From: owner-abolition-usa-digest@lists.xmission.com (abolition-usa-digest) To: abolition-usa-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: abolition-usa-digest V1 #192 Reply-To: abolition-usa-digest Sender: owner-abolition-usa-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-abolition-usa-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk abolition-usa-digest Thursday, October 7 1999 Volume 01 : Number 192 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 20:06:33 -0700 From: "David Crockett Williams" Subject: (abolition-usa) Space Based Weapons and White House Aims To Save Test Ban Thanks Carol for this very important message regarding the redirection of space based weapons research and development funding to peaceful purposes. I agree with your sentiments of course, but wish to point out that space based weapons apparently already exist as photographed from the space shuttle in approx 1992 where live video feed since shown on network television shows what analysts describe as the "rail gun" or "brilliant pebbles" non-exploding high-speed projectiles being shot at UFO's in Eart= h's atmosphere which easily dodged these projectiles accelerated on a magneti= c track reportedly powered by the military usurped n-Machine of Bruce DePal= ma http://www.depalma.pair.com . I do not have url reference to the NASA video feed in question but perhaps someone on a list this post reaches wi= ll by now have such reference. The date can be precisely determined becaus= e after this incident NASA changed from live to delayed video feed on all space shuttle missions to prevent such data from being repeated publicly. Since the 1985 Congressional testimony of Dr. Yonas, chief scientist of S= DI "Star Wars" program where he requested funding for research and developme= nt of several SDI "critical technologies" including the "homopolar generator= " (Michael Faraday's name for the rediscovered and shown overunity n-Machin= e), space based weapons have reportedly been covertly developed and deployed. This pity is that the new-energy technologies involved are the antidote t= o ending the environmental poisoning of nuclear and fossil fuel power technologies but these new-energy devices are being restricted to militar= y use by our government and its secrecy order reproduced on page 163-4 of Jeane Manning's book about these technologies called The Coming Energy Revolution. (see exceprt below) For some references to these new technologies see http://www.padrak.com/i= ne and http://www.infinite-energy.com including the available LENT devices under development to neutralize radioactive materials. David Crockett Williams Global Emergency Alert Response http://www.angelfire.com/on/GEAR2000 - -----Original Message----- From: carol rosin To: David Crockett Williams (by way of *STRIDER*) Date: Tuesday, October 05, 1999 11:54 AM Subject: Re: White House Aims To Save Test Ban >I am a former corporate manager of an aerospace company, a space and missile >defense consultant, founder of the Institute for Security and Cooperatio= n in >Outer Space, and an activist who helped to start the movement to prevent the >weaponization of space. > >For many years, I've said that the US will never stop testing...until th= ere >is a ban on space-based weapons. That there will never be a CTB that wi= ll >survive. I've said that the ABM Treaty will be broken. Because these test, >space-based weapons and other dangerous technologies are a necessary par= t of >the US plan to seize the high ground...to point weapons down everyone's >throat "to control earth from space." > >If you really want to stop nuclear testing and the furthering of nuclear and >other dangerous technology research and development programs...call for = a >verifiable ban on all space-based weapons...IMMEDIATELY. > >Over $125 billion is now in the largest R&D program in history...all aim= ed >at space-based weaponry. Another $15 billion was just allotted a few we= eks >ago. In June, Clinton plans to announce his approval of DEPLOYMENT! > >The game goes on. > >However, there is a way to end this madness once and for all! All we have >to do is to eliminate the space-based weapons R&D, and take the money an= d >put it into expanding a non-weapons civilian, commercial and military sp= ace >program. > >Yes, military space program, too. In space is where the transformation o= f >the military is taking place. There are no weapons in space. Yet, the >military has a great role to play. And since the military is not going = to >disappear, we have to give them something to do. Study what they are doi= ng >in space...there are no weapons in their roles...yet. > >Stop the same old peace/anti-nuke rehetoric. If we want change, we have = to >change, too. In order to preserve the treaties we want, to prevent furth= er >testing, etc.: > >Call for: > >1) A worldwide ban on space-based weapons and > >2) A worldwide cooperative space program to be developed...without weap= ons >in space. > >For further information, input or questions, contact Carol Rosin, 498 >Manzanita Court, Ventura, CA. 93001. rosin@west.net >-----Original Message----- >From: David Crockett Williams (by way of *STRIDER*) > >To: Select List >Date: Sunday, October 03, 1999 5:20 PM >Subject: AP: White House Aims To Save Test Ban > > >>From: "David Crockett Williams" >>Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 13:44:48 -0700 >>Via: Bay_Area_Activist list: >http://fornits.com/renegade/peaars.cgi?fetch=3D54 >> Archives: http://www.onelist.com/archives.cgi/bay_area_activist >>List-Subscribe: >>Subject: [Bay_Area_Activist] AP: White House Aims To Save Test Ban >> >> >>http://wire.ap.org/APnews/center_story.html?FRONTID=3DNATIONAL&STORYID=3D= APIS6 V >R6EI0 >>0 >> >> >>OCTOBER 02, 16:12 EDT >> >>White House Aims To Save Test Ban >> >>By TERENCE HUNT >>AP White House Correspondent >> >>WASHINGTON (AP) =97 The White House launched ``a hurry up offense'' Sat= urday >>to save a global nuclear test ban treaty, racing to build support for t= he >>landmark agreement while accusing Senate Republicans of trying to kill = it >>with an unexpectedly quick vote. >> >>After two years of inaction and without any hearings on the treaty, Sen= ate >>GOP leaders abruptly decided Thursday to hold a vote Oct. 12. >> >>``This is not what the Founding Fathers meant by advise and consent,'' >Sandy >>Berger, the national security adviser, said in an interview Saturday. >``This >>is hit and run.'' >> >>The administration and its allies accused Republicans of rushing the vo= te >in >>hopes of defeating the treaty. Democrats fear they are about 15 votes short >>of the 67 needed to ratify the agreement. >> >>Trying to build support, President Clinton will speak about the treaty >>Tuesday when he signs a major defense bill at the Pentagon. >> >>To demonstrate military backing for the agreement, Clinton will gather >>testimonials Wednesday from former chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staf= f, >>former astronaut and Sen. John Glenn, and Nobel laureate physicists. >> >>Republicans say the treaty is flawed, in part because it would not prev= ent >>countries such as North Korea, Iraq and Iran from testing. >> >>``We think it would put us in a weakened position internationally,'' Senate >>Majority Leader Trent Lott, R-Miss., said Friday. ``But since there hav= e >>been all these calls and demands for a vote, we have offered to vote.'' >> >>Traditionally, major treaties are debated at length in committee hearin= gs >>before coming to a vote in the Senate. >> >>``There has not been one day of hearings,'' Berger said. ``This process has >>been short-circuited. We're dealing here with the most serious and sobe= r >>matter that comes before the Senate and we have a hurry up offense.'' >> >>The treaty calls for an outright ban on all nuclear testing. It has bee= n >>signed by 152 nations, including the United States but it has been ratified >>only by 47 countries, the most recent Bulgaria on Wednesday. More >>significantly, the treaty has been ratified by only 23 of the 44 >>nuclear-capable countries that must ratify it for it to take effect. >> >>To win ratification, the treaty requires approval by a two-thirds vote = in >>the Senate. Even if all 45 Democrats support the treaty, 22 other >>Republicans must vote ``yes'' for it to be ratified. >> >>The Senate Armed Services Committee will open three days of hearings on the >>treaty beginning Wednesday. The treaty normally would be considered by = the >>Senate Foreign Relations Committee but its chairman, Sen. Jesse Helms, >>R-N.C., is one of its foremost opponents. Defense Secretary William Coh= en >>and Gen. Henry H. Shelton, chairman of the Joint Chiefs, will present t= he >>administration's case. >> >>Cohen is cutting short a trip to Asia to return to Washington for a meeting >>Monday of Clinton's national security team. In Singapore, Cohen said >>Saturday that ratification of the treaty would send a strong signal to >India >>and Pakistan, as well as other nations, to temper their nuclear ambitio= ns. >> >>A former Republican senator, Cohen said he wants ``to talk to former >>colleagues and ask them to keep an open mind.'' Shelton, also in Asia, = may >>return early, too. >> >>``It's a verifiable treaty,'' Cohen said, adding that the United States has >>the technology to ensure nuclear tests are not conducted. >> >>The United States stopped nuclear testing in 1992 and relies on >>supercomputer simulations to test the nuclear arsenal. ``This is about >>whether we can stop other countries from testing,'' Berger said. >> >>``For the United States to say, `No,' we're going to go the other way, >we're >>going to go in the direction of the nuclear testers, is crazy,'' Berger >>said. >> >> >>home ] us news ] world ] business ] sports ] weather ] search ] help ] >> >> >> >>Copyright 1999 Associated Press. All rights reserved. >>This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistribut= ed. >>Comments and questions >> >>----------------------- >>NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is >>distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a pri= or >>interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and >>educational purposes only. For more information go to: >>http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml >>----------------------- >> >> >>-----------------------------------------------------------------------= - -- >>-----------------------------------------------------------------------= - -- >> >>Search /RENEGADE/ for articles on nukes - >>http://fornits.com/renegade/peaars.cgi?NUCLEAR >> >>/RENEGADE/ Search - GO TO: http://fornits.com/renegade/peaars.cgi? >>and just type in your topic. For differing results you may uncheck >>"article" and search on just "subject," etc. /RENEGADE/ also has >>"time-frame" in the search, so you can tailor your results that way, to= o. >> >>----- >> p.163-4 of Jeane Manning's book The Coming Energy Revolution, from Avery Harassing the Energy Innovators Keeping Inventors Quiet If you were an inventor trying to patent an important new-energy discover= y, you might receive a secrecy order along the lines of the one reproduced here. According to information obtained under the Freedom of Information Act by the Federation of American Scientists, the Pentagon placed 774 pat= ent applications under secrecy orders in 1991 -- up from 290 in 1979 -- and 5= 06 of these orders were imposed on inventions by private companies. The government has standing gag orders on several thousand inventions. The following order issued in the 1980's was obtained by inventor Ken MacNeil= l of Georgia and revealed in 1983. SECRECY ORDER (Title 35, United States code [1952], sections 181-188) NOTICE: To the applicant above named, his heirs, and any and all his assignees, attorneys and agents, herinafter designated principals. You are hereby notified that your application as above identified has been found to contain subject matter, the unauthorized disclosure of whic= h might be detrimental to the national security, and you are ordered in nowise to publich or disclose the invention or any material information w= ith respect thereto, including hitherto unpublished details of the subject matter of said application, in any way to any person not cognizant of the invent= ion prior to the date of the order, including any employee of the principals, but to keep the same secret except by written consent first obtained of t= he Commissioner of Patents, under the penalties of 35 U.S.C. [1952] 182, 186 Any other application already filed or hereafter filed which contains = any significant part of the subject matter of the above identified applicatio= n falls within the scope of this order. If such other application does not stand under a secrecy order, it and the common subject matter should be brought to the attention of the Security Group, Licensing and Review, Pat= ent Office. If, prior to the issuance of the secrecy order, any significant part= of the subject matter has been revealed to any person, the principals shall promptly inform such person of the secrecy order and the penalties for improper disclosure. However, if such part of the subject matter was disclosed to any person in a foreign country or foreign national in the U.S., the prinicpals shall not inform such person of the secrecy order, b= ut instead shall promptly furnish to the Commission of Patents the following information to the extent not already furnished: Date of disclosure, nam= e and address of the disclosee, identification of such part; and any authorization by any U.S. Government agency to export such part. If the subject matter is included in any foreign patent application or patent th= is should be indentified. The principals shall comply with any related instructions of the Commissioneer. This order shall not be construed in any way to mean that the Government = has adopted or contemplates adopton of the alledged invention disclosed in th= is application; nor is it any indication of the value of such invention. At the conference where he revealed the secrecy order MacNeill advised inventors of new-energy devices to go public: "Get the information or th= e device out there to enough people that they could not stop you" - - 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. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 20:39:53 -0700 (PDT) From: Nuclear Age Peace Foundation Subject: (abolition-usa) Three Actions To: Abolition 2000 and Abolition-USA listserves From: David Krieger Re: Three Actions "Ask not what Abolition 2000 can do for you. Ask what you can do for Abolition 2000." This is a monthly action reminder. Please help the Network achieve its goal by taking the following actions: 1. Enroll new organizations. 2. Donate funds to support Network coordination and activities. 3. Circulate the Abolition 2000 petition. Also, in some countries, names are being gathered of 2000 individuals, prominent in various fields, who support the abolition of nuclear weapons. These names will be presented at the Non-Proliferation Review Conference scheduled for April-May 2000. Can you help with this? We need the efforts of all our supporters, individuals and organizations alike, at this critical time. Thank you for your continued support of Abolition 2000. David Krieger President, Nuclear Age Peace Foundation - - 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. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 09:51:55 -0400 From: ASlater Subject: (abolition-usa) Fwd: New Democratic Party of Canada Policy Resolution on Abolishing Nu clear Weapons >Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 14:20:07 -0400 >Subject: New Democratic Party of Canada Policy Resolution on Abolishing Nu clear Weapons >Priority: non-urgent >X-FC-MachineGenerated: true >To: abolition@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca >X-FC-Forwarded-From: RobinS0@parl.gc.ca >From: abolition@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca (abolition@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca) > >Thought you would be interested in the nuclear weapons abolition policy >resolution which passed at the New Democratic Party of Canada Policy >Convention in August in Ottawa. > >Gary Evans > >Adjoint l=E9gislatif pour le d=E9put=E9 Svend Robinson >Legislative Assistant to Svend Robinson, MP >t=E9l (613) 996-5599, fax (613) 992-5501 > >robins0@parl.gc.ca > > >_____________________________________________________ > > > >Resolution on Abolishing Nuclear Weapons > >As passed at the New Democratic Party of Canada Convention, August 1999 > > >WHEREAS the NDP recognizes that nuclear weapons continue to represent the >most serious threat to world peace and security and New Democrats have >always been firmly committed to the abolition of nuclear weapons; and > >WHEREAS a 1998 opinion poll carried out for the Canadian Peace Alliance >showed that ninety-two percent of Canadians support the government taking a >leadership role in negotiations to abolish nuclear weapons; and > >WHEREAS rather than showing leadership on this issue, the federal Liberal >government has moved to expropriate from the BC government the Nanoose Bay >testing range to allow for continued torpedo testing in Canadian waters by >American nuclear-powered and possibly nuclear-armed warships; and > >Whereas the Liberal government has also indicated that they intend to >ignore >the recommendation of the multi-party House of Commons Foreign Affairs >Committee report opposed to the burning of Mox fuel in Canada; > >THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the NDP: > >1) urges the Canadian government to give immediate notice of >termination of the agreement between Canada and the United States >establishing a torpedo testing range at Nanoose Bay in the Strait of >Georgia >in British Columbia; and that the government work with local stakeholders >including community representatives, labour, business, environmentalists >and >aboriginal peoples to establish an environmentally sustainable job creating >alternative in the Nanoose Bay area; >2) calls on NATO, as a first step toward eliminating its nuclear >arsenal, to revise its cold war strategic doctrine so as to adopt a policy >of "No-First-Use" of nuclear weapons and to "de-alert" all active warheads, >and calls on other nuclear capable states to adopt the same policies; >3) demands that the Canadian government not contribute to any >anti-ballistic missile defence ("Star Wars") programs; >4) urges all countries to sign the Nuclear-Non-Proliferation-Treaty= and >for nuclear armed states to live up the disarmament goals of this treaty; >5) supports the goals of the Abolition 2000 campaign and will work in >solidarity with organizations that share these goals to raise awareness and >promote education concerning issues of nuclear abolition; >6) supports the call for the conclusion of a nuclear weapons >disarmament convention; >7) opposes the environmentally unsound and undesirable burning of Mox >fuel in Canada; >8) calls on the Liberal government to end all low level flight >training over Innu lands in Labrador; >9) reaffirms our policy that Canada should withdraw from NATO and >NORAD, and work to reform and strengthen the United Nations; and >10) calls on the Canadian government to renounce all Canadian reliance >on the nuclear umbrella and bring to an end any Canadian support for the >nuclear weapons possessed by other countries; and > >BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the NDP reaffirms that Halifax Harbour and all >other Canadian ports should be declared nuclear weapons free zones. > =20 Alice Slater Global Resource Action Center for the Environment (GRACE) 15 East 26th Street, Room 915 New York, NY 10010 tel: (212) 726-9161 fax: (212) 726-9160 email: aslater@gracelinks.org GRACE is a member of Abolition 2000, a global network working for a treaty to eliminate 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. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 11:14:58 EDT From: JTLOWE@aol.com Subject: Re: (abolition-usa) Fwd: New Democratic Party of Canada Policy Resolution on ... Hi Allice, Is Doug roche involved in that? This is so encouraging colby - - 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. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 10:10:52 -0700 From: "David Crockett Williams" Subject: (abolition-usa) Russian Nuke Whistleblower Trial From: Bellona To: Recipient list suppressed Date: Wednesday, October 06, 1999 3:12 AM BELLONA MESSAGER, 06 October, 1999 Nikitin trial date set St. Petersburg City Court is to hear the Nikitin case on 23 November 1999. St. Petersburg City Court Judge Sergei Golets will hear the espionage case against environmentalist Alexandr Nikitin beginning November 23, 1999. Nikitin has been charged eight successive times with espionage for his participation in a Bellona report detailing the unsafe nuclear waste storage practices of the Russian Northern Fleet. The court hearing is to follow the additional investigation conducted by the Russian Security Police, or FSB. The case was sent to the further investigation by the same judge, Sergei Golets, in October 1998. The Judge said then that the indictment submitted by the FSB was vague and inconsistent with Russian federal legislation. The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation reaffirmed Golets's decision in February 1999. "But the new indictment, prepared by the FSB for the court, had not been made consistent with the Russian federal legislation, as the two courts demanded," says Nikitin's defender Yury Schmidt. Aleksandr Nikitin is still indicted in accordance with secret and retroactive normative acts - in violation of both Russian and international principles of legal protection. On July 26, 1999, Aleksandr Nikitin, frustrated with the Russian legal system, forwarded his application to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. The application has been registered as case no. 50178/99. Currently, a judge in Strasbourg has been appointed to evaluate the application and make recommendations for further procedure. _____________________________________________________________ More info: http://www.bellona.no/e/russia/nikitin/ mailto:info@bellona.no Please dissiminate this information further and/or make a link to the above URL, thank you. - -------------------------------------------------------------------- This information is mailed to a number of recipients, mostly people we have been in contact with, or who have requested updates on Nikitin in addition to media. If this information is irrelevant to you, we apologize. Send us a mail, and we will make sure we don't send you emails as this in the future. Regards, Igor Kudrik, Researcher, the Bellona Foundation - ---------------------------------------------------------------- Fax: +47 22383862 Phone: +47 23234600 Snail mail: BELLONA, Box 2141 Grunerlokka, N-0505 Oslo, Norway Email: bellona@bellona.no WWW: http://www.bellona.no/ =C9=03 - - 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. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 14:01:53 -0400 (EDT) From: Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space Subject: (abolition-usa) RUSSIA WARNS OF ARMS RACE AFTER BMD TEST =20 Russia Warns U.S. of Arms Race ASSOCIATED PRESS - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------= - --- - -- MOSCOW =97 A missile defense system the United States wants to build would= =20 lead to a Cold War-style arms race, mutual suspicion and uncertainty, a top= =20 Russian commander warned.=20 If the defense system is built, Russia may drop out of all disarmament=20 treaties, close its borders to U.S. arms observers and begin stockpiling=20 nuclear weapons, the commander of Russia's Strategic Missile Forces, Col.= =20 Gen. Vladimir Yakovlev, said in a newspaper interview published Tuesday.=20 "We will fully withdraw from all inspection measures and will not let anyon= e=20 close to our arms. Russia will not know what is going on in the United=20 States. Americans will not know what is going on in Russia," Yakovlev told= =20 the daily Nezavisimaya Gazeta.=20 Moscow staunchly opposes U.S. plans to amend the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missil= e=20 treaty so it can build a limited missile defense system.=20 Foreign Ministry spokesman Vladimir Rakhmanin on Tuesday also denounced the= =20 first test of the proposed missile defense system, saying it already violat= es=20 the ABM treaty, the ITAR-Tass news agency reported.=20 During the test Saturday, an unarmed Minuteman missile was launched from th= e=20 Marshall Islands to intercept a missile fired from California.=20 The missile defense system would protect the United States against nuclear= =20 missile strikes by terrorists or rogue nations, and not against an attack= =20 from a major nuclear power.=20 But Russia insists the system would upset the strategic balance of powers.= =20 "If the United States throws out the 1972 ABM treaty, they will effectively= =20 become the culprit for a disruption of the process of limiting nuclear=20 weapons," Yakovlev was quoted as saying.=20 "All agreements that have been signed or are being prepared, will come unde= r=20 threat - namely, START-I, START-II and consultations on START-III."=20 Russian officials have repeatedly warned of a new arms race if the missile= =20 defense system is built. But Russia is broke and can hardly afford a new ar= ms=20 race with the United States.=20 Still, Moscow can afford to put multiple warheads on its new Topol=20 intercontinental ballistic missiles - something it has refrained from doing= =20 in the past because of disarmament plans and obligations, Yakovlev said.=20 =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. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 19:16:22 -0700 (PDT) From: Justin Equal Subject: (abolition-usa) abolition-usa - --0-1804289383-939262582=:9921 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Not just Japan but also Korea and Finland. And don't forget to read the article about those unfortunate Indian villagers.Starting from: http://cnn.com/ASIANOW/east/9910/05/korea.nuclear.03/index.html - --------------------------------- Do You Yahoo!? Bid and sell for free at Yahoo! Auctions. - --0-1804289383-939262582=:9921 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Not just Japan but also Korea and Finland. And don't forget to read the article about those unfortunate Indian villagers. Starting from: http://cnn.com/ASIANOW/east/9910/05/korea.nuclear.03/index.html
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at Yahoo! Auctions.
- --0-1804289383-939262582=:9921-- - - 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. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 18:38:34 +1000 From: FoE Sydney - Nuclear Campaign Subject: (abolition-usa) CTBT RATIFICATION ITEMS John Hallam =46riends of the Earth Sydney, 17 Lord street, Newtown, NSW, Australia, =46ax(61)(2)9517-3902 ph (61)(2)9517-3903 nonukes@foesyd.org.au http://homepages.tig.com.au/~foesyd http://homepages.tig.com.au/~foesyd/nuclear/bbletter.html Dear People, =46ound all this while looking for Y2K stuff. Given the upcoming CTBT vote, I felt it might be of interest. The Kissinger/Deutsch article in the Washington Post is especially noxious. Note however, the 33 nobel laureates who spoke in the treaty's favour. John Hallam Reuters UPI White House, Senate Seek To Delay Nuclear Pact Vote Updated 12:28 AM ET October 7, 1999 By Christopher Wilson WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The White House and the Republican-controlled Congress, engaged in a high-stakes struggle over endorsing a global nuclear test ban treaty, sought Wednesday to postpone a Senate vote on ratification. President Clinton, who has set nuclear non-proliferation as a top foreign policy priority, warned a defeat of the treaty in the Senate would make the spread of nuclear weapons more likely, encourage testing and set a poor example for nations looking to the United States for leadership. "The message of not ratifying this treaty is: OK, we're not going to test but you guys have a green light," Clinton said at the White House. "I don't think we ought to give a green light to our friends in India and Pakistan, to the Chinese or the Russians, or to people who would be nuclear powers. I think that would be a mistake." However, the White House indicated that Clinton might accept a delay in the Senate vote scheduled for next Tuesday. "If senators in their wisdom believe that they need more time, they need more months to look at this, then we will certainly be open to looking at their concerns and looking at what the schedule is," said White House spokesman Joe Lockhart. He said Clinton would consider a delay of months, but opposed putting off the ratification vote until a new president takes office in January 2001. Senior administration officials and senators said they feared next week's vote would fall short of the two-thirds majority needed to ratify the treaty and that rejection would draw condemnation of the United States by its allies. "If the Senate rejects the treaty, the proliferation of nuclear weapons is more likely, posing serious challenges to our nonproliferation goals," Defense Secretary William Cohen told a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing. "There should never be a rush to ratify something as complicated and comprehensive as this," said Cohen, a former senator from Maine and the only Republican in Clinton's Cabinet. "This is the first hearing that has been held. There should not be...a quick vote, but rather a very thoughtful examination." Clinton told reporters: "After two long years of inaction, one week is very little time for considered action." But he said, "For now the vote is scheduled for Tuesday, and I will continue to aggressively argue to the Senate and to the American people that this is in our national interest." Germany and Japan, opening a U.N. review conference on the nuclear test ban treaty in Vienna, urged the United States to ratify it and set an example to the world. "Ratification in Washington would send a strong signal in favor of the treaty, which is just what we are trying to do in Vienna," said German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer. More than 150 countries have already signed the treaty, but to take force it must be ratified by all 44 countries in the Geneva-based Conference on Disarmament that have nuclear reactors or research programs, including the United States. Clinton signed the treaty in 1996 and sent it to the Senate for ratification early in 1997. After blocking attempts by Democrats to hold hearings and vote on the issue for more than two years, Senate Republican leader Trent Lott surprised everyone last week by suddenly announcing it would be rushed to the Senate floor for a vote. Senators from both parties, caught in the political wrangle between Congress and the White House but impressed with the seriousness of the ratification decision, seemed to conclude that the vote should be delayed. "We should not hold a vote on the CTBT this year," said Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska. "This is far too important of an issue to rush into what will surely be a political vote. We are talking about the future of the United States. This is not a discussion that should be hurried for political or partisan gain." Secretary of State Madeleine Albright underlined the gravity of the vote in a letter to each Senate member. "You and your Senate colleagues face a critical vote and carry the responsibility of deciding how best to build a safer future for America in a world where dangers abound. I ask you to look at this question, not in the context of the Cold War, but rather with respect to the range of emerging threats we face -- in South Asia, North Korea, the Middle East and elsewhere -- from the proliferation of nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles. The CTBT is a fundamental roadblock in the path of this trend toward proliferation," the letter said. As the day wore on, Senate Republicans and Democrats appeared to lose their appetite for a prolonged confrontation. Aides said both Lott and Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle are seeking a dignified way to resolve the issue and satisfy their parties. "The current status is that we're still hopeful that we can reach some agreement that would preclude the need for a vote Tuesday," Daschle told reporters. News Home U.S. Reuters UPI Clinton Presses Senate To Ratify Nuclear Pact Updated 1:50 PM ET October 6, 1999 By Arshad Mohammed WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Clinton said Wednesday he would keep pushing the Republican-controlled Senate to ratify a treaty to ban nuclear tests as other officials hinted the White House may agree to delay a vote to stave off defeat. The Senate, which dragged its feet over the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) for two years before abruptly deciding last week to consider it, appears unlikely to muster the 67 votes needed to ratify the landmark treaty by Tuesday's expected vote. Republican and Democratic senators were discussing a way to postpone the vote, and Clinton said that he would keep fighting for the treaty until they did. "After two long years of inaction, one week is very little time for considered action," Clinton told reporters in the White House Rose Garden. "For now the vote is scheduled for Tuesday, and I will continue to aggressively argue to the Senate and to the American people that this is in our national interest." But other Clinton administration officials suggested it was just a matter of time before some form of compromise was worked out, either to withdraw the treaty entirely or for the Senate to postpone a vote on it for the time being. "I'd think it would be the latter," said one official who asked not to be named, saying that the White House was unwilling to agree to withdraw the bill entirely and to lose any chance of the Senate acting on it before Clinton steps down in early 2001. Clinton signed the treaty in 1996 and sent it to the Senate the following year. Many of the treaty's Republican opponents argue that the U.S. inventory of nuclear weapons will deteriorate without adequate testing and that the treaty itself is impossible to verify. The United States ceased nuclear testing in 1992 and the White House says the U.S. arsenal can be maintained through a program of sophisticated computer simulations that costs $4.5 billion per year. The treaty would ban all signatories from conducting nuclear tests and provides for 300 monitoring stations around the world as well as for on-site inspections to verify compliance. According to the Vienna-based Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Organization, 154 countries have signed the treaty and 51 of these have ratified it as of Oct. 5. In order to take force, the treaty must be ratified by all 44 countries in the Geneva-based Conference on Disarmament that have nuclear reactors or research programs, including the United States. So far, only 26 of these have done so. Clinton has said that if the Senate fails to ratify the CTBT this would give a "green light" to countries like India and Pakistan to hone their nuclear capabilities and would deter others from signing on to the document. The president plans to hold an event Wednesday afternoon to make the case for the treaty again, inviting pro-CTBT Nobel prize winners as well as former U.S. military and civilian officials to the White House to buttress his case. Earlier, White House spokesman Joe Lockhart suggested that the Clinton administration was laying the groundwork for the possible postponement of the Senate vote. Lockhart said Clinton, who dined with a bipartisan group of senators Tuesday night to try to drum up support for the treaty, believed there was not enough time before the Senate vote for a fair debate. "The most remarkable part about the dinner was the general consensus that the process that the Senate has set up for this treaty is inadequate," Lockhart told reporters. "To try and do this in eight or nine days is simply inadequate." Reuters UPI Senate Starts Hearings On Nuclear Treaty Updated 12:23 PM ET October 5, 1999 By Randall Mikkelsen WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Senate hearings began Tuesday on a treaty banning the testing of nuclear weapons, as President Clinton pressed on with his uphill case for ratification of the 152-nation agreement ahead of a snap vote. CIA and U.S. Energy Department experts Tuesday testified behind closed doors to the Senate Armed Services Committee on the military implications of the nation Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), which the Senate's Republican leadership last week scheduled for a vote Oct. 14 after a two-year delay. The armed services panel and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, headed by Republican treaty foe Sen. Jesse Helms of North Carolina, Monday reversed earlier plans not to hold hearings and said they would take testimony this week. The White House drew some encouragement from the decision to hold hearings, but remained guarded about the prospects of avoiding what would be a major foreign policy defeat if it were to lose the vote or be forced to pull the treaty. "Even at the 11th hour it's important that the Senate deal with this in a responsible way and deal with the important issues that face us. They will deal with no more serious issue about our security and safety for Americans into the next century," White House spokesman Joe Lockhart said. "Whatever the reasons for scheduling the hearing, it's important that the Senate hear the arguments from our scientific community, from our national security community and from a bipartisan group of former national security officials that it is in our interest," Lockhart said. The Republican-controlled Senate, which has dragged its feet over the treaty for two years by tying its ratification to other matters, last week abruptly decided to begin debating it this Friday, with a vote set for next Tuesday. Clinton, who began a blitz campaign for ratification Monday, has admitted that he lacked the 67 votes needed to ratify the treaty, which bans nuclear testing and provides for a worldwide network of sensors as well as on-site inspections to ensure that nations are not conducting tests. White House officials said only two Senate Republicans were on record as favoring the treaty, but they were hoping other moderates could be won over. All 45 Democrats in the 100-member Senate are expected to vote for the treaty. Analysts said a key voice could be Republican presidential candidate George W. Bush, who has not commented publicly on it. Clinton was planning to hold a dinner for about six senators -- some treaty supporters and some undecided -- at the White House Tuesday evening. He also was planning to speak for the treaty while signing a $288.8 billion defense programs authorization bill at the Pentagon Tuesday afternoon. In addition, the White House planned to bring several security and foreign policy experts in the administration to brief reporters at the White House on the treaty. Proponents say the treaty, which Clinton signed in 1996 and sent to the Senate the following year, would deter other nations from developing and refining nuclear weapons. Opponents argue that compliance with the treaty cannot be adequately verified. In order to enter into force, the treaty must be ratified by all 44 countries in the Geneva-based Conference on Disarmament that have nuclear reactors or research programs, including the United States. Twenty-three have done so, according to the Vienna-based Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Organization. Less than a third of the 152 countries that have signed the treaty have ratified it. U.S. officials said that Washington's stance was key to persuading others to follow suit. WASHINGTON, Oct. 6 (UPI) Three former high-profile White House aides argued that the U.S. Senate should delay its vote on the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, former national security adviser Brent Scowcroft and former undersecretary of defense John Deutch stated on the op-ed page of Wednesday's Washington Post that they "are no fans of the CTBT" but want the vote postponed because the United States needs to learn more about issues such as nuclear programs in Russia, China, India and Pakistan. The CTBT purports to halt nuclear proliferation. Opponents argue that the treaty is no guarantee that countries that do not sign on will not develop nuclear weapons. Kissinger, Scowcroft and Deutch said, Senate ratification of the treaty "is unlikely to have any significant impact" on other countries' decision to agree to the treaty. "For example," they wrote, "no serious person should believe that rogue nations such as Iran or Iraq will give up their efforts to acquire nuclear weapons if only the United States ratifies the CTBT." The former officials wrote that the United States must continue to rely on nuclear devices as a deterrent against attack and to be certain the weapons work, they must be tested. They conclude, "In light of uncertainty, and in the absence of any compelling reasons for early ratification, it is unwise to take actions now that constrain this or future presidents' choices about how best to pursue our nonproliferation and other national security goals while maintaining the effectiveness and credibility of our nuclear deterrent." Meanwhile, The New York Times reported Wednesday that 32 Nobel laureates in physics have urged the Senate to approve the CTBT, calling it "central to future efforts to halt the spread of nuclear weapons." The laureates made their plea in a letter Tuesday sent to every senator, which was conveyted by the American Physical Society. "To line up this many physics Nobel laureates is unprecedented," Dr. Robert L. Park, a physicist at the University of Maryland who directs the group's Washington office, told the Times. Jerome I. Friedman, the president of the physics group, a Nobel laureate at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and an organizer of the letter, said the test ban "is important for the future of humankind, and therefore has to be taken extremely seriously." Test-Ban Treaty: Let's Wait Awhile By John Deutch, Henry Kissinger and Brent Scowcroft Wednesday, October 6, 1999; The Senate is scheduled to vote Oct. 12 on whether to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT). The treaty has many strong supporters and equally vociferous opponents who are committed to its defeat next week. We believe, however, that the treaty's supporters and opponents are both wrong. While we are no fans of the CTBT, our purpose here is not to argue its merits and defects. Our point is more straightforward. The simple fact is that it is premature for the Senate to vote on the CTBT -- at least during the life of the present Congress -- because the treaty is not coming into force any time soon, whether or not the United States ratifies it. This means that few if any of the benefits envisaged by the treaty's advocates could be realized by such action. But if we act now, there could be real costs and risks to our security interests, including our nonproliferation objectives. Supporters of the CTBT claim that it will make a major contribution to limiting the spread of nuclear weapons. But even the treaty's advocates concede that for this objective to be achieved, at least the key countries that are of proliferation concern must agree to accede to the treaty. Indeed, the treaty wisely requires that each of 44 specific countries sign and ratify the document before it enters into force. But only 23 of those countries have done so thus far. For example, India, Pakistan, North Korea, Iran, Iraq and Syria have not yet acted. Many of these countries may never join the CTBT regime, and U.S. Senate ratification, early or late, is unlikely to have any significant impact on their decisions. For example, no serious person should believe that rogue nations such as Iran or Iraq will give up their efforts to acquire nuclear weapons if only the United States ratifies the CTBT. The United States should take advantage of this situation to delay a vote on ratification, without prejudice to eventual action on the treaty. This would provide the opportunity to learn more about such issues as movement on the ratification process by the required 44 countries, technical progress in the Department of Energy's Stockpile Stewardship Program, the political consequences of the India/Pakistan detonations, changing Russian doctrine toward greater reliance on nuclear weapons, and continued Chinese development of a nuclear arsenal. We do not minimize the threat posed by the spread of nuclear weapons. On the contrary, U.S. efforts to combat proliferation of weapons of mass destruction not only deserve but are receiving the highest national security priority. It is clear to any fair-minded observer that the United States has substantially reduced its reliance on nuclear weapons. The United States has also made or committed to dramatic reductions in the level of deployed nuclear force. Nevertheless, for the foreseeable future, the United States must continue to rely on nuclear weapons to help deter certain kinds of attacks on this country and its friends and allies. In addition, several countries depend on the U.S. nuclear deterrent for their security. Their lack of confidence in that deterrent might lead to the further spread of weapons of mass destruction by increasing incentives for them to acquire their own nuclear or other weapons-of-mass-destruction capabilities. As a consequence, the United States must continue to be certain that its nuclear weapons remain safe, secure and reliable. But the fact is that the scientific case simply has not been made that over the long term the United States can ensure the nuclear stockpile without nuclear testing. The United States is seeking to do so by means of an ambitious effort called the Stockpile Stewardship Program. This program attempts to maintain adequate knowledge of nuclear weapons physics indirectly by computer modeling, simulation and other experiments. We support the kind of scientific and analytical effort that is reflected in the Stockpile Stewardship Program. At this point, however, success is far from ensured. In light of the uncertainty, and in the absence of any compelling reasons for early ratification, it is unwise to take actions now that constrain this or future presidents' choices about how best to pursue our nonproliferation and other national security goals while maintaining the effectiveness and credibility of our nuclear deterrent. Accordingly, we urge the Senate leadership to reach an understanding with the president to suspend action on the CTBT, at least for the duration of the 106th Congress. John Deutch was undersecretary of defense for acquisition and technology, deputy secretary of defense and Director of Central Intelligence in the first Clinton administration. Henry Kissinger was secretary of state to Presidents Nixon and Ford. Brent Scowcroft was national security adviser to Presidents Ford and Bush. =A9 Copyright 1999 The Washington Post 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. ------------------------------ End of abolition-usa-digest V1 #192 *********************************** - To unsubscribe to $LIST, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe $LIST" 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.