFUAcgBhAG4AaQB1AG0ALgBkAG8AYwARAEYAcgBhAG4A YwBpAHMAIABTAC4AIABEAHcAbwByAGEAawBXAEMAOgBcAFcASQBOAEQATwBXAFMAXABBAHAA cABsAGkAYwBhAHQAaQBvAG4AIABEAGEAdABhAFwATQBpAGMAcgBvAHMAbwBmAHQAXABXAG8A cgBkAFwAQQB1AHQAbwBSAGUAYwBvAHYAZQByAHkAIABzAGEAdgBlACAAbwBmACAATQA5AC0A RABlAHAAbABlAHQAZQBkACAAVQByAGEAbgBpAHUAbQAuAGEAcwBkABEARgByAGEAbgBjAGkA cwAgAFMALgAgAEQAdwBvAHIAYQBrAFcAQwA6AFwAVwBJAE4ARABPAFcAUwBcAEEAcABwAGwA aQBjAGEAdABpAG8AbgAgAEQAYQB0AGEAXABNAGkAYwByAG8AcwBvAGYAdABcAFcAbwByAGQA XABBAHUAdABvAFIAZQBjAG8AdgBlAHIAeQAgAHMAYQB2AGUAIABvAGYAIABNADkALQBEAGUA cABsAGUAdABlAGQAIABVAHIAYQBuAGkAdQBtAC4AYQBzAGQAEQBGAHIAYQBuAGMAaQBzACAA UwAuACAARAB3AG8AcgBhAGsAXgBDADoAXABNAHkAIABEAG8AYwB1AG0AZQBuAHQAcwBcAEkA cwBzAHUAZQBzAFwATQBpAGwAaQB0AGEAcgBpAHMAbQBcAE4AdQBjAGwAZQBhAHIAIABXAGUA YQBwAG8AbgBzAFwARQBkAHUAYwBhAHQAaQBvAG4AYQBsACAATQBlAHMAcwBhAGcAZQBzAFwA TQA5AC0ARABlAHAAbABlAHQAZQBkACAAVQByAGEAbgBpAHUAbQAuAGQAbwBjABEARgByAGEA bgBjAGkAcwAgAFMALgAgAEQAdwBvAHIAYQBrAF4AQwA6AFwATQB5ACAARABvAGMAdQBtAGUA bgB0AHMAXABJAHMAcwB1AGUAcwBcAE0AaQBsAGkAdABhAHIAaQBzAG0AXABOAHUAYwBsAGUA YQByACAAVwBlAGEAcABvAG4AcwBcAEUAZAB1AGMAYQB0AGkAbwBuAGEAbAAgAE0AZQBzAHMA YQBnAGUAcwBcAE0AOQAtAEQAZQBwAGwAZQB0AGUAZAAgAFUAcgBhAG4AaQB1AG0ALgBkAG8A YwARAEYAcgBhAG4AYwBpAHMAIABTAC4AIABEAHcAbwByAGEAawBeAEMAOgBcAE0AeQAgAEQA bwBjAHUAbQBlAG4AdABzAFwASQBzAHMAdQBlAHMAXABNAGkAbABpAHQAYQByAGkAcwBtAFwA TgB1AGMAbABlAGEAcgAgAFcAZQBhAHAAbwBuAHMAXABFAGQAdQBjAGEAdABpAG8AbgBhAGwA IABNAGUAcwBzAGEAZwBlAHMAXABNADkALQBEAGUAcABsAGUAdABlAGQAIABVAHIAYQBuAGkA dQBtAC4AZABvAGMAEQBGAHIAYQBuAGMAaQBzACAAUwAuACAARAB3AG8AcgBhAGsAXgBDADoA XABNAHkAIABEAG8AYwB1AG0AZQBuAHQAcwBcAEkAcwBzAHUAZQBzAFwATQBpAGwAaQB0AGEA cgBpAHMAbQBcAE4AdQBjAGwAZQBhAHIAIABXAGUAYQBwAG8AbgBzAFwARQBkAHUAYwBhAHQA aQBvAG4AYQBsACAATQBlAHMAcwBhAGcAZQBzAFwATQA5AC0ARABlAHAAbABlAHQAZQBkACAA VQByAGEAbgBpAHUAbQAuAGQAbwBjABEARgByAGEAbgBjAGkAcwAgAFMALgAgAEQAdwBvAHIA YQBrAFcAQwA6AFwAVwBJAE4ARABPAFcAUwBcAEEAcABwAGwAaQBjAGEAdABpAG8AbgAgAEQA YQB0AGEAXABNAGkAYwByAG8AcwBvAGYAdABcAFcAbwByAGQAXABBAHUAdABvAFIAZQBjAG8A dgBlAHIAeQAgAHMAYQB2AGUAIABvAGYAIABNADkALQBEAGUAcABsAGUAdABlAGQAIABVAHIA YQBuAGkAdQBtAC4AYQBzAGQAEQBGAHIAYQBuAGMAaQBzACAAUwAuACAARAB3AG8AcgBhAGsA XgBDADoAXABNAHkAIABEAG8AYwB1AG0AZQBuAHQAcwBcAEkAcwBzAHUAZQBzAFwATQBpAGwA aQB0AGEAcgBpAHMAbQBcAE4AdQBjAGwAZQBhAHIAIABXAGUAYQBwAG8AbgBzAFwARQBkAHUA YwBhAHQAaQBvAG4AYQBsACAATQBlAHMAcwBhAGcAZQBzAFwATQA5AC0ARABlAHAAbABlAHQA ZQBkACAAVQByAGEAbgBpAHUAbQAuAGQAbwBjABEARgByAGEAbgBjAGkAcwAgAFMALgAgAEQA dwBvAHIAYQBrAF4AQwA6AFwATQB5ACAARABvAGMAdQBtAGUAbgB0AHMAXABJAHMAcwB1AGUA cwBcAE0AaQBsAGkAdABhAHIAaQBzAG0AXABOAHUAYwBsAGUAYQByACAAVwBlAGEAcABvAG4A cwBcAEUAZAB1AGMAYQB0AGkAbwBuAGEAbAAgAE0AZQBzAHMAYQBnAGUAcwBcAE0AOQAtAEQA ZQBwAGwAZQB0AGUAZAAgAFUAcgBhAG4AaQB1AG0ALgBkAG8AYwD/QAGAAQBZEgAAWRIAAFRF OwIBAAEAWRIAAAAAAABVEgAAAAAAAAIQAAAAAAAAABwTAABQAAAIAEAAAP//AQAAAAcAVQBu AGsAbgBvAHcAbgD//wEACAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA//8BAAAAAAD//wAAAgD//wAAAAD//wAAAgD/ /wAAAAADAAAARxaQAQAAAgIGAwUEBQIDBIc6AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD/AAAAAAAAAFQAaQBt AGUAcwAgAE4AZQB3ACAAUgBvAG0AYQBuAAAANRaQAQIABQUBAgEHBgIFBwAAAAAAAAAQAAAA AAAAAAAAAACAAAAAAFMAeQBtAGIAbwBsAAAAMyaQAQAAAgsGBAICAgICBIc6AAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAD/AAAAAAAAAEEAcgBpAGEAbAAAACIABAAxCIgYAPDQAgAAaAEAAAAACRxLpnQaVEby MksmEgC+AQAAwwIAAMEPAAABAAgAAAAEAAMQIQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAQABAAAAAQAAAAAAAAAk AwDwEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAClBsAHtAC0 AIGBEjAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAFgTAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAAAAAAAAAgyg1EA8BAACAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD//xIAAAAAAAAAEABEAEUAUABMAEUAVABF AEQAIABVAFIAQQBOAEkAVQBNAAAAAAAAABEARgByAGEAbgBjAGkAcwAgAFMALgAgAEQAdwBv AHIAYQBrABEARgByAGEAbgBjAGkAcwAgAFMALgAgAEQAdwBvAHIAYQBrAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD+/wAABAoCAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABAAAA 4IWf8vlPaBCrkQgAKyez2TAAAACgAQAAEgAAAAEAAACYAAAAAgAAAKAAAAADAAAAvAAAAAQA AADIAAAABQAAAOQAAAAGAAAA8AAAAAcAAAD8AAAACAAAAAwBAAAJAAAAKAEAABIAAAA0AQAA CgAAAFABAAALAAAAXAEAAAwAAABoAQAADQAAAHQBAAAOAAAAgAEAAA8AAACIAQAAEAAAAJAB AAATAAAAmAEAAAIAAADkBAAAHgAAABEAAABERVBMRVRFRCBVUkFOSVVNAABkAB4AAAABAAAA AEVQTB4AAAASAAAARnJhbmNpcyBTLiBEd29yYWsAZAAeAAAAAQAAAAByYW4eAAAAAQAAAABy YW4eAAAABwAAAE5vcm1hbAAgHgAAABIAAABGcmFuY2lzIFMuIER3b3JhawBkAB4AAAADAAAA MTgAbh4AAAATAAAATWljcm9zb2Z0IFdvcmQgOS4wAABAAAAAAPQzTj4AAABAAAAAAIQhOAlI wAFAAAAAABZ059FFwAFAAAAAAEBCQUW8wAEDAAAAAQAAAAMAAADDAgAAAwAAAMEPAAADAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA/v8AAAQKAgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAQAAAALVzdWcLhsQ k5cIACss+a4wAAAA+AAAAAwAAAABAAAAaAAAAA8AAABwAAAABQAAAHwAAAAGAAAAhAAAABEA AACMAAAAFwAAAJQAAAALAAAAnAAAABAAAACkAAAAEwAAAKwAAAAWAAAAtAAAAA0AAAC8AAAA DAAAANkAAAACAAAA5AQAAB4AAAABAAAAAABUAAMAAAAhAAAAAwAAAAgAAAADAAAAWBMAAAMA AACgCgkACwAAAAAAAAALAAAAAAAAAAsAAAAAAAAACwAAAAAAAAAeEAAAAQAAABEAAABERVBM RVRFRCBVUkFOSVVNAAwQAAACAAAAHgAAAAYAAABUaXRsZQADAAAAAQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAEAAAACAAAAAwAAAAQAAAAFAAAABgAAAAcAAAAIAAAACQAAAAoAAAALAAAA DAAAAA0AAAAOAAAADwAAABAAAAARAAAA/v///xMAAAAUAAAAFQAAABYAAAAXAAAAGAAAABkA AAAaAAAA/v///xwAAAAdAAAAHgAAAB8AAAAgAAAAIQAAACIAAAD+////JAAAACUAAAAmAAAA JwAAACgAAAApAAAAKgAAAP7////9////LQAAAP7////+/////v////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ////////////////////////////////////////////////UgBvAG8AdAAgAEUAbgB0AHIA eQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABYABQH///// /////wMAAAAGCQIAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA4PD2UEW8wAEvAAAAgAAAAAAA AAAxAFQAYQBiAGwAZQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADgACAP///////////////wAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAABIAAAAXEQAAAAAAAFcAbwByAGQARABvAGMAdQBtAGUAbgB0AAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAaAAIBBQAAAP//////////AAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACIiAAAAAAAABQBTAHUAbQBtAGEA cgB5AEkAbgBmAG8AcgBtAGEAdABpAG8AbgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACgA AgECAAAABAAAAP////8AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAbAAAA ABAAAAAAAAAFAEQAbwBjAHUAbQBlAG4AdABTAHUAbQBtAGEAcgB5AEkAbgBmAG8AcgBtAGEA dABpAG8AbgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAOAACAf///////////////wAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACMAAAAAEAAAAAAAAAEAQwBvAG0AcABPAGIAagAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAASAAIBAQAAAAYAAAD///// AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGoAAAAAAAAATwBiAGoA ZQBjAHQAUABvAG8AbAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAABYAAQD///////////////8AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAODw9lBFvMAB4PD2UEW8 wAEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAP///////////////wAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAEAAAD+//////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ////////AQD+/wMKAAD/////BgkCAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARhgAAABNaWNyb3NvZnQgV29yZCBE b2N1bWVudAAKAAAATVNXb3JkRG9jABAAAABXb3JkLkRvY3VtZW50LjgA9DmycQAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA= --------------ACEED510370948C584906E36-- - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Patricia Watson Subject: Re: (abolition-usa) DU Date: 26 Nov 2001 15:56:24 -0400 Thank you. Very intaeresting and lucid essay. I forwarded it to Alex King. peace, patricia watson - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "tom" Subject: Re: (abolition-usa) DU Date: 26 Nov 2001 22:31:03 +0100 You can also find a paper in the www.ialana.org/ webside - italian lawyers .... best regards Jo. Lau ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 8:56 PM > Thank you. Very intaeresting and lucid essay. I forwarded it to Alex King. > > peace, patricia watson > > > > > - > To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" > with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. > For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send > "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ASlater Subject: (abolition-usa) Fwd: NYTimes.com Article: For Radiation, How Much Is Too Much? Date: 27 Nov 2001 17:14:56 -0500 >Sender: articles-email@ms1.lga2.nytimes.com >Reply-To: csalvi@gracelinks.org >From: csalvi@gracelinks.org >To: aslater@gracelinks.org >Subject: NYTimes.com Article: For Radiation, How Much Is Too Much? >Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 14:37:48 -0500 (EST) >X-Loop-Detect: 1 > >This article from NYTimes.com >has been sent to you by csalvi@gracelinks.org. > > > >For Radiation, How Much Is Too Much? > >November 27, 2001 > >By GINA KOLATA > > > > >In their efforts to protect Americans from the hazards of >radiation, federal agencies have found themselves in a >quandary. People are constantly exposed to radiation from >natural sources - from cosmic rays, radon seeping out of >the earth and radioactive substances in soil, water, food >and even from potassium in the human body itself. > >Compared with this radiation, the amounts coming from human >efforts like nuclear plants are, relatively, minuscule. So, >the question is, How closely must this radiation be >regulated? > >Up to now, regulators have typically acted as if every bit >of excess exposure is potentially hazardous. But some >scientists question this assumption. > >The issue is becoming increasingly pressing as more than >100 nuclear power plants are being relicensed so they can >continue to operate. At the same time, the country faces a >growing predicament of what to do with nuclear waste from >power plants and weapons sites. > >"The issue rages because we are regulating doses that are >lower than the natural background of radiation," said Dr. >Arthur Upton. A radiation expert and former director of the >National Cancer Institute, Dr. Upton is a professor of >environmental and community medicine at the University of >Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey. > >In a report last year on radiation standards, the General >Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress, said: >"The standards administered by E.P.A. and N.R.C. to protect >the public from low-level radiation exposure do not have a >conclusive scientific basis, despite decades of research." > >The situation is further confused, experts say, because >regulatory standards are a hodgepodge. > >The Environmental Protection Agency advocates a standard >for all radiation exposure from a single source or site at >15 millirem a year, with no more than 4 coming from ground >water. A standard chest X-ray, in comparison, gives about >10 millirem to the chest, which is equivalent to 1 or 2 >millirem to the whole body. The Nuclear Regulatory >Commission sets its acceptable level of radiation exposure >from any one source at 25 millirem a year. In contrast, the >natural level of background radiation in the United States, >on average, is about 350 millirem a year, and in some areas >of the country it is many times higher than that. > >In New York, for example, people absorb about 100 millirem >of radiation each year from cosmic rays alone, said Dr. >John Boice Jr., a radiation expert, who is the scientific >director of the International Epidemiology Institute in >Rockville, Md. In Denver, exposure from cosmic rays >averages 200 millirem a year, he said, and natural >variation in radiation exposure is many times the amounts >of radiation that are being disputed by regulatory >agencies. > >"We eat, breathe and drink low levels of radiation," Dr. >Boice said. > >At the same time, said Dr. Fred Mettler, chairman of the >radiology department at the University of New Mexico >medical school, major medical sources of radiation, like >CAT scanners, have fallen outside the purview of any >regulatory agency. > >"A whole lot of places aren't regulated at all," Dr. >Mettler said. "It's a bit of a nightmare." > >"When you look at the exposure of the population from >radiation, about two-thirds is due to natural background >and about 15 percent is due to your friendly doctors and >chiropractors," Dr. Mettler said. "Everything else is, to >tell you the truth, very minimal. Less than a couple of >percent is from all the nuclear reactors and all the >research industry." > >But, asked Dr. John Evans, a risk analyst at the Harvard >School of Public Health, Why should the level of background >radiation matter to the question of how much additional >risk from human-generated sources is acceptable? "Why isn't >the more relevant question, How much of this risk can be >mitigated at what cost to you?" he asked. > >The quandary over how to set radiation levels does not >result from a lack of research or analysis, scientists say. > > >"Radiation's effects on people have been studied for over a >century," Dr. Mettler said. "There's a vast literature. >There are probably more studies on the harmful effects of >radiation than for any other toxic or noxious agents in the >environment." > >And as scientists studied radiation, committees to evaluate >the data proliferated. > >"We have national and international standing committees >that periodically review the world's literature on ionizing >radiation," said Dr. Boice, who is a member of many such >groups. "At the International Committee on Radiological >Protection, we just celebrated our 75th anniversary and we >meet two or three times a year." > >Then, he said, there is the United Nations Scientific >Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation. "That started >in 1955," Dr. Boice said. "We meet every year in Vienna and >we publish volumes." > >In the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency, >the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the National Council >on Radiation Protection and Measurements wrestle with the >radiation standards question, and the National Academy of >Sciences has been called upon periodically since the 1950's >to weigh in with its committee, called the Biological >Effects of Ionizing Radiation committee. The Department of >Energy and the National Institutes of Health conduct >extensive research. > >The science has grown rapidly. In 1980, Dr. Boice set up >the radiation epidemiology section at the National Cancer >Institute with just a handful of researchers. Now, he said, >while he moved on to form the International Epidemiology >Institute, which conducts research for industry and the >government, the cancer institute's radiation department is >no longer a section, it is a branch, and one of the largest >branches there, with hundreds of scientists. > >"A lot of people say, `Gee, we don't know a lot about the >risks of radiation,' " Dr. Boice said. "I say: `We know a >whole lot. We've studied populations all over the world >since the turn of the last century. We know what happens at >high doses. We know what happens at medical doses. And we >know that at low doses the risks are low. The controversy >is just how low are they. Are they really low or are they >really, really low?' " > >As with other toxic substances in the environment, the >stricter the standards, the more it costs to meet them. > >The G.A.O. report last year, which had the subtitle >"Scientific Basis Inconclusive, and E.P.A. and N.R.C. >Disagreement Continues," gave some examples of the costs of >complying with standards setting different levels of >radiation. The cost of cleaning soil around reactors and >nuclear weapons facilities could range from thousands of >dollars to more than $100 million, depending on whether the >standard was an exposure of 15 or 25 millirem a year, the >report said. > >The report said that for groundwater, the cost of going >from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's limits of 25 >millirem a year to the level that the Environmental >Protection Agency wants could be billions of dollars. > >Scientists usually rely on a mathematical model in >estimating radiation risk. The most widely used model is >known as the linear-nonthreshold dose-response model. It >assumes that there is no safe dose of radiation and that >the risk of getting cancer or genetic damage increases >along with radiation exposure. > >"For better or worse, that is our model," said Stephen >Page, the director of the environmental agency's office of >radiation and indoor air. And with that model, he said, >"the E.P.A. has tried to be as protective as possible." The >agency, he added, uses that model to make sure the risk >from radiation is within the allowable range from toxic >chemicals, 1 in 10,000 to 1 in a million chance of >developing cancer. > >Some say that the linear model is the best way to estimate >radiation risk, but others say that there is, in fact, a >threshold below which radiation poses no hazard to health. >And still others say that low doses of radiation are >actually beneficial. > >The linear hypothesis had its origin in 1927, when the >geneticist Dr. H. J. Muller published a paper on his work >eliciting gene mutations in fruit flies by bombarding them >with radiation from X-rays. In a paper published in the >journal Science, Dr. Muller showed that the number of >mutations in fruit flies was proportional to the dose of >X-rays that had struck the insects. > >"He said: `Aha! There's a linear relationship,' " said Dr. >Dade W. Moeller, a radiation expert and professor emeritus >at Harvard who runs a consulting company, Dade Moeller & >Associates in New Bern, N.C. Yet, Dr. Moeller points out, >those studies by Dr. Muller used very high doses of >radiation, and he elicited gene mutations, not cancer. But >the idea that radiation's effects were directly >proportional to its dose caught hold and soon was being >used to predict cancer cases. The difficulty was in >demonstrating it. > >The risks of getting cancer from exposure to radiation >increase with dose. But since a third of all people get >cancer anyway, at some time in their lives, the problem is >to find evidence that low doses of radiation cause cancers >that would not have otherwise occurred. Even for people >exposed to large radiation doses, like the 80,000 to 90,000 >survivors of the atomic bombs exploded over Hiroshima and >Nagasaki, it has been hard to find excess cancers. > >"They were exposed in 1945 and nearly half are still >alive," Dr. Moeller said. > >Dr. Mettler said the latest data show that 12,000 of these >atomic bomb survivors had died from cancer. He said the >number of excess cancers in the group is about 700. > >Those data, Dr. Mettler said, show that there is a small >risk of cancer with an exposure of tens of thousands of >millirem of radiation. > >"There's a group that says that if you can't see it, it >doesn't exist," Dr. Mettler said. "Then there's another >group that says, `That's nice, but it doesn't mean it >doesn't happen.' " > >Now, some scientists even say low radiation doses may be >beneficial. They theorize that these doses protect against >cancer by activating cells' natural defense mechanisms. As >evidence, they cite studies, like one in Canada of >tuberculosis patients who had multiple chest X-rays and one >of nuclear workers in the United States. The tuberculosis >patients, some analyses said, had fewer cases of breast >cancer than would be expected and the nuclear workers had a >lower mortality rate than would be expected. > >Dr. Boice said these studies were flawed by statistical >pitfalls, and when a committee of the National Council on >Radiation Protection and Measurement evaluated this and >other studies on beneficial effects, it was not convinced. >The group, headed by Dr. Upton of New Jersey, wrote that >the data "do not exclude" the hypothesis. But, it added, >"the prevailing evidence has generally been interpreted as >insufficient to support this view." > >In the meantime, the regulatory agencies are at a >stalemate, continuing to disagree on radiation standards. >And the committee reports and committee meetings on >radiation standards go on. > >A recent report, issued in June by the National Council on >Radiation Protection and Risks, is 287 pages long and >devoted entirely to evaluating the linear-nonthreshold >model. It explains that the council "has sought to leave no >significant aspect of the subject unaddressed." > >Its conclusion? > >For lack of a better model, it recommends >keeping the linear one. > >"There is not conclusive evidence on which to reject" the >model, the report says, adding that "it may never be >possible to prove or disprove the validity of the linear >nonthreshold assumption." > >http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/27/health/policy/27RADA.html?ex=1007889868& ei=1&en=283e5acd4b1e66fc > > > >HOW TO ADVERTISE >--------------------------------- >For information on advertising in e-mail newsletters >or other creative advertising opportunities with The >New York Times on the Web, please contact Alyson >Racer at alyson@nytimes.com or visit our online media >kit at http://www.nytimes.com/adinfo > >For general information about NYTimes.com, write to >help@nytimes.com. > >Copyright 2001 The New York Times Company > - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tim Bruening Subject: (abolition-usa) U.S. A Terrorist Nation? Date: 27 Nov 2001 20:32:55 -0800 Dear Abolition Caucus: Below is a draft of a letter to the editor about the U.S. being a terrorist nation. How can I improve it? On November 26, President Bush widened his definition of terrorism to include the development of weapons of mass destruction that will "terrorize nations", and demanded that Iraq allow UN weapons inspectors back in to look for nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons. For over 56 years, it's been America's policy to threaten to use nuclear weapons (and has not ruled them out in the current Afghanistan crisis), and still has thousands of nuclear missiles on hair-trigger alert. By Bush's definition, this makes us (and Russia, China, Britain, and France) a terrorist nation! To become a non terrorist nation, we should take our nuclear weapons off hair trigger alert, stop developing nuclear weapons, negotiate a treaty to abolish nuclear weapons, and allow international inspectors to inspect our nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons. Please contact President Bush (The White House, Washington, D.C., 20500; (202) 456-1111; president@whitehouse.gov), to urge him to take the above actions to end the nuclear terror. - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: carol wolman Subject: Re: (abolition-usa) U.S. A Terrorist Nation? Date: 27 Nov 2001 21:08:07 -0800 Dear Tim, It's an excellent letter. You might add that US citizens are just as much hostages of US nuclear weapons as everyone else on the planet, since we live in a balance of terror. I hate to be paranoid, but is it possible that the administration likes its population to be terrorized, to make us more docile? Peace, Carol Tim Bruening wrote: > Dear Abolition Caucus: > > Below is a draft of a letter to the editor about the U.S. being a > terrorist nation. How can I improve it? > > On November 26, President Bush widened his definition of terrorism to > include the development of weapons of mass destruction that will > "terrorize nations", and demanded that Iraq allow UN weapons inspectors > back in to look for nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons. For over > 56 years, it's been America's policy to threaten to use nuclear weapons > (and has not ruled them out in the current Afghanistan crisis), and > still has thousands of nuclear missiles on hair-trigger alert. By > Bush's definition, this makes us (and Russia, China, Britain, and > France) a terrorist nation! To become a non terrorist nation, we should > take our nuclear weapons off hair trigger alert, stop developing nuclear > weapons, negotiate a treaty to abolish nuclear weapons, and allow > international inspectors to inspect our nuclear, chemical, and > biological weapons. > > Please contact President Bush (The White House, Washington, D.C., 20500; > (202) 456-1111; president@whitehouse.gov), to urge him to take the above > actions to end the nuclear terror. > > - > To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" > with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. > For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send > "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Lisa Ledwidge / IEER Subject: (abolition-usa) IEER Releases Alternative to Bush Energy Plan Date: 28 Nov 2001 10:29:50 -0600 --=====================_5295538==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable For further information, contact: Arjun Makhijani: (301) 270-5500 Bob Schaeffer: (941) 395-6773 Mark Helm, Friends of the Earth, 202-783-7400, x 102 for use after 10:00am Wednesday, November 28, 2001 National Press Club News= =20 Conference PRESS RELEASE BUSH ENERGY PLAN WILL WORSEN U.S. OIL, NUCLEAR, ELECTRICITY VULNERABILITIES Comprehensive Alternative Calls for 100-MPG Cars by 2020; Nuclear Power Phase Out, Advanced Electricity Grid System; Report Concludes Administration Proposals for New Nuclear Reactors,=20 Plutonium Fuel Increase Risk Washington, D.C., November 28, 2001: The Bush Administration=92s energy= plan,=20 conceived before the September 11 terrorist attack, will aggravate U.S.=20 energy vulnerabilities, according to a new report released today by the=20 Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER).=20 Securing the Energy Future= =20 of the United States: Oil, Nuclear, and Electricity Vulnerabilities and a=20 post-September 11, 2001 Roadmap for Action, presents a comprehensive=20 alternative approach that its author says will accomplish the same economic= =20 goals, but with far fewer serious risks. =93It is stunning that the Bush administration did not review its energy= plan=20 in light of the gaping vulnerabilities revealed by the September 11=20 attacks,=94 said IEER President Dr. Arjun Makhijani and author of the= report.=20 =93If the United States sticks to the course the Bush plan endorses, oil=20 imports will double over the next forty years. That is an invitation to=20 major problems, given the tensions and instabilities in the Middle East.=94= =20 Based in Takoma Park, Maryland, IEER has published many studies on nuclear= =20 technologies and other energy issues. Securing the Energy Future of the United States sets forth vulnerability=20 criteria to evaluate energy proposals. Among the major risks it cites in=20 the Bush plan: =B7 sudden disruptions of world oil markets and U.S. imports, for=20 instance through terrorism or upheavals in the governments of major=20 petroleum exporting countries; =B7 attacks on nuclear reactors or spent fuel pools which could create= =20 economic, health and environmental damage on the scale of the Chernobyl=20 disaster; =B7 diversion of plutonium from commercial facilities; and =B7 damage to centralized electricity grids causing breakdowns in= power=20 distribution over wide regions The report specifically condemns a new nuclear plant design, called the=20 Pebble Bed Modular Reactor, which the Bush plan endorses. According to=20 IEER, this reactor is proposed to be built without the concrete =93secondary= =20 containment=94 that shields most current reactors from all but the most=20 massive attacks. While immune to melt-down accidents, the Pebble Bed=20 Modular reactor could still catch fire and spread radioactivity if it were= =20 attacked in a variety of ways. Also targeted for criticism is the administration=92s continued pursuit of= =20 the idea of using surplus military plutonium to generate electricity in=20 commercial reactors. =93The use of plutonium in reactors was already a bad= =20 idea before September 11,=94 said Dr. Makhijani. =93It is simply appalling= now.=20 The risks of transporting plutonium fuel and the consequences of an attack= =20 on reactors that use it are far too grave to tolerate.=94 =93One drunk with a rifle disabled the Trans Alaska Pipeline a few weeks=20 ago,=94 said Friends of the Earth President, Dr. Brent Blackwelder. =93It is= =20 high time that our leaders begin to aggressively explore energy sources=20 that are safe, resilient, and don't have a bull's-eye painted on them for=20 terrorists.=94 The alternative energy plan drafted by IEER calls for federal regulations=20 requiring new cars to achieve an average fuel efficiency of 100 miles per=20 gallon by the year 2020. =93In the 1950s, it used to said that =91What=92s= good=20 for General Motors is good for the country,=92=94 said Dr. Blackwelder,= =93It=92s=20 time to reverse that formula to read, =91What=92s good for the country ought= to=20 be good for GM.=92=94 The IEER report also calls for substituting vigorous procurement policies=20 in place of tax credits for renewable energy purchases. =93Tax breaks tend= =20 to keep the cost of technology high and retard progress,=94 said Dr.=20 Makhijani. =93Targeted purchases of energy efficient products and renewable= =20 energy over the next ten to twenty years can provide a strong stimulus to=20 private research and development, help create a manufacturing base, make=20 some cutting-edge technologies commercial, and rapidly reduce costs.=94 IEER= =20 recommends a $20 billion per year program, half spent on federal purchases= =20 of products such as fuel-efficient vehicles, fuel cells, and solar cells=20 and half awarded as grants to state and local government for similar=20 procurement programs. In addition to 100 mile per gallon cars by 2020, the IEER energy plan=20 contains the following principal features: =B7 A phase out of nuclear power by the year 2030 and storage of spent= =20 fuel packed in casks and surplus plutonium sealed in glass logs in=20 subsurface silos; =B7 A reduction of coal use by 55 percent by 2030 and by 90 percent by= =20 2040; =B7 Large-scale use of wind power fed into regional electricity grids; =B7 Creation of distributed grids in which highly efficient local= power=20 generation sources are combined with central station power plants; =B7 Widespread use of high efficiency space heating and cooling=20 technologies such as geothermal heat pumps in combination with local=20 generation; and =B7 Progressively more stringent carbon emissions standards for=20 electricity generation. =93IEER=92s plan is highly innovative in that it shows how we can achieve=20 security and environmental goals simultaneously,=94 said Dr. Blackwelder.=20 =93Friends of the Earth will do all we can to help change the country=92s=20 energy path to the direction of this seminal work.=94 -30- Copies of Securing the Energy Future of the United States are available on= =20 request and also online at http://www.ieer.org/reports/energy/bushtoc.html Author's statement also online:= http://www.ieer.org/reports/energy/busharj.html Lisa Ledwidge Outreach Coordinator and Editor, Science for Democratic Action Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER) http://www.ieer.org ieer@ieer.org --=====================_5295538==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable For further information, contact:=20
Arjun Makhijani: (301) 270-5500=20
Bob Schaeffer: (941) 395-6773=20
Mark Helm, Friends of the Earth, 202-783-7400, x 102
for use after 10:00am Wednesday, November 28, 2001 National Press Club News Conference

PRESS RELEASE

BUSH ENERGY PLAN WILL WORSEN U.S. OIL, NUCLEAR, ELECTRICITY VULNERABILITIES

Comprehensive Alternative Calls for 100-MPG Cars by 2020;
Nuclear Power Phase Out, Advanced Electricity Grid System;

Report Concludes Administration Proposals for New Nuclear Reactors, Plutonium Fuel Increase Risk

Washington, D.C., November 28, 2001: The Bush Administration=92s energy plan, conceived before the September 11 terrorist attack, will aggravate U.S. energy vulnerabilities, according to a new report released today by the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER). Securing the Energy Future of the United States: Oil, Nuclear, and Electricity Vulnerabilities and a post-September 11, 2001 Roadmap for Action, presents a comprehensive alternative approach that its author says will accomplish the same economic goals, but with far fewer serious risks.

=93It is stunning that the Bush administration did not review its energy plan in light of the gaping vulnerabilities revealed by the September 11 attacks,=94 said IEER President Dr. Arjun Makhijani and author of the report. =93If the United States sticks to the course the Bush plan endorses, oil imports will double over the next forty years. That is an invitation to major problems, given the tensions and instabilities in the Middle East.=94 Based in Takoma Park, Maryland, IEER has published many studies on nuclear technologies and other energy issues.

Securing the Energy Future of the United States sets forth vulnerability criteria to evaluate energy proposals. Among the major risks it cites in the Bush plan:

=B7       sudden disruptions of world oil markets and U.S. imports, for instance through terrorism or upheavals in the governments of major petroleum exporting countries;
=B7       attacks on nuclear reactors or spent fuel pools which could create economic, health and environmental damage on the scale of the Chernobyl disaster;
=B7       diversion of plutonium from commercial facilities; and
=B7       damage to centralized electricity grids causing breakdowns in power distribution over wide regions

The report specifically condemns a new nuclear plant design, called the Pebble Bed Modular Reactor, which the Bush plan endorses. According to IEER, this reactor is proposed to be built without the concrete =93secondary containment=94 that shields most current reactors from all but the most massive attacks. While immune to melt-down accidents, the Pebble Bed Modular reactor could still catch fire and spread radioactivity if it were attacked in a variety of ways.

Also targeted for criticism is the administration=92s continued pursuit of the idea of using surplus military plutonium to generate electricity in commercial reactors. =93The use of plutonium in reactors was already a bad idea before September 11,=94 said Dr. Makhijani. =93It is simply appalling now. The risks of transporting plutonium fuel and the consequences of an attack on reactors that use it are far too grave to tolerate.=94

=93One drunk with a rifle disabled the Trans Alaska Pipeline a few weeks ago,=94 said Friends of the Earth President, Dr. Brent Blackwelder. =93It is high time that our leaders begin to aggressively explore energy sources that are safe, resilient, and don't have a bull's-eye painted on them for terrorists.=94

The alternative energy plan drafted by IEER calls for federal regulations requiring new cars to achieve an average fuel efficiency of 100 miles per gallon by the year 2020. =93In the 1950s, it used to said that =91What=92s g= ood for General Motors is good for the country,=92=94 said Dr. Blackwelder, =93I= t=92s time to reverse that formula to read, =91What=92s good for the country ought to be good for GM.=92=94

The IEER report also calls for substituting vigorous procurement policies in place of tax credits for renewable energy purchases.  =93Tax breaks tend to keep the cost of technology high and retard progress,=94 said Dr. Makhijani. =93Targeted purchases of energy efficient products and renewable energy over the next ten to twenty years can provide a strong stimulus to private research and development, help create a manufacturing base, make some cutting-edge technologies commercial, and rapidly reduce costs.=94 IEER recommends a $20 billion per year program, half spent on federal purchases of products such as fuel-efficient vehicles, fuel cells, and solar cells and half awarded as grants to state and local government for similar procurement programs.

In addition to 100 mile per gallon cars by 2020, the IEER energy plan contains the following principal features:

=B7       A phase out of nuclear power by the year 2030 and storage of spent fuel packed in casks and surplus plutonium sealed in glass logs in subsurface silos;
=B7       A reduction of coal use by 55 percent by 2030 and by 90 percent by 2040;
=B7       Large-scale use of wind power fed into regional electricity grids;
=B7       Creation of distributed grids in which highly efficient local power generation sources are combined with central station power plants;
=B7       Widespread use of high efficiency space heating and cooling technologies such as geothermal heat pumps in combination with local generation; and
=B7       Progressively more stringent carbon emissions standards for electricity generation.

=93IEER=92s plan is highly innovative in that it shows how we can achieve security and environmental goals simultaneously,=94 said Dr. Blackwelder. =93Friends of the Earth will do all we can to help change the country=92s energy path to the direction of this seminal work.=94

-30-

Copies of Securing the Energy Future of the United States are available on request
and also online at http://www.ieer.org/reports/energy/bushtoc.html

Author's statement also online: http://www.ieer.org/reports/energy/busharj.html

Lisa Ledwidge
Outreach Coordinator and Editor, Science for Democratic Action
Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER)
http://www.ieer.org
ieer@ieer.org --=====================_5295538==_.ALT-- - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ASlater Subject: (abolition-usa) Fwd: Date: 28 Nov 2001 15:46:06 -0500 > > X-Authentication-Warning: drizzle.com: majordom set sender to > owner-bananas@drizzle.com using -f=20 > Reply-To:=20 > From: "Tom Carpenter"=20 > To: "ANA List"=20 > Subject: =3D?us-ascii?Q?WHISTLEBLOWERS_PROPOSE_=3D2210_COMMANDMENTS=3D22.h= tm?=3D=20 > Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 10:52:23 -0800=20 > Organization: Government Accountability Project=20 > X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627=20 > Importance: Normal=20 > Sender: owner-bananas@drizzle.com=20 > X-Loop-Detect: 1=20 > > =20 > =20 > > ---------- > =20 > > PRESS RELEASE > > =20 > > FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE > > November 28, > 2001 = =20 > =20 > > CONTACT: GAP > > WASHINGTON, D.C. OFFICE > > (202) 408-0034=20 > > TOM DEVINE (ext. 124) > > MARTIN EDWIN ANDERSEN (ext. 143) > > GAP SEATTLE OFFICE > > TOM CARPENTER > > (206) 292-2890 > > or POGO > > DANIELLE BRIAN > > (202) 347-1122 > > = =20 > =20 > > WHISTLEBLOWERS PROPOSE 10 COMMANDMENTS=20 > > FOR REDUCING VULNERABILITIES OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS > > AND WEAPONS FACILITIES TO TERRORIST ATTACK > > A group of nuclear energy and weapons whistleblowers with extensive > experience in safety and security issues, including the reduction of plant > vulnerabilities to terrorist attack, have proposed 10 commandments for > closing the window on the continued safety hazards at nuclear facilities, two > good government groups announced today. > > The Government Accountability Project (GAP) and the Project on Government > Oversight (POGO) have just released a white paper, 10 Ways to Reduce > Vulnerabilities of Nuclear Power Plants and Weapons Facilities to= Terrorist > Attack. Ten whistleblowers representing several atomic power stations, > research centers and weapons facilities signed the document, which makes > concrete suggestions to defend American nuclear safety and security in the > aftermath of the September 11 terrorist attacks.=20 > > After September 11th, it is vital that the myriad of vulnerabilities that had > been openly discussed before the terrorist incidents, be addressed now, > before those mistakes become tragedies, said Tom Carpenter, GAP s director of > nuclear programs. "The suggestions offered by accredited nuclear safety > whistleblowers, all of whom have had their warnings vindicated in one way= or > another in the past, should provide federal policymakers with a framework for > addressing these critical issues." > > The white paper's suggestions range from making security budgets line= items > in departmental and agency budgets, therefore elevating their status to a > priority, to suggestions about how to safely store weapons-grade fissile > materials, to protecting whistleblowers from reprisal by bureaucratic > managers bent on covering up management mistakes and abuses. > > "When he took office, Director of Homeland Security Tom Ridge promised= that > those who raise potential security problems or questions would be treated > with respect. By focusing attention to the kind of issues whistleblowers > often uncover, these can and should be addressed in a forthright manner," > said POGO Director Danielle Brian. "Unfortunately, reprisal against= nuclear > safety whistleblowers is a time-honored practice at the Department of= Energy > (DOE), the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and other critical government > agencies. > > "It is time that Ridge's principles be put into practice, and we believe that > the '10 Commandments' provides the guideposts for how to do so." > > Among the other proposals included in the white paper were: > > =B7 Security at DOE nuclear sites should be carried out by trained= law > enforcement personnel > > =B7 Obsolete nuclear plants should be closed, and that bureaucratic > "self-policing" should be abolished; > > =B7 Government contractors who do not protect their whistleblowers should > be debarred from further government service > > =B7 The practice of indemnifying contractors for legal fees that= result > from their retaliation against national security whistleblowers should= end. > > "These reforms rely on strengthening freedom of speech instead of secrecy. > The whole context for these '10 Commandments' is the need to revive the > 'right to warn' within the federal bureaucracy," noted Tom Devine, GAP= legal > director. "For too long, the bureaucracy's response to whistleblowers has > been to 'kill the messenger" bearing bad news about vulnerabilities to > terrorist attack, as well as other waste, fraud and abuse of power issues. > > "Unfortunately, much of what needs to be reformed has been known for a= long > time, yet very little has been done. Americans deserve not only the > appearance of security, but the reality as well." > > --30-- > >= ___________________________________________________________________________= _ > > Government Accountability Project > > 1612 K Street, NW =B7 Suite 400 > > Washington, DC 20006 > > 10 Ways to Reduce Vulnerabilities of > Nuclear Power Plants and Weapons Facilities > to Terrorist Attack > > > > 1. Security budgets should be a line item in departmental and agency budgets, > where they can be fully debated by Congress (behind closed doors, if > necessary) and analyzed as part of a comprehensive strategy against= terror, > thereby elevating the issue to a priority status. > > 2. The Department of Energy should put an end to the practice of indemnifying > the vast numbers of government contractors for cost overruns associated= with > doing business, as well as whose that indemnify contractors for legal fees > incurred as a result of their retaliation against national security > whistleblowers. > > > 3. Whistleblowers at these facilities should be granted a full range of legal > protections so that they are not harassed, transferred or dismissed from > their posts for "committing the truth" by pointing out security failures that > bureaucratic managers either ignore or try to sweep under the rug.=20 > Recommendations concerning whistleblowers include: > > a) Managers need to be prevented from stripping national security > whistleblowers of their security clearance, which automatically makes them > dysfunctional in the workplace and denies fundamental constitutional rights.=20 > > > b) Whistleblowers should be fully involved in the investigation of their > complaints, together with others that identify security problems,= including > identifying and helping to craft solutions to security breaches and > violations. > > c) Existing federal anti-gag statutes should be made permanent and go= beyond > being a symbolic right to one that offers whistleblowers a general right= not > to be forced to seek advanced permission (prior restraint) for sounding= the > alarm about national security threats. > > d) Adequate safety and security requires trustworthy ethical, > competent and accountable professionals working in a safety and security > conscious work environment. Employers of safety and security= professionals > should work with appropriate professional bodies in upholding and= protecting > the codes of ethics of the safety and security professions and in creating > safety and security conscious work environments.=20 > > > 4. Security at Department of Energy nuclear sites should be carried out by > federal workers, preferably appropriately trained law enforcement personnel.=20 > (Use of the military was discontinued in the 1960s.) Part-time security > personnel positions should be abolished, where possible, increasing the staff > of full-time personnel accordingly. By doing so, DOE would eliminate the > practice of placing managers on security detail, thereby relegating= security > to a lower priority and ensuring that the same bureaucracy will= essentially > police itself. Greater attention should be paid to increasing the size of > the DOE's protective force and improving weaponry, tactics and command, > control and communication to defend against both theft and radiological > sabotage. > > 5. The Base Realignment and Closure Commission should be empowered to= close > obsolete Department of Energy plants, many of which were established half= a > century ago, in order to reduce government costs and eliminate potential > targets of terrorist attack. Particular attention should be paid to > consolidating nuclear materials at more easily protected sites, which= would > both save money and reduce the risk to the public posed by the present > dispersion of these materials around the country. > > 6. General oversight of security issues concerning nuclear power plants= and > weapons facilities should be independent, not part of the Department of > Energy's responsibilities, in order to ensure greater attention to= possible > security deficits and their timely remediation. The Nuclear Regulatory > Commission should be granted greater authority and a larger role in= nuclear > power plant security. > > 7. Independent oversight mechanisms should also be empowered to protect > national security whistleblowers from reprisal by an agency (DOE) with a > history of "killing the messenger" who warns of possible vulnerabilities. > Currently, the Department of Energy's whistleblower protection offices= are, > in fact, Trojan Horses that end up punishing rather than rewarding truth > tellers. > > 8. Plans to abolish the Department of Energy's Office of Environmental Safety > and Health should be shelved, and its mission expanded to provide greater > protection from terrorist threats. > > 9. All government contractors must have an adequate program to protect > whistleblowers and deal effectively with their concerns or they should be > debarred from further government service. > > 10. Storage of special nuclear materials should be stabilized to= avoid > criticality. > > __________________________________________________________ > > > > Whistleblowers Who Endorse the > > > > > 10 Commandments Of Nuclear=20 > > > > > Power Plant and Weapons Facility Safety > > > > > Mark A. Graf > > Alarm Station Supervisor > > Rocky Flats (Colo.) Environmental Technology Site > > Jeff Peters > > Director, Protective Force Operations > > Rocky Flats (Colo.) Environmental Technology Site > > Ronald Timm > > President, RETA Security > > (Senior Security Analyst for Department of Energy) > > > > Charles Quinones, President > > > > > Security Police Officers Association > > > > > Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory > > > > > > Mathew J. Zipoli, Vice President > > > > > Security Police Officers Association > > > > Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory > > Mark Danielson > > Security Police Officer > > Special Response Team Member > > Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory > > Marshall S. Cole, Jr. > > Security Police Officer > > Special Response Team Member > > Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory > > Scot A. Walker > > Special Response Team Member > > Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory > > David Weiner > > Special Response Team Member > > Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory > > Joseph Carson, P.E. > > National Society of Professional Engineers > > > Oak Ridge (Tenn.) National Laboratory > > > > > > - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Pamela Meidell Subject: (abolition-usa) Abolition 2000 Report Card on Website! Date: 28 Nov 2001 13:12:59 -0800 Dear Abolition Friends, Feed the Wolf: A Rough Guide to Global Security, the 2001 edition of the Abolition 2000 Report Card is now up on the Abolition 2000 website: Just scroll down to the new features section and you will find it on the left hand side of the page. It is in pdf format this year. Anyone who would like a plain text version, please email me and I will be happy to send it to you. (I tried four time to send both versions to this list, but failed. Please let me know if you have any trouble finding it.) Thanks! And hope you find it useful. We would be happy for any feedback. In peace, Pamela Meidell and Janet Bloomfield The Atomic Mirror Pamela Meidell Director The Atomic Mirror "Reflecting and Transforming our Nuclear World through the Arts" P.O. Box 220 Port Hueneme, CA 93044 tel: 805 985 5073 fax: 805 985 7563 email: pamela@atomicmirror.org "Unless we insist that politics is imagination and mind, we will learn that imagination and mind are politics, and of a kind we will not like." Lionel Trilling - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ASlater Subject: (abolition-usa) Re: [globenet] Sorry computer glitch;See this version to view Date: 28 Nov 2001 16:46:54 -0500 Are we getting our Congressmememembers to sign on as co-sponsors? Call your member of Congress at 202-224-3121. Can we get a Senator to introduce a companion bill? =20 At 01:25 PM 11/28/2001 -0800, Carol Rosin wrote: >KUCINICH SPACE-BASED WEAPONS BAN BILL ENDORSERS >Updated 11-28-01 > >(HR 2977), the Space Preservation Act of 2001 (Congressman Dennis >Kucinich) >"To preserve the cooperative, peaceful uses of space for the benefit of all >humankind by permanently prohibiting the basing of weapons in space by the >United States, and to require the President to take action to adopt and >implement a world treaty banning space-based weapons." > > *To add your organization to this list of endorsers please send an= e-mail >to globalnet@mindspring.com. Endorsement indicates a commitment to promote >the space-based weapons ban effort in your community. Official launch of >the campaign begins in January. http://www.space4peace.org. > *To view H.R. 2977 and the World Treaty Banning Space-based Weapons, and >to FAX your congressional representatives and world leaders, go to >http://www.peaceinspace.com. > > > =B7 Action for Nuclear Disarmament (Cape Cod, MA) > > =B7 Action NOW! > > =B7 American Friends Service Committee Colorado > > =B7 American Friends Service Committee Western Massachusetts > > =B7 Anarchist Action of Rochester (NY) > > =B7 Antiwar.com > > =B7 AquaCoalition.org > > =B7 Association of World Citizens (San Francisco, CA) > > =B7 Australian Peace Committee (Adelaide, South Australia) > > =B7 Australian Peace Committee (Queensland) > > =B7 Baltimore Emergency Response Network (MD) > > =B7 Baltimore Hiroshima-Nagasaki Commemoration Committee (MD) > > =B7 Campaign for the Accountability of American Bases (United Kingdom) > > =B7 Cape Cod Fellowship of Reconciliation (MA) > > =B7 Central Coast Peace & Environmental Council (San Luis Obispo, CA) > > =B7 Central Committee for Conscientious Objectors > > =B7 Centre de Resources Dur La Non-Violence (Montreal, Canada) > > =B7 Checkmate - Winning Strategies for Environmental Justice (Vermont) > > =B7 Citizen Soldier (New York, N.Y.) > > =B7 Citizens Energy Council (Hewitt, N.J.) > > =B7 Citizens for Peace in Space (Colorado Springs, CO) > > =B7 City of New Haven Peace Commission (CT) > > =B7 Cleveland Peace Action (Ohio) > > =B7 Clinton County Peace Education Group (OH) > > =B7 Coalition for Nuclear Disarmament and Peace (India) > > =B7 Colorado Coalition for the Prevention of Nuclear War > > =B7 Delray Citizens for Social Responsibility (FL) > > =B7 Don Quixote Society > > =B7 Don't Waste Connecticut > > =B7 Don't Waste Oregon (Portland) > > =B7 Every Church a Peace Church (ECAPC) (Duluth, MN) > > =B7 Fellowship of Reconciliation (Louisville, KY) > > =B7 Fellowship of Reconciliation (Nyack, N.Y.) > > =B7 Fellowship of Reconciliation (Seattle, WA) > > =B7 Florida Coalition for Peace & Justice > > =B7 Flyby News > > =B7 Food Not Bombs (Atlanta, GA) > > =B7 For Mother Earth (Bucharest, Romania) > > =B7 Genesee Valley Citizens for Peace (New York) > > =B7 Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space > > =B7 Global Response (Boulder, CO) > > =B7 GRACE Public Fund (New York, N.Y.) > > =B7 Grandmothers for Peace (San Luis Obispo, CA) > > =B7 Grandmothers for Peace (Superior, WI) > > =B7 Grandmothers for Peace International > > =B7 Great Neck SANE/Peace Action (N.Y.) > > =B7 Greater New Haven Peace Council (CT) > > =B7 Green Earth Organization (Ghana) > > =B7 Green Justice Association (Bulgaria) > > =B7 Green Party of Connecticut > > =B7 Green Party of Skagit County (WA) > > =B7 Greens of Volusia County (FL) > > =B7 Greenville Peace Committee (North Carolina) > > =B7 Groove Embassy Records > > =B7 Ground Zero Center for Nonviolent Action (Poulsbo, WA) > > =B7 Hanford Watch (Portland, OR) > > =B7 Headingly CND (England) > > =B7 Home for Peace & Justice (Saginaw, MI) > > =B7 Indian Institute for Peace, Disarmament, & Environmental= Protection >(Nagpur, India) > > =B7 Indianapolis Peace & Justice Center (IN) > > =B7 Institute for Cooperation in Space (Ventura, CA) > > =B7 Interfaith Stewards of Creation (Gallup, NM) > > =B7 International Institute of Concern for Public Health (Canada) > > =B7 International Society for Ecology & Culture > > =B7 Jonah House (Baltimore, MD) > > =B7 Journey for Justice > > =B7 Just Peace Committee of Peace Church (UCC) (Duluth, MN) > > =B7 Kalamazoo Area Coalition for Peace & Justice (MI) > > =B7 Kirkstall CND (England) > > =B7 Kodiak Rocket Launch Information Group (Kodiak, AK) > > =B7 Kurtz Institute of Peacemaking > > =B7 Larry Bogart Memorial Library (Hewitt, N.J.) > > =B7 Livermore Conversion Project (Oakland, CA) > > =B7 Long Island Coalition for Peaceful Alternatives (N.Y.) > > =B7 Los Alamos Study Group (New Mexico) > > =B7 Making the Walls Transparent > > =B7 Maryknoll Office of Global Concerns > > =B7 McKinley County Green Party (Gallup, NM) > > =B7 Midwest Coalition for Responsible Investment (St Louis, MO) > > =B7 Military Toxics Project > > =B7 Mojave Greens (CA) > > =B7 Moms for Justice (Philadelphia, PA) > > =B7 Nevada Desert Experience > > =B7 New Zealand Nuclear-Free Peacemaking Association > > =B7 No Nukes North (Fairbanks, Alaska) > > =B7 North American Water Office (Lake Elmo, MN) > > =B7 North Dakota Peace Coalition > > =B7 Northwest Disarmament Coalition (Seattle, WA) > > =B7 Nuclear Age Peace Foundation (Santa Barbara, CA) > > =B7 Nuclear Watch of New Mexico > > =B7 Oak Ridge Environmental Peace Alliance (TN) > > =B7 Office of Justice, Peace & Integrity of Creation (Mankato Province >School Sisters of Notre Dame) > > =B7 Office of Justice-Peace-Integrity of Creation (Catholic Diocese of >Knoxville, TN) > > =B7 OMNI Center for Peace, Justice & Ecology (Fayetteville, AR) > > =B7 Oregon Conservancy Foundation > > =B7 Oxford Citizens for Peace & Justice (Oxford, OH) > > =B7 Pacific Green Party (Oregon State University) > > =B7 Paralyzed Veterans of America > > =B7 Pax Christi (St. Louis University) > > =B7 Peace & Justice Task Force, Rocky Mountain Conference, United= Church >of Christ > > =B7 Peace & Social Justice Center of South Central Kansas (Wichita) > > =B7 Peace Action (San Mateo, CA) > > =B7 Peace Action Maine > > =B7 Peace Action New Mexico > > =B7 Peace Action Wisconsin > > =B7 Peace Farm (Panhandle, TX) > > =B7 Peace Foundation Aotearoa/New Zealand > > =B7 Peninsula Peace & Justice Center (Palo Alto, CA) > > =B7 Portland Greens (OR) > > =B7 Portsmouth/Piketon Residents for Environmental Safety & Security= (OH) > > > =B7 Prairie Island Coalition (Minneapolis, MN) > > =B7 Progressive Secretary > > =B7 Promoting Enduring Peace (Woodmont, CT) > > =B7 Proposition One Committee (Washington DC) > > =B7 Reality News Network (West Palm Beach, FL) > > =B7 Rocky Mountain Peace & Justice Center (Boulder, CO) > > =B7 Sacred Earth & Space Plowshares > > =B7 San Francisco Bay Area Progressive Challenge (CA) > > =B7 Scientists for Indigenous People > > =B7 Sisters of Loretto Disarmament/Economic Conversion Committee > > =B7 Sisters of St. Joseph of Carondelet (St. Louis Province) > > =B7 South Dakota Peace and Justice Center > > =B7 SS. Francis & Therese Catholic Worker (Worcester, MA) > > =B7 St. Louis Economic Conversion Project (MO) > > =B7 Students Taking Action for a New Democracy (University of Akron= (OH) > > =B7 Swedish Peace Committee > > =B7 The Peace Center (Longhorne, PA) > > =B7 The Who's Counting Project (CA) > > =B7 Theosophical Order of Service Peace Department (Tucson, AZ) > > =B7 Third Millennium Foundation (Auburn, WA) > > =B7 Tri-Valley CAREs (Livermore, CA) > > =B7 20/20 Vision of Washington State > > =B7 U.S. Peace Council > > =B7 Unitarian Society Social Responsibility Committee (Hartford, CT) > > =B7 Veterans for Peace (Gainesville, FL) > > =B7 Veterans for Peace, Inc. > > =B7 WAND of Northern Indiana > > =B7 West Midlands Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (Birmingham, U.K.) > > =B7 Wide World Peace Puppetry (Albuquerque, NM) > > =B7 Women for Peace (Berkeley, CA) > > =B7 World Peace Now (Tampa, FL) > > =B7 Yorkshire CND (England) > >** List in formation (11-28-01) by Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear >Power in Space, PO Box 90083, Gainesville, FL. 32607, (352) 337-9274, >http://www.space4peace.org. >**Email to sign-on at globalnet@mindspring.com. >**View H.R. 2977 and World Treaty Banning Space-based Weapons, and FAX your >Congress representatives and world leaders at: www.peaceinspace.com, >Institute for Cooperation in Space, PO Box 25040, Ventura, CA. 93001, >805-641-1999. > > > > > > >------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> >Universal Inkjet Refill Kit $29.95 >Refill any ink cartridge for less! >Includes black and color ink. >http://us.click.yahoo.com/4bQK.B/MkNDAA/ySSFAA/nJ9qlB/TM >---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> > >To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: >globenet-unsubscribe@egroups.com > >=20 > >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/= =20 > =20 - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ASlater Subject: (abolition-usa) Action Alert-Star Wars Date: 28 Nov 2001 16:48:34 -0500 Hi Friends, Are we getting our Congressmememembers to sign on as co-sponsors? Call your member of Congress at 202-224-3121. Can we get a Senator to introduce a companion bill? Alice Slater At 01:25 PM 11/28/2001 -0800, Carol Rosin wrote: >KUCINICH SPACE-BASED WEAPONS BAN BILL ENDORSERS >Updated 11-28-01 > >(HR 2977), the Space Preservation Act of 2001 (Congressman Dennis >Kucinich) >"To preserve the cooperative, peaceful uses of space for the benefit of all >humankind by permanently prohibiting the basing of weapons in space by the >United States, and to require the President to take action to adopt and >implement a world treaty banning space-based weapons." > > *To add your organization to this list of endorsers please send an= e-mail >to globalnet@mindspring.com. Endorsement indicates a commitment to promote >the space-based weapons ban effort in your community. Official launch of >the campaign begins in January. http://www.space4peace.org. > *To view H.R. 2977 and the World Treaty Banning Space-based Weapons, and >to FAX your congressional representatives and world leaders, go to >http://www.peaceinspace.com. > > > =B7 Action for Nuclear Disarmament (Cape Cod, MA) > > =B7 Action NOW! > > =B7 American Friends Service Committee Colorado > > =B7 American Friends Service Committee Western Massachusetts > > =B7 Anarchist Action of Rochester (NY) > > =B7 Antiwar.com > > =B7 AquaCoalition.org > > =B7 Association of World Citizens (San Francisco, CA) > > =B7 Australian Peace Committee (Adelaide, South Australia) > > =B7 Australian Peace Committee (Queensland) > > =B7 Baltimore Emergency Response Network (MD) > > =B7 Baltimore Hiroshima-Nagasaki Commemoration Committee (MD) > > =B7 Campaign for the Accountability of American Bases (United Kingdom) > > =B7 Cape Cod Fellowship of Reconciliation (MA) > > =B7 Central Coast Peace & Environmental Council (San Luis Obispo, CA) > > =B7 Central Committee for Conscientious Objectors > > =B7 Centre de Resources Dur La Non-Violence (Montreal, Canada) > > =B7 Checkmate - Winning Strategies for Environmental Justice (Vermont) > > =B7 Citizen Soldier (New York, N.Y.) > > =B7 Citizens Energy Council (Hewitt, N.J.) > > =B7 Citizens for Peace in Space (Colorado Springs, CO) > > =B7 City of New Haven Peace Commission (CT) > > =B7 Cleveland Peace Action (Ohio) > > =B7 Clinton County Peace Education Group (OH) > > =B7 Coalition for Nuclear Disarmament and Peace (India) > > =B7 Colorado Coalition for the Prevention of Nuclear War > > =B7 Delray Citizens for Social Responsibility (FL) > > =B7 Don Quixote Society > > =B7 Don't Waste Connecticut > > =B7 Don't Waste Oregon (Portland) > > =B7 Every Church a Peace Church (ECAPC) (Duluth, MN) > > =B7 Fellowship of Reconciliation (Louisville, KY) > > =B7 Fellowship of Reconciliation (Nyack, N.Y.) > > =B7 Fellowship of Reconciliation (Seattle, WA) > > =B7 Florida Coalition for Peace & Justice > > =B7 Flyby News > > =B7 Food Not Bombs (Atlanta, GA) > > =B7 For Mother Earth (Bucharest, Romania) > > =B7 Genesee Valley Citizens for Peace (New York) > > =B7 Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space > > =B7 Global Response (Boulder, CO) > > =B7 GRACE Public Fund (New York, N.Y.) > > =B7 Grandmothers for Peace (San Luis Obispo, CA) > > =B7 Grandmothers for Peace (Superior, WI) > > =B7 Grandmothers for Peace International > > =B7 Great Neck SANE/Peace Action (N.Y.) > > =B7 Greater New Haven Peace Council (CT) > > =B7 Green Earth Organization (Ghana) > > =B7 Green Justice Association (Bulgaria) > > =B7 Green Party of Connecticut > > =B7 Green Party of Skagit County (WA) > > =B7 Greens of Volusia County (FL) > > =B7 Greenville Peace Committee (North Carolina) > > =B7 Groove Embassy Records > > =B7 Ground Zero Center for Nonviolent Action (Poulsbo, WA) > > =B7 Hanford Watch (Portland, OR) > > =B7 Headingly CND (England) > > =B7 Home for Peace & Justice (Saginaw, MI) > > =B7 Indian Institute for Peace, Disarmament, & Environmental= Protection >(Nagpur, India) > > =B7 Indianapolis Peace & Justice Center (IN) > > =B7 Institute for Cooperation in Space (Ventura, CA) > > =B7 Interfaith Stewards of Creation (Gallup, NM) > > =B7 International Institute of Concern for Public Health (Canada) > > =B7 International Society for Ecology & Culture > > =B7 Jonah House (Baltimore, MD) > > =B7 Journey for Justice > > =B7 Just Peace Committee of Peace Church (UCC) (Duluth, MN) > > =B7 Kalamazoo Area Coalition for Peace & Justice (MI) > > =B7 Kirkstall CND (England) > > =B7 Kodiak Rocket Launch Information Group (Kodiak, AK) > > =B7 Kurtz Institute of Peacemaking > > =B7 Larry Bogart Memorial Library (Hewitt, N.J.) > > =B7 Livermore Conversion Project (Oakland, CA) > > =B7 Long Island Coalition for Peaceful Alternatives (N.Y.) > > =B7 Los Alamos Study Group (New Mexico) > > =B7 Making the Walls Transparent > > =B7 Maryknoll Office of Global Concerns > > =B7 McKinley County Green Party (Gallup, NM) > > =B7 Midwest Coalition for Responsible Investment (St Louis, MO) > > =B7 Military Toxics Project > > =B7 Mojave Greens (CA) > > =B7 Moms for Justice (Philadelphia, PA) > > =B7 Nevada Desert Experience > > =B7 New Zealand Nuclear-Free Peacemaking Association > > =B7 No Nukes North (Fairbanks, Alaska) > > =B7 North American Water Office (Lake Elmo, MN) > > =B7 North Dakota Peace Coalition > > =B7 Northwest Disarmament Coalition (Seattle, WA) > > =B7 Nuclear Age Peace Foundation (Santa Barbara, CA) > > =B7 Nuclear Watch of New Mexico > > =B7 Oak Ridge Environmental Peace Alliance (TN) > > =B7 Office of Justice, Peace & Integrity of Creation (Mankato Province >School Sisters of Notre Dame) > > =B7 Office of Justice-Peace-Integrity of Creation (Catholic Diocese of >Knoxville, TN) > > =B7 OMNI Center for Peace, Justice & Ecology (Fayetteville, AR) > > =B7 Oregon Conservancy Foundation > > =B7 Oxford Citizens for Peace & Justice (Oxford, OH) > > =B7 Pacific Green Party (Oregon State University) > > =B7 Paralyzed Veterans of America > > =B7 Pax Christi (St. Louis University) > > =B7 Peace & Justice Task Force, Rocky Mountain Conference, United= Church >of Christ > > =B7 Peace & Social Justice Center of South Central Kansas (Wichita) > > =B7 Peace Action (San Mateo, CA) > > =B7 Peace Action Maine > > =B7 Peace Action New Mexico > > =B7 Peace Action Wisconsin > > =B7 Peace Farm (Panhandle, TX) > > =B7 Peace Foundation Aotearoa/New Zealand > > =B7 Peninsula Peace & Justice Center (Palo Alto, CA) > > =B7 Portland Greens (OR) > > =B7 Portsmouth/Piketon Residents for Environmental Safety & Security= (OH) > > > =B7 Prairie Island Coalition (Minneapolis, MN) > > =B7 Progressive Secretary > > =B7 Promoting Enduring Peace (Woodmont, CT) > > =B7 Proposition One Committee (Washington DC) > > =B7 Reality News Network (West Palm Beach, FL) > > =B7 Rocky Mountain Peace & Justice Center (Boulder, CO) > > =B7 Sacred Earth & Space Plowshares > > =B7 San Francisco Bay Area Progressive Challenge (CA) > > =B7 Scientists for Indigenous People > > =B7 Sisters of Loretto Disarmament/Economic Conversion Committee > > =B7 Sisters of St. Joseph of Carondelet (St. Louis Province) > > =B7 South Dakota Peace and Justice Center > > =B7 SS. Francis & Therese Catholic Worker (Worcester, MA) > > =B7 St. Louis Economic Conversion Project (MO) > > =B7 Students Taking Action for a New Democracy (University of Akron= (OH) > > =B7 Swedish Peace Committee > > =B7 The Peace Center (Longhorne, PA) > > =B7 The Who's Counting Project (CA) > > =B7 Theosophical Order of Service Peace Department (Tucson, AZ) > > =B7 Third Millennium Foundation (Auburn, WA) > > =B7 Tri-Valley CAREs (Livermore, CA) > > =B7 20/20 Vision of Washington State > > =B7 U.S. Peace Council > > =B7 Unitarian Society Social Responsibility Committee (Hartford, CT) > > =B7 Veterans for Peace (Gainesville, FL) > > =B7 Veterans for Peace, Inc. > > =B7 WAND of Northern Indiana > > =B7 West Midlands Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (Birmingham, U.K.) > > =B7 Wide World Peace Puppetry (Albuquerque, NM) > > =B7 Women for Peace (Berkeley, CA) > > =B7 World Peace Now (Tampa, FL) > > =B7 Yorkshire CND (England) > >** List in formation (11-28-01) by Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear >Power in Space, PO Box 90083, Gainesville, FL. 32607, (352) 337-9274, >http://www.space4peace.org. >**Email to sign-on at globalnet@mindspring.com. >**View H.R. 2977 and World Treaty Banning Space-based Weapons, and FAX your >Congress representatives and world leaders at: www.peaceinspace.com, >Institute for Cooperation in Space, PO Box 25040, Ventura, CA. 93001, >805-641-1999. > >=20 - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Sally Light Subject: (abolition-usa) NDE's "Monday Night Series" continues on Dec. 10 in Berkeley, CA Date: 28 Nov 2001 23:12:06 +0000 Friends, On December 10, NDE continues its "Monday Night Series" in Berkeley with Dr. Kathryn Smick. We had a great turn-out on Nov. 26 for Andreas Toupadakis - please join us for this next presentation per our flyer below. Peace, Sally Sally Light Executive Director Nevada Desert Experience RADIATION AND PUBLIC HEALTH Presentation by Dr. Kathryn Smick, Physicians for Social Responsibility Sponsored by Nevada Desert Experience, as part of its “Monday Night Series,” covering all aspects of nuclear weapons, the nuclear cycle, and of missile defense/ “Star Wars.” Date & Time: Monday, December 10, 2001 - 6 - 9 pm Place: Wesley Student Center, 2398 Bancroft Way (at Dana), Berkeley, directly across from the UC Campus. Open to students as well as the general public. This event is free, although donations are welcome. Light refreshments will be available. A well-known Bay Area physician and peace activist, Dr. Smick gave an excellent presentation on this topic at our May 2001 3-dayteach-in at San Francisco State University. Following Dr. Smick’s presentation, there will be ample time for Q & A and discussion in a relaxed & cordial setting. This is your opportunity to have all your questions answered about thehealth risks of radiation. For more information, please call Nevada Desert Experience at (510) 527-2057. - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ASlater Subject: (abolition-usa) Fwd: FDA Ignoring Evidence that New Chemicals in Irradiated Date: 29 Nov 2001 13:26:31 -0500 >X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.2 >Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 10:19:20 -0500 >From: "Mark Worth" >Subject: FDA Ignoring Evidence that New Chemicals in Irradiated Food > Could Be Harmful >To: aslater@gracelinks.org >X-Loop-Detect: 1 > >For Immediate Release: >Nov. 29, 2001 > >Contact: >Patty Lovera (202) 454-5132 >Peter Jenkins (202) 547-9359 ext. 13 > >FDA Ignoring Evidence that New Chemicals Created in Irradiated Food Could Be Harmful > >Groups Urge FDA to Halt Irradiated Food Approvals Until New Chemicals Are Tested for Safety > >WASHINGTON, D.C. - - The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has ignored growing evidence that a new class of chemicals formed when food is irradiated could be harmful, according to a report released today by Public Citizen and the Center for Food Safety. The groups are urging the FDA to refrain from legalizing irradiation for any additional types of food until the new chemicals are tested for safety. > >The chemicals, called cyclobutanones, do not occur naturally anywhere on Earth. They recently were found to cause genetic damage in rats, and genetic and cellular damage in human and rat cells. > >The groups' report, Hidden Harm, details how the FDA has ignored this unique class of chemicals, which are created in many irradiated foods that the agency has legalized for sale in this country - - including beef, pork, chicken, lamb, eggs, mangoes and papayas. It is expected that cyclobutanones also would be formed in many other foods the FDA is currently considering to legalize for irradiation. > >The organizations today also released a sworn affidavit of toxicologist William Au, who was retained by the groups to independently review the risks posed by cyclobutanones and other chemicals formed by irradiation that could cause genetic damage. > >Along with a letter outlining numerous health concerns caused by food irradiation, the groups filed Hidden Harm and Au's affidavit with the FDA to oppose pending petitions to legalize irradiation for processed foods, which comprise 37 percent of the typical American's diet; molluscan shellfish, such as clams and oysters; crustacean shellfish, such as lobsters and shrimp; and meat products. A fifth petition seeks to double the maximum dose of radiation to which poultry can legally be exposed. > >"The risk that the FDA is taking with the health of the American people cannot be overstated," said Wenonah Hauter, director of Public Citizen's Critical Mass Energy and Environment Program. "If government officials knowingly allow people to eat food that contains these chemicals, they are courting a major public health disaster." > >Though federal regulations require the FDA to determine whether food additives proposed for human consumption are likely to cause cancer, birth defects or other health problems, the agency has not done so for cyclobutanones, nor have agency officials explained why they have failed to do so. Under federal law, irradiation is considered a food additive. > >Americans likely are unwittingly eating irradiated foods containing cyclobutanones. Though most irradiated food sold in stores must be labeled, there is no such requirement for restaurants, schools, hospitals, nursing homes and other institutional settings. And there is no labeling requirement for foods with irradiated ingredients, except those containing irradiated meat. Moreover, due to a lack of reporting requirements for food companies, it is unknown how much irradiated food is sold in the U.S., or where. > >"Children are likely to be especially vulnerable to the risks of these untested chemicals in their food," said Peter T. Jenkins, policy analyst at the Center for Food Safety. "It is beyond me why the FDA would take a chance by exposing American children in this way. The science is against it." > >Au, an environmental toxicology professor at the University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston, is internationally recognized for his work on the toxicological mechanisms that induce human disease. For more than 20 years he has taught, published peer-reviewed research and served on expert committees. He has received numerous awards, and has published or co-published more than 100 articles. > >"An emphasis should be placed on the products that are unique to the irradiation process and that are potentially mutagenic, e.g. 2-DCB [2-dodecylcyclobutanone]," Dr. Au wrote in the affidavit. "Without conclusive evidence regarding the safety of these products, the safety of irradiated food cannot be assured." Au urged the FDA to "seriously and explicitly" consider "repeated observations" of genetic damage and reproductive toxicity in feeding experiments. > >Though cyclobutanones were first identified in irradiated food in 1971, it was not until 1998 that German government scientists discovered that one type of cyclobutanone, 2-DCB, caused genetic damage in rats, and genetic and cellular damage in human and rat cells. Subsequently, the scientists found that two other types of cyclobutanones - - 2-TCB and 2-TDCB - - caused genetic and cellular damage in human cells. Rat feeding studies of these two chemicals are expected to be completed soon. > >Despite these findings, the FDA not only has failed to publicly acknowledge the potential risks posed by cyclobutanones, but the agency proceeded to legalize irradiation for three classes of food even after the first two German studies were made public. Last year, the FDA legalized the irradiation of eggs, juice and sprouting seeds despite the fact that several high-ranking agency officials four months earlier had attended an international conference in Beijing at which the 2-DCB toxicity findings were presented and discussed. > >Ironically, cyclobutanones are so easily detectable and have been known to remain in food for such lengthy periods - more than a decade - that they are commonly used as "markers" to determine whether food has been exposed to ionizing radiation. > >The groups are calling on the FDA to take several steps: refrain from legalizing irradiation for any additional foods until comprehensive, published, peer-reviewed research is conducted on cyclobutanones; conduct a comprehensive analysis of the cyclobutanone levels in foods covered by irradiation petitions already approved by or pending before the FDA; and convene public hearings to thoroughly explore the potential health effects of cyclobutanones. > >Hidden Harm can be viewed at >www.citizen.org/documents/HiddenHarm_-_PDF.pdf; >Au's affidavit is at www.citizen.org/cmep/foodsafety/food_irrad/articles.cfm?ID=6516 > >### > >For more information about Public Citizen, visit www.citizen.org. >For more information about the Center for Food Safety, visit www.centerforfoodsafety.org. > - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ASlater Subject: (abolition-usa) Fwd: Date: 29 Nov 2001 14:27:32 -0500 >From: "Maryna Harrison" >To: >Subject: >Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 13:39:45 -0500 >Organization: Global Resource Action Center for the Environment >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 >Importance: Normal >X-Loop-Detect: 1 > >Tuesday, the House of Representatives voted to reauthorize the >Price-Anderson Act- by voice vote with only FIFTEEN members of congress >present!!! There was no roll call vote. > >Price-Anderson subsidizes nuclear power by limiting liability for >nuclear power plants in the event of a nuclear accident. It asks >tax-payers to assume liability by creating a cap on the amount nuclear >reactor owners pay in the event of a catastrophic accident or terrorist >attack. Under Price Anderson, corporations are only responsible for >about two percent of the estimated cost of a serious accident, making >them largely immune from the responsibilities of operating these >extremely dangerous facilities in America's communities. > >******************************************************************* > >We can still STOP PRICE-ANDERSON IN THE SENATE! > >Price-Anderson reauthorization is likely to be attached to the Senate >Democrats' energy bill, which could be released THIS FRIDAY. There are, >however, likely to be changes from the House-passed version. Senate >Republicans have attached Price-Anderson to an energy bill of their own, >and they continue to press for an early vote on it--they may try to >attach it as an amendment to the Farm bill which is coming up anyday. >Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle has said clearly he doesn't want a >vote on the energy bill until early next year, but it's not 100% clear >he can stop the Republican amendment approach. > >*********************************************************** > >HERE'S HOW!!! >Call 202-224-3121 and ask for your Senator's office. >Tell them you urge them to OPPOSE Price-Anderson reauthorization and to >OPPOSE any form of Price-Anderson reauthorization in the Democrats' >energy bill. > >Paste the letter below into a document, add your info, and fax it to >your Senators. You can find their fax numbers at >http://www.senate.gov/contacting/index.cfm > >************************************************************************ >** > >Dear Senator , > >I urge you to oppose the Price-Anderson Reauthorization Act in any form, >including as part of the Democrats' energy bill. Price-Anderson >subsidizes nuclear power by limiting liability for nuclear power plants >in the event of a nuclear accident. I oppose this legislation because >it asks tax-payers to assume liability by creating a cap on the amount >nuclear reactor owners pay in the event of a catastrophic accident or >terrorist attack. Under Price Anderson, corporations are only >responsible for about two percent of the estimated cost of a serious >accident, making them largely immune from the responsibilities of >operating these terribly dangerous facilities in America's communities. > >The Price Anderson Act indemnifies Department of Energy nuclear >contractors even in cases of gross negligence and willful misconduct, >which discourages contractor accountability and a safety culture. No >other government agency provides this level of taxpayer indemnification >to non-government personnel. > >In light of the tragic events of September 11, security limitations at >nuclear power plants are all the more serious. There should be a >thorough and independent assessment of the security needs at U.S. >nuclear power facilities before reauthorization of Price Anderson is >even considered. > >When Price Anderson was originally enacted in 1954, President Eisenhower >intended it to encourage an unwilling industry to build nuclear power >plants in order to get materials for our nuclear weapons arsenals. Each >nuclear reactor is a bomb factory. Nearly fifty years later, the >nuclear industry is still coming, hat in hand, for corporate welfare at >taxpayer expense, and at the expense of developing solar and wind >energy, which they argue are non-competitive (without considering the >government subsidies they receive). > >Continuing to hide behind Price Anderson's taxpayer bailout is dangerous >for America's well-being. Please oppose Price-Anderson in any form. > >Sincerely, >Your Name >Your address >******************************************************************** > >Please act now! Make your voice heard! > >Thank you, > >Maryna Harrison >GRACE Public Fund >mharrison@gracelinks.org >(212) 726-9161, x17 > >Maryna Harrison >Global Resource Action >Center for the Environment >mharrison@gracelinks.org >(212) 726-9161, x17 > > - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Boyle, Francis" Subject: (abolition-usa) FW: Bush's Police State Power Grab Date: 29 Nov 2001 14:18:50 -0600 This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C17913.0F2C1010 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" -----Original Message----- Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 1:45 PM In Name of Security, Thousands Denied Constitutional Rights The federal government wants Americans to believe that the Constitution only applies when it says so. Exclusive to American Free Press By Christopher Bollyn The actions taken by President George W. Bush and Attorney General John Ashcroft in secretly detaining untold numbers of individuals and calling for secret military tribunals to handle captured Taliban and Al Qaeda prisoners have been condemned as "a constitutional coup d'etat" which may lead to a "police state," according to experts on constitutional and international law. While most if not all the detainees "look Arab" now, experts warn, tomorrow's detainees could be blond, blue-eyed-or you. "What we've seen, since Sept. 11, if you add up every thing that Ashcroft, Bush and their coterie of federalist society lawyers have done here, is a coup d'etat against the United States Constitution," said Francis A. Boyle, professor of international law at the University of Illinois. "When you add in the Ashcroft police state bill that was passed by Congress . . . that's really what we're seeing now. "Since Sept. 11, we have seen one blow against the Constitution after another," Boyle said. "Recently, we've had Ashcroft saying that he had, unilaterally, instituted monitoring of attorney-client communications without even informing anyone-he just went ahead and did it, despite the Fourth Amendment ban on unreasonable searches and seizures without warrant and the Sixth Amendment right to representation by counsel." The criminal investigation into the attacks, the largest in U.S. history, has netted about 1,200 detainees. But the Justice Department has failed to build a case against a single prime U.S. suspect in the terrorist attacks. BAD EVIDENCE Nine weeks after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, federal authorities said on Nov. 15 that they had found no evidence indicating that any of the roughly 1,200 people detained in the United States played a role in the suicide hijacking plot. However, numerous legal protections, based on constitutional and international treaties, appear to have been ignored or violated in the case of the 1,200 detainees. "We are becoming a banana republic here in the United States, with 'disappeared' people, which was the phenomenon that we all saw down in Latin American dictatorships in the 1970s and 1980s, with the support, by the way, of the United States Government," Boyle said. "We don't know where they are or the conditions under which they are being held. We have no idea wheth er they have access to attorneys. We do know one of them died, under highly suspicious circumstances, while in custody. There have been reports that he was tortured to death," he said. The Constitution protects aliens in the United States, according to Boyle. "Clearly aliens here are entitled to the protections of the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment , as well as to the Article III (Section 2, Clause 3) basic constitutional rights in criminal cases, including indictment, trial before a federal district judge or jury, [rights relating to] venue and things of that nature," Boyle said. "I'm surprised there hasn't been more of an outcry," said Robert B. Reich, secretary of labor under President Bill Clinton, about the long-term detentions and the administration's plans to monitor conversations be tween lawyers and terrorism suspects in federal custody. "The president is, by emergency decree, getting rid of rights that we assumed that anyone within our borders legally would have. We can find ourselves in a police state step-by-step without realizing that we have made these compromises along the way." The foreign detainees are also protected by international law under treaties, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (VCCR). The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which the United States government is a party, affords basic due process protections to everyone here in the United States, irrespective of their citizenship, according to Boyle. The VCCR of 1963 calls for notification "without delay" of consular officials when one of their nationals has been arrested or "detained in any other manner." Although Egypt, Pakistan, Syria, and Saudi Arabia are party to the VCCR along with the United States, the Justice Department told AFP that it is using an abbreviated list of nations, the Mandatory Notification Countries, which includes only one Middle Eastern nation, Kuwait. Spokesmen from the Justice and State Departments could not confirm to AFP that the United States was abiding by the terms of the VCCR and notifying the consulates of the detainees. However, Kareem Shora, legal adviser at the American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, said that it had received at least 10 complaints that this was not the case. The Justice Department is planning to "round up" and question some 5,000 men, mostly from Middle Eastern countries, who entered the U.S. legally within the past two years. "When will the FBI, the CIA and the National Secur ity Agency start to turn these powers, that they have under the Ashcroft police state bill, against American citi zens?" Boyle asks. "Clearly, that will be the next step." BAD PRECEDENT Concerning the executive order calling for military tribunals to try alleged al Qaeda members, or even former al Qaeda members, in Afghanistan, Boyle says there is an "even more serious problem." "The third and fourth Geneva Conventions, of 1949, clearly apply to our conflict now with Afghanistan," Boyle says. "These alleged al Qaeda members would be protected either by the third Geneva Convention, if they are fighters incorporated into the army there in Afghanistan, or by the fourth Geneva Convention, if they are deemed to be civilians. Both conventions have very extensive procedural protections on trials that must be adhered to." Although a trial can be held, there are extensive rules and protections and basic requirements of due process of law, set forth in these treaties that must be applied. Failures to apply these treaties would constitute war crimes, according to Boyle. The executive order calling for secret military tribunals is extremely dangerous because it invites reprisals by the Taliban, Boyle says. "What it is basically saying to the Taliban government and to al Qaeda is, 'We are not going to give you the protections of either the third or fourth Geneva Conventions' guarantees on trials.' What that means is that they could engage in reprisals against captured members of the United States Armed Forces. "It opens up our own armed forces to be denied prisoner-of-war treatment," he said. "So, what we're doing here is exposing them to a similar type of treatment, which would be a summary trial, in secret, subject to the death penalty." Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954(voice) 217-244-1478(fax) fboyle@law.uiuc.edu ------_=_NextPart_001_01C17913.0F2C1010 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Boyle, Francis=20
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 1:45 PM
To: = Killeacle=20 (E-mail)
Subject: Bush's Police State Power = Grab

In Name=20 of Security, Thousands=20 Denied
          &n= bsp;           &n= bsp;           &n= bsp;   =20 Constitutional Rights
 
          &nb= sp;      =20 The federal government wants Americans to believe that the Constitution = only=20 applies=20 when
          &nbs= p;      =20 it says=20 so.
           = ;       =20
           &n= bsp;     =20 Exclusive to American Free Press
 
          &nb= sp;      =20 By Christopher=20 Bollyn
          &n= bsp;        =20
           &n= bsp;     =20 The actions taken by President George W. Bush and Attorney General John = Ashcroft=20 in
           =       =20 secretly detaining untold numbers of individuals and calling for secret = military=20 tribunals=20 to
           =       =20 handle captured Taliban and Al Qaeda prisoners have been condemned as = “a=20 constitutional
         =         =20 coup d’etat” which may lead to a “police = state,” according to experts on=20 constitutional=20 and
           = ;      =20 international law.
 
          &nb= sp;      =20 While most if not all the detainees “look Arab” now, = experts warn, tomorrow’s=20 detainees
          = ;       =20 could be blond, blue-eyed—or you.
 
          &nb= sp;      =20 “What we’ve seen, since Sept. 11, if you add up every thing = that Ashcroft, Bush=20 and=20 their
          &nb= sp;      =20 coterie of federalist society lawyers have done here, is a coup = d’etat against=20 the=20 United
          &n= bsp;      =20 States Constitution,” said Francis A. Boyle, professor of = international law at=20 the=20 University
         &nbs= p;       =20 of Illinois. “When you add in the Ashcroft police state bill that = was passed by=20 Congress . .=20 .
           =       =20 that’s really what we’re seeing now.
 
          &nb= sp;      =20 “Since Sept. 11, we have seen one blow against the Constitution = after another,”=20 Boyle=20 said.
          &nb= sp;      =20 “Recently, we’ve had Ashcroft saying that he had, = unilaterally, instituted=20 monitoring=20 of
           =       =20 attorney-client communications without even informing anyone—he = just went ahead=20 and=20 did
           = ;      =20 it, despite the Fourth Amendment ban on unreasonable searches and = seizures=20 without
          &= nbsp;      =20 warrant and the Sixth Amendment right to representation by=20 counsel.”
 
          &nb= sp;      =20 The criminal investigation into the attacks, the largest in U.S. = history, has=20 netted about=20 1,200
          &nb= sp;      =20 detainees. But the Justice Department has failed to build a case = against a=20 single prime=20 U.S.
          &nbs= p;      =20 suspect in the terrorist attacks.
 
          &nb= sp;      =20 BAD EVIDENCE
 
          &nb= sp;      =20 Nine weeks after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, federal authorities = said on=20 Nov. 15 that=20 they
          &nbs= p;      =20 had found no evidence indicating that any of the roughly 1,200 people = detained=20 in the=20 United
          &n= bsp;      =20 States played a role in the suicide hijacking plot.
 
          &nb= sp;      =20 However, numerous legal protections, based on constitutional and = international=20 treaties,
          = ;       =20 appear to have been ignored or violated in the case of the 1,200=20 detainees.
 
          &nb= sp;      =20 “We are becoming a banana republic here in the United States, = with ‘disappeared’=20 people,
          &= nbsp;      =20 which was the phenomenon that we all saw down in Latin American = dictatorships in=20 the
           = ;      =20 1970s and 1980s, with the support, by the way, of the United States = Government,”=20 Boyle
          &nb= sp;      =20 said.
 
          &nb= sp;      =20 “We don’t know where they are or the conditions under which = they are being held.=20 We
           =       =20 have no idea wheth er they have access to attorneys. We do know one of = them=20 died,=20 under
          &nb= sp;      =20 highly suspicious circumstances, while in custody. There have been = reports that=20 he=20 was
           = ;      =20 tortured to death,” he said.
 
          &nb= sp;      =20 The Constitution protects aliens in the United States, according to = Boyle.=20 “Clearly=20 aliens
          &n= bsp;      =20 here are entitled to the protections of the due process clause of the = Fifth=20 Amendment ,=20 as
           =       =20 well as to the Article III (Section 2, Clause 3) basic constitutional = rights in=20 criminal=20 cases,
          &n= bsp;      =20 including indictment, trial before a federal district judge or jury, = [rights=20 relating to] venue=20 and
           = ;      =20 things of that nature,” Boyle said.
 
          &nb= sp;      =20 “I’m surprised there hasn’t been more of an = outcry,” said Robert B. Reich,=20 secretary=20 of
           =       =20 labor under President Bill Clinton, about the long-term detentions and = the=20 administration’s
       &nbs= p;         =20 plans to monitor conversations be tween lawyers and terrorism suspects = in=20 federal=20 custody.
          =        =20 “The president is, by emergency decree, getting rid of rights = that we assumed=20 that=20 anyone
          &n= bsp;      =20 within our borders legally would have. We can find ourselves in a = police state=20 step-by-step
         &n= bsp;       =20 without realizing that we have made these compromises along the=20 way.”
 
          &nb= sp;      =20 The foreign detainees are also protected by international law under = treaties,=20 including=20 the
           = ;      =20 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Vienna = Convention=20 on=20 Consular
          =        =20 Relations (VCCR).
 
          &nb= sp;      =20 The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which the = United=20 States
          &n= bsp;      =20 government is a party, affords basic due process protections to = everyone here in=20 the=20 United
          &n= bsp;      =20 States, irrespective of their citizenship, according to = Boyle.
 
          &nb= sp;      =20 The VCCR of 1963 calls for notification “without delay” of = consular officials=20 when one=20 of
           =       =20 their nationals has been arrested or “detained in any other = manner.”=20
 
          &nb= sp;      =20 Although Egypt, Pakistan, Syria, and Saudi Arabia are party to the VCCR = along=20 with=20 the
           = ;      =20 United States, the Justice Department told AFP that it is using an = abbreviated=20 list of=20 nations,
          =        =20 the Mandatory Notification Countries, which includes only one Middle = Eastern=20 nation,
          &= nbsp;      =20 Kuwait.
 
          &nb= sp;      =20 Spokesmen from the Justice and State Departments could not confirm to = AFP that=20 the
           = ;      =20 United States was abiding by the terms of the VCCR and notifying the = consulates=20 of=20 the
           = ;      =20 detainees. However, Kareem Shora, legal adviser at the American=20 Arab
          &nbs= p;      =20 Anti-Discrimination Committee, said that it had received at least 10 = complaints=20 that this=20 was
           = ;      =20 not the case.
 
          &nb= sp;      =20 The Justice Department is planning to “round up” and = question some 5,000 men,=20 mostly
          &n= bsp;      =20 from Middle Eastern countries, who entered the U.S. legally within the = past two=20 years.
          &n= bsp;      =20 “When will the FBI, the CIA and the National Secur ity Agency = start to turn=20 these=20 powers,
          &= nbsp;      =20 that they have under the Ashcroft police state bill, against American = citi=20 zens?” Boyle=20 asks.
          &nb= sp;      =20 “Clearly, that will be the next step.”
 
          &nb= sp;      =20 BAD PRECEDENT
 
          &nb= sp;      =20 Concerning the executive order calling for military tribunals to try = alleged al=20 Qaeda
          &nb= sp;      =20 members, or even former al Qaeda members, in Afghanistan, Boyle says = there is an=20 “even
         &nb= sp;       =20 more serious problem.”
 
          &nb= sp;      =20 “The third and fourth Geneva Conventions, of 1949, clearly apply = to our conflict=20 now=20 with
          &nbs= p;      =20 Afghanistan,” Boyle says. “These alleged al Qaeda members = would be protected=20 either=20 by
           =       =20 the third Geneva Convention, if they are fighters incorporated into the = army=20 there=20 in
           =       =20 Afghanistan, or by the fourth Geneva Convention, if they are deemed to = be=20 civilians.=20 Both
          &nbs= p;      =20 conventions have very extensive procedural protections on trials that = must be=20 adhered to.”
 
          &nb= sp;      =20 Although a trial can be held, there are extensive rules and protections = and=20 basic
          &nb= sp;      =20 requirements of due process of law, set forth in these treaties that = must be=20 applied.=20 Failures
          =        =20 to apply these treaties would constitute war crimes, according to=20 Boyle.
 
          &nb= sp;      =20 The executive order calling for secret military tribunals is extremely = dangerous=20 because=20 it
           =       =20 invites reprisals by the Taliban, Boyle says. “What it is = basically saying to=20 the=20 Taliban
          &= nbsp;      =20 government and to al Qaeda is, ‘We are not going to give you the = protections of=20 either=20 the
           = ;      =20 third or fourth Geneva Conventions’ guarantees on trials.’ = What that means is=20 that=20 they
          &nbs= p;      =20 could engage in reprisals against captured members of the United States = Armed=20 Forces.
 
          &nb= sp;      =20 “It opens up our own armed forces to be denied prisoner-of-war = treatment,” he=20 said.=20 “So,
         &nbs= p;       =20 what we’re doing here is exposing them to a similar type of = treatment, which=20 would be=20 a
           &= nbsp;     =20 summary trial, in secret, subject to the death=20 penalty.” 
        = ;          =20
 
 
Francis A. Boyle
Law Building
504 E. Pennsylvania Ave.
Champaign, IL 61820 USA
217-333-7954(voice)
217-244-1478(fax)
fboyle@law.uiuc.edu
=
 
 
------_=_NextPart_001_01C17913.0F2C1010-- - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message.