From: owner-abolition-usa-digest@lists.xmission.com (abolition-usa-digest) To: abolition-usa-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: abolition-usa-digest V1 #497 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 Wednesday, December 26 2001 Volume 01 : Number 497 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 13:05:05 -0500 From: ASlater Subject: Re: Fw: (abolition-usa) Re: Countdown to 2002 Dear Dr. Lau, Thank you for your additional legal insight into the illegality of Bush's withdrawal from the UN. It would be most helpful if a lawyers study group could write a legal brief for the US Senate which will take this isssue up shortly. I heard Senator Biden on C-Span(US cable TV) discussing your point that there has not been the "extraordinary event" required for withdrawal. IALANA, led by the Lawyers Committee for Nuclear Policy and INESAP convened an Abolition 2000 Working Group which resulted in the drafting of a Model Nuclear Weapons Convention. I am copying this message to several lawyers who worked on this issue to see if they would be interested in forming an Abolition 2000 Working Group to prepare a brief on this issue for the US Senate. Many thanks for your comments. Sincerely, Alice Slater At 08:59 AM 12/20/2001 +0100, tom wrote: > > Dr. Joachim Lau > studio legale > Rechtsanwalt > Via delle Farine 2 ( Pzz. d. Signoria) > I - 50122 Firenze - Italia > Tel 0552398546 / Fax 0575592243 > > > Dear Alice Slater > > In the discussion about the ABM-treaty was untill now not mentioned the > evident violation of international law, that once again the USA shall > commit , withdrawing from the obligation of the treaty : > > The ABM treaty was signed by USSR and USA in 26 may 1972, because the two > states wanted " mindful of their obligations under Article VI of the Treaty > on the Non Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons &. achieve at the earliest > possible date the cessation of the nuclear arms race and to take effective > measures towards reductions in strategic arms, nuclear disarmament &. " > > For this reason they agreed in Article XV "This treaty shall be of unlimited > duration." Only in the case that "( a Party of the treaty ) decides that > extraordinary events related to the subject matter of this treaty have > jeopardised its supreme interests" it has the right to withdrawn from this > Treaty. > > > The north American governments are looking since Mr Reagan for a way to get > rid off the bindings and obligations of this treaty and the discussion about > the Star-wars is much older than the terrorists activities of Mr. Bin Laden. > > But in any case the reasons stated by Mr. Bush that "the September 11 > terrorist attacks heightened the need for such a system( anti missiles system > )" and that therefor the USA has the right to withdrawn from the ABM-treaty > is not only bullshit ( sorry) but also illegal . > > The September attack may be an extraordinary event but in any case the event > relates not to the subject matter of the ABM- treaty . > > Until now the USA- government tells ( I don t know for what reason) a lot of > false stories about the terrorists, > > 1. They had not send letters with anthrax (WMD) - > > 2. They did not used or prepared nuclear attacks against USA > > even this terrible event had not jeopardised Americans "supreme interest" in > relation to the ABM treaty. > > > Insomma, the September attack is a pretext not only to start war against all > those other States , which ca in futur disurb the approach to the energy > ressources , but it is also a violation the ABM-treaty. > > Without the September attacks, it would have been very difficulty to Bush to > explain to the american peoples the revoke of the ABM treaty . Or not? > > It seems indispensable that an international independent group of persons , > may be also a commission of the UN - , will start a research and report of > all aspects of the current inyernational crisis , and especially with regards > to the intention of the USA to start another war against the IRAK. . > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "ASlater" > To: "Paul Wellstone" > Cc: > Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 11:50 PM > Subject: (abolition-usa) Re: Countdown to 2002 > > > > We need a champion in the Senate to stop George Bush from unilaterally > pulling > > out of the ABM treaty. Lynne Woolsey has already taken that on in the > House. > > Will Senator Wellstone take the lead on this? If so, I would be happy to > > support your Campaign Countdown. Sincerely, Alice Slater > > > > At 04:25 PM 12/19/2001 -0600, you wrote: > > > > > > Wellstone! > > > Campaign Countdown > > > > > > > > > It is the official Campaign Countdown to 2002 and we need your help now! > > > > > > It is critical that we start 2002 with a strong financial foundation. We > are > > > laying the groundwork for one of the largest grassroots campaigns this > state > > > has ever seen. To do this, we need to raise the money necessary to carry > it > > > out. And we need to raise that money now. It is important the campaign > > file a > > > strong Federal Election Commission (FEC) report on December 31st! It is > one > > > way of showing our opponent how strong we really are. Please take a > moment > > > NOW to make your year-end donation to the Wellstone for Senate > re-election > > > campaign. By pressing the GIVE NOW button you will be brought to our > secure > > > on-line donation page. > > > > > > Let s start 2002 strong so we can win in November! > > > > > > Also, please stay tuned for more details on our > > > Campaign Headquarters Grand Opening Celebration > > > Wellstone for Senate will kick off the Campaign this January with an open > > > house celebration. All are welcome! > > > > > > Thank you all for your continued support, and happy holidays! > > > > > > > > > > > > Contributions or gifts to Wellstone for Senate are not deductible for > > federal > > > income tax purposes. Paid for by Wellstone For Senate, Rick Kahn, > Treasurer. > > > > > > > > > To request the text version or to unsubscribe, > > > click > here. > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > - > > 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. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 14:19:48 +1000 From: FoE Sydney - Nuclear Campaign Subject: (abolition-usa) Send Bush, US Senate a Christmas Message - No to Missile Defence, Yes to ABMT Please excuse cross- postings and multiple copies, and please do pass this message on to anyone that might act on it before Christmas RE: BUSH ADMINISTRATION WITHDRAWAL FROM ABM TREATY - CALL TO ACTION SEND BUSH, US SENATE A CHRISTMAS MESSAGE - NO TO MISSILE DEFENCE, YES TO THE ABM TREATY As it is the last Friday before Christmas, I am urging you to get this off as soon as you can. My apologies for the number of times you may have seen this, but it really is IMPORTANT that people round the world send a strong signal to the US administration and Senate before christmas, that they should not withdraw from the ABM treaty. Do please take action on this if you have not yet done so, if possible before Christmas. - - Urging you all to write to Bush, US Senate, Congress, and your own government if you are from a country other than the US, asking the US not to withdraw from the ABM treaty, and not to proceed with Missile Defence. CONTAINS: SAMPLE LETTERS TO US PRESIDENT BUSH AND US SENATE LEADERS with fax numbers ABM Talking Points (From IPPNW) US House of reps H.RES.313, Email list for the whole US Senate I am urging folk worldwide to take immediate action in response to President Bush's issuance of a notification that he is giving the six months notice required to exit from the ABM treaty. If you are from the US or from another country, I am asking you to WRITE/Fax President Bush and (more importantly) US Senate leaders, to urge that the US government reconsider its withdrawal from the ABM treaty. If you are from outside the US (as most of the world is), you are urged in addition (not instead but in addition) - to write to your own government urging them to urge the US to reconsider. This applies especially to people/organisations from Australia, Canada, UK, Denmark, Germany, and Japan. IT is not too late: The issuance of a notification that the US intends to withdraw from the ABM treaty does not itself constitute a withdrawal - it merely starts a clock ticking that has to tick for six months before the US will actually have withdrawn. That process can be halted at any point. In addition, there are doubts about whether the President actually has the authority to withdraw from the ABM treaty (or any treaty) without the consent of Congress. US Senate Democrat leaders, Daschle, Biden, and Levine, have all denounced the Bush withdrawal plan. There are doubts however, about just how much muscle they might put behind this. In the House of Representatives, Democrat representative Woolsey has recently introduced H.RES.313, which urges the preservation of the ABM treaty. I urge that therefore, both US AND NON-US recipients of this email might like to: 1) Fax President Bush on 1-202-456-2461, urging him to reconsider. (Sample letter below) 2) Fax The following senators, urging them to put real muscle behind their statements (text below) opposing the withdrawal from the ABM treaty, and urging them to use their Senate numbers to prevent the US withdrawal from the ABM treaty: (Sample letter below) SENATOR TOM DASCHLE 1-202-224-7895 SENATOR JOSEPH BIDEN, CHAIR, SENATE FOREIGN RELATIONS COMMITTEE 1-202-224-0= 139 SENATOR CARL LEVIN, CHAIR,SENATE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE 1-202-224-1388 3) If you are from the US, urge your house of representatives member to support H.RES.313 from Barbara Woolsey. (Text below). Whether or not you are from the US, you might like to email the entire US Senate, urging them to - --Support H.RES.313 - --Take measures to disallow the withdrawal from the ABM treaty by President Bush. (Email list for the US Senate is right at the end of this email) 4) If you are not from the US, and especially if you are from Australia, Canada, the UK, Denmark or Germany, you should also write to your own government and ask them to strongly oppose the US move. Ask them to urge restraint on the US government. The clock is now ticking on ABM withdrawal. I urge you to go for it. PLease write the US Senate, Bush, and if you are not from the US, write also your own government. The sample letters, talking points, quotes from US Senators, and H.RES.313 are below. John Hallam (Letter to Bush and Senate leaders below) (Do NOT reproduce word for word - It is best to rewrite this letter IN YOUR OWN WORDS - Best handwriitten not typed. ) PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH, 1-202-456-2461, 1-202-456-2883, SENATOR TOM DASCHLE 1-202-224-7895 SENATOR JOSEPH BIDEN, CHAIR, SENATE FOREIGN RELATIONS COMMITTEE 1-202-224-0= 139 SENATOR CARL LEVIN, CHAIR, SENATE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE 1-202-224-1388 Dear President Bush, Senator Tom Daschle, Senator Joseph Biden, and Senator Carl Levin, I am writing as one of thousands of ordinary people, as well as non-governmental organizations and governments throughout the world, who are horrified by your decision to scrap the ABM treaty and deploy a system of Missile Defence. I urge the US Senate to disallow this dangerous and irresponsible decision. I urge President Bush to reconsider that decision. If the terrible events of September 11th showed anything, it surely was that missile defence systems and nuclear weapons would have had no impact whatever on the security threat posed by terrorists. At a time when the US must work with the broadest possible coalition of nations in the fight against terrorism, withdrawal from the ABM treaty sends a terrible signal to those whose help the US needs, particularly to Russia. As the Russian ratification of the START-II nuclear weapons agreement was dependent on the ABM treaty remaining intact, the scrapping of the ABM treaty will mean that START-II also no longer exists. Russia could well re-evaluate its recent agreement to reduce its nuclear arsenal to below 2000 warheads in the light of the elimination of the ABM treaty. Already, there are reports of voices in the Russian Duma calling for the fitting of multiple warheads on their heavy ICBMs. This would be hazardous for the American people and the people of the world. The world as a whole does not need a system of missile defence. What needs to be done in the immediate term, is to implement the cuts agreed to between you and President Putin at Crawford, and to take US and Russian strategic nuclear weapons off Launch-on-warning status. What the nations and people of the world have demonstrated they want, over and over again in the votes of the UN General Assembly, is the total and unequivocal elimination of nuclear weapons as agreed in the last NPT Review conference. I urge The President not to scrap the ABM treaty. I urge the US Senate not to permit the President to scrap the ABM treaty Yours Sincerely, (your signature) ABM Treaty Withdrawal Talking Points (From IPPNW) According to recent press accounts, the Bush Administration is expected to give formal 6-month notice of its intention to withdraw from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty in the very near future. Below are some talking points on ABM withdrawal. President Bush should not withdraw from the ABM Treaty. Such a unilateral action could negatively affect relations with our allies, could cause Russia to reconsider previous arms control agreements, and is an unnecessary risk. Unilateralism in a Multilateral World At a time in which we are working with a broad-based coalition of nations in the fight against terrorism, unilateral withdrawal from an international treaty sends a bad signal to the rest of the world. Now, more than ever, we should be working with the international community to confront global security threats, not walking away from our treaty obligations. Russia Withdrawal from the ABM Treaty could hurt our relations with Russia. While the Bush Administration should be praised for its past efforts to improve U.S.-Russian relations, withdrawing from the ABM Treaty could wipe out all of the progress we have made. President Bush's decision on the ABM Treaty may cause Russia to re-evaluate its commitment to previous arms control agreements, including its recent statements on reducing its strategic nuclear arsenal to below 2,000 warheads. If, by withdrawing from the ABM Treaty, we encourage Russia to maintain more warheads than they can safely manage, the American people will be less safe. An Unnecessary Risk Withdrawing from the ABM Treaty at this time is simply an unnecessary risk and won't get us any closer to a working National Missile Defense System. The ABM Treaty does not keep the United States from continuing to research and test a missile defense system. In fact, the biggest impediments to a national missile defense system are unproven technologies and cost, not the ABM Treaty. National missile defense--the last line of defense against a nuclear threat--should not be allowed to undercut the first line of defense, namely, the reduction of the threat itself. No decision to deploy a missile defense system should be made until that system has been proven to be reliably effective against realistic threats, including countermeasures. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Quotes from US Senate Leaders: Thank you, Senator Feinstein: ``It's a mistake to withdraw from a treaty before you have something to replace it with. I would be very concerned that withdrawal from the treaty does fuel an arms race.'' Thank you, Senator Daschle: "It=B4s something that ought to have been more carefully deliberated," Daschle said, adding that he was exploring how Congress could respond to the withdrawal from the 1972 treaty that prevents the United States and Russia from developing and deploying anti-ballistic missile systems. Daschle said there are limits to what Congress can do legislatively, but it still has the "power of the purse," suggesting it can hold up funds for missile defense or other White House programs. Thank you, Senator Levin: "Ensuring the security and safety of the American people, especially from weapons of mass destruction, must remain our first defense priority. If I believed that withdrawing unilaterally from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty would enhance our national security, I would support doing so. However, the President's announcement that the United States will unilaterally withdraw from the ABM Treaty is a serious mistake for our national security. It is not necessary and it is not wise... The Armed Services Committee will hold hearings on the administration's decision in the weeks and months ahead. ( for full text, go to =20 http://levin.senate.gov/rele= ases /121301pr1.htm ) Thank you, Senator Biden: "Mr. President, I rise this morning to speak to a decision that I am told and have read is about to be made by the President--a very significant decision and, I think, an incredibly dangerous one--to serve notice that the United States of America is going to withdraw from the ABM Treaty .... Today the doors to international cooperation and American leadership are wide open. But if we slam them shut too often, we will lose our chance to restructure the world and we will be condemned to repeat the experience of the last century, rather than move beyond it. " Woolsey(D-CA) Resolution,H.RES.313 HOUSE RESOLUTION 313 Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding the continued importance of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. Whereas nuclear weapons remain a threat to humankind; Whereas the ABM Treaty has been the cornerstone of international arms control efforts since its inception in 1972; Whereas the ABM Treaty has helped maintain trusting, lasting relationships with traditional allies of the United States and has been the foundation for positive relationships with Russia and other nuclear states; Whereas the ABM Treaty remains an important means of limiting the threat of nuclear war and the proliferation of nuclear weapons; Whereas the ABM Treaty is an important symbol of the United States' commitment to global peace and cooperation in order to limit the proliferation of nuclear weapons and remains an important and viable method for safeguarding international peace; Whereas the American people have made it overwhelmingly clear that they support a reasoned approach toward arms control policy-which the ABM Treaty represents-and not a buildup of weapons system and programs; Whereas the ABM Treaty helps ensure that no country questions the validity of the established and proven principles of deterrence, which remains an important and viable method for safeguarding international peace; Whereas President Bush's November 2001 agreement with Russian President Vladimir Putin to reduce the number of nuclear weapons held by both countries is a welcome and useful step toward global peace and security; Whereas we are troubled by the Bush Administration's desire to withdraw from the ABM Treaty in order to develop and build a National Missile Defense System; Whereas no National Missile Defense system has proven to be reliable, despite numerous trial tests; Whereas withdrawing from, or abrogating, the ABM Treaty in order to continue development of a National Missile Defense System could weaken ties with traditional allies of the United States and alienate friendly, non-nuclear countries; Whereas withdrawing from, or abrogating, the ABM Treaty would destabilize the international relations and could spur nuclear states to pursue a new arms race with the United States; Whereas deployment of a National Missile Defense system presently outlawed by the ABM Treaty would undermine deterrence, thereby increasing tension between nuclear powers and increasing worldwide instability; Whereas a National Missile Defense system would also be perceived by other states as a threat and could hinder attempts to further reduce nuclear arsenals; Whereas increased tension between nuclear powers threatens the stability that makes economic and social cooperation between such powers possible; Whereas the events of September 11, 2001-and the worldwide response to them-underscore the fact that interstate cooperation is extraordinarily important for protecting the security of United States citizens; Whereas a National Missile Defense system would not have prevented the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001; Whereas terrorist groups or rogue nations are far more likely to use simple means to threaten or harm the United States as opposed to the types of weapons a National Missile Defense system would defend against; Whereas withdrawing from the ABM Treaty and developing a NMD system would divert scarce taxpayer dollars and attention away from more pressing threats to our national security; Whereas these scarce resources should be earmarked for homeland security priorities, such as increased airline security, public health measures, and rebuilding those communities affected by the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, that it is the sense of the House of Representatives that in the interests of United States citizens, and all of humankind, that the United States should-- (1) remain a signatory to the ABM Treaty; (2) not encourage Russia to withdraw in order to validate United States efforts to build a National Missile Defense system; (3) continue to work cooperatively with Russia and other nuclear powers to prevent nuclear proliferation, reduce the number of weapons in current arsenals, and facilitate nuclear disarmament. COSPONSORS(28), ALPHABETICAL Rep Baldwin, Tammy - 12/12/2001 Rep Barrett, Thomas M. - 12/12/2001 Rep Blumenauer, Earl - 12/12/2001 Rep DeFazio, Peter A. - 12/12/2001 Rep Doggett, Lloyd - 12/12/2001 Rep Evans, Lane - 12/12/2001 Rep =46arr, Sam - 12/12/2001 Rep Fattah, Chaka - 12/12/2001 Rep Filner, Bob - 12/12/2001 Rep Frank, Barney - 12/12/2001 Rep Hinchey, Maurice D. - 12/12/2001 Rep Holt, Rush D. - 12/12/2001 Rep Hooley, Darlene - 2/12/2001 Rep Lee, Barbara - 12/12/2001 Rep Lewis, John - 12/12/2001 Rep Markey, Edward J. - 12/12/2001 Rep McDermott, Jim - 12/12/2001 Rep McGovern, James P. - 12/12/2001 Rep McKinney, Cynthia A. - 12/12/2001 Rep Nadler, Jerrold - 12/12/2001 Rep Olver, John W. - 12/12/2001 Rep Payne, Donald M. - 12/12/2001 Rep Rangel, Charles B. - 12/12/2001 Rep Rivers, Lynn N. - 12/12/2001 Rep Sabo, Martin Olav - 12/12/2001 Rep Schakowsky, Janice D. - 12/12/2001 Rep Tierney, John F. - 12/12/2001 Rep Watson, Diane E. - 12/12/2001 US SENATE EMAIL LIST email@murkowski.senate.gov, Senator_Stevens@stevens.senate.gov, senator@sessions.senate.gov, senator@shelby.senate.gov, senator.hutchinson@hutchinson.senate.gov, blanche_lincoln@lincoln.senate.gov, info@kyl.senate.gov, senator_mccain@mccain.senate.gov, senator@boxer.senate.gov, senator@feinstein.senate.gov, administrator@campbell.senate.gov, sen_dodd@dodd.senate.gov, senator_lieberman@lieberman.senate.gov, senator@biden.senate.gov, bob_graham@graham.senate.gov, Senator_Max_Cleland@Cleland.senate.gov, senator@akaka.senate.gov, senator@inouye.senate.gov, chuck_grassley@grassley.senate.gov, tom_harkin@harkin.senate.gov, larry_craig@craig.senate.gov, dick@durbin.senate.gov, senator_fitzgerald@fitzgerald.senate.gov, senator@bayh.senate.gov, senator_lugar@lugar.senate.gov, sam_brownback@brownback.senate.gov, pat_roberts@roberts.senate.gov, jim_bunning@bunning.senate.gov, senator@mcconnell.senate.gov, senator@breaux.senate.gov, senator@landrieu.senate.gov, senator@kennedy.senate.gov, john_kerry@kerry.senate.gov, senator@mikulski.senate.gov, senator@sarbanes.senate.gov, senator@collins.senate.gov, olympia@snowe.senate.gov, senator@levin.senate.gov, senator@stabenow.senate.gov, senator@wellstone.senate.gov, kit_bond@bond.senate.gov, senator_carnahan@carnahan.senate.gov, senator@cochran.senate.gov, senatorlott@lott.senate.gov, max@baucus.senate.gov, conrad_burns@burns.senate.gov, Senator@Edwards.senate.gov, jesse_helms@helms.senate.gov, senator@conrad.senate.gov, senator@dorgan.senate.gov, chuck_hagel@hagel.senate.gov, mailbox@gregg.senate.gov, opinion@smith.senate.gov, senator@torricelli.senate.gov, senator_bingaman@bingaman.senate.gov, senator_domenici@domenici.senate.gov, senator@ensign.senate.gov, senator_reid@reid.senate.gov, senator@clinton.senate.gov, senator@schumer.senate.gov, senator_dewine@dewine.senate.gov, senator_voinovich@voinovich.senate.gov, jim_inhofe@inhofe.senate.gov, senator@nickles.senate.gov, oregon@gsmith.senate.gov, senator@wyden.senate.gov, senator_specter@specter.senate.gov, senator_chafee@chafee.senate.gov, jack@reed.senate.gov, qmail@hollings-cms.senate.gov, administrator@thurmond.senate.gov, tom_daschle@daschle.senate.gov, tim@johnson.senate.gov, senator_frist@frist.senate.gov, senator_thompson@thompson.senate.gov, phil_gramm@gramm.senate.gov, senator@hutchison.senate.gov, senator@bennett.senate.gov, senator_hatch@hatch.senate.gov, senator_allen@allen.senate.gov, senator@warner.senate.gov, vermont@jeffords.senate.gov, senator_leahy@leahy.senate.gov, maria@cantwell.senate.gov, senator_murray@murray.senate.gov, russell_feingold@feingold.senate.gov, senator_kohl@kohl.senate.gov, senator_byrd@byrd.senate.gov, senator@rockefeller.senate.gov, senator@enzi.senate.gov, craig@thomas.senate.gov - - 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, 20 Dec 2001 22:05:29 -0800 From: "David Crockett Williams" Subject: (abolition-usa) So.Cal., NAPF Hiroshima Flame Ceremony On December 19th, on her way north from Los Angeles, Nipponzan Myohoji's Rev. Jun Yasuda kindly conducted a small ceremony in Santa Barbara after hours with the Hiroshima Flame at the offices of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation with incense offerings by its President, David Krieger, and by its Youth Outreach Coordinator, Michael Coffey who had met with Jun-san's California Prison Dharma Walk when it was in Santa Barbara last winter. Their photos with the Flame were taken for publication. After the ceremony and after hearing the detailed story of the Hiroshima Flame, of the great difficulty bringing it to the US after Sept.11, and of the 2002 Hiroshima Flame Interfaith Pilgrimage which will carry it from Seattle to the United Nations (Jan.15 - May12), Krieger said that NAPF would help to the extent it could to promote the walk via its network, newsletter, and website http://www.wagingpeace.org Krieger is one of the founders of the nuclear Abolition 2000 network of 2050 organizations worldwide dedicated to the abolition of nuclear weapons and he edited with Carah Ong, former coordinator of Aboliton 2000, a May 2001 book of essays by 18 prominent international authorities refuting the need for the proposed Ballistic Missile Defense system, "A Maginot Line in The Sky, International Perspectives on Ballistic Missile Defense" whose acclamations include a Princeton University International Law Professor's comment: "I think no reasonable person can read these essays without concluding that the missile defense project menaces our national security and erodes our reputation as a global leader." Copies of this book have been delivered to all members of the US Congress with a "Dear Colleague" letter from Rep. Dennis Kucinich, to 100 senior foreign policy makers in the Canadian government, and were on the way to all UN missions this Fall. Jun-san said that she had never been in such a lavish peace office and expressed the hope that the hearts of their constituents would be motivated and inspired by the story of this Hiroshima Flame which has been kept for 56 years revived from the smoldering embers of the Hiroshima atomic bombing as a memorial to one Japanese soldier's destroyed family and which over the years of his mother's religious devotion to keeping the flame going subsequently transformed it for him from a symbol a soldier's hatred over the vaporization of his family by the atomic bomb into a symbol of the universal love of humanity which he came to understand is the only thing which can prevent such a tragedy from happening again. The Nuclear Age Peace Foundation was founded in 1982 by Krieger and by the man who in 1947 became President Harry Truman's speechwriter, journalist Frank Kelly. More on the 2002 Hiroshima Flame Interfaith Pilgrimage and the messages of Jun-san's teacher whom Mahatma Gandhi called "Guruji", the late most venerable Nichidatsu Fujii, is at http://www.dharmawalk.org and posted at the updates and discussion group http://groups.yahoo.com/group/star-wars-dharma-walk including recent posts describing the first American Ceremony with the Hiroshima Flame (arranged by members of "Global Citizens for a Sustainable Existence Now!" convened by Dr. Brian O'Leary http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gcsen) on December 16th at the Los Angeles Peace Sunday event sponsored by the Unity-and-Diversity World Council and the Agape International Spiritual Center. Mike Coffey was given a copy to share of the newly translated Nichidatsu speech "Nuclear Technologies and the Future of Humanity" (also posted at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sun-reach/messages/17 ) and a packet of info from the September 10, 2001, 3rd Global Crisis Solutions Conference with info about developments in chemical physics of consciousness theory related to the new-energy technologies to replace nuclear and fossil fuel power http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gcsc-csun and about O'Leary who will be meeting with CA Energy Czar David Freeman to discuss these new-energy technologies http://groups.yahoo.com/group/new-energy-solutions soon after this Christmas, the 2000th Jesus Christ birthday anniversary. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/third-millennium-project Jun-san is showing and recommending people see the 29minute video "Star Wars Returns" available and described at http://www.enviromedia.com featuring Michio Kaku and Karl Grosman, author of "Weapons in Space" http://www.sevenstories.com and other experts discussing documented official US policy to become the "Master of Space" by installing nuclear powered weapons platforms and nuclear weapons in Earth orbit -- possibly even more ominous than ABM plans. - - 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: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 19:48:01 -0700 From: marylia@earthlink.net (marylia) Subject: (abolition-usa) Critics hang displays at Livermore Lab - the Court Decision Dear colleagues: The installation of the new, 4 foot by 6 foot displays in the Livermore Lab Visitors Center went very well. The multi-color wall displays were created by graphic artist Deborah Reade, and the project was sponsored by Tri-Valley CAREs, Western States Legal Foundation and San Francisco Bay Area Physicians for Social Responsibility. Local TV news and a number of area papers covered it. A good time (and cake) was had by all. These new displays follow on earlier artistic efforts, but are MUCH more eye-catching and are MUCH better at competing visually with the Lab's own displays. In fact, if I may say so, they beat the heck out of the Lab's displays at capturing the viewers attention from across the room!!!!! Many of you emailed and asked me about the court decision that paved the way for the displays. The court ruled in essence that US taxpayer money was being spent on the Visitors Center (by the Lab) and that only one view was represented (theirs). Therefore, the court said, alternative views must be allowed. The Lab appealed -- and lost. The court issued a Permanent Injunction saying that the Lab must set aside specified wall space, rack space and reasonable use of the facility auditorium for alternative views. The court's decision can have a far-reaching impact if community groups want to use it to press for space at similar government (or other publicly funded) facilities. The case number is 531956-1. The Plaintiffs are U.C. Nuclear Weapons Labs Conversion Project, et al. The Defendants are Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, et al. The Judgment for Permanent Injunction was signed February 11, 1985 by Superior Court Judge Winton McKibben (in the State of California). It has already been used by a non-governmental organization, Los Alamos Study Group, to access space in Los Alamos Lab's Bradbury Museum. The media advisory about our displays and the installation event is on the Tri-Valley CAREs web site at www.igc.org/tvc. When our webmeister returns from holiday, we will have JPEG files of the two displays up on the site for you to see -- they are very, very cool -- with very powerful images -- you will want to see them!!! Peace, Marylia Kelley Marylia Kelley Tri-Valley CAREs (Communities Against a Radioactive Environment) 2582 Old First Street Livermore, CA USA 94550 - is our web site, please visit us there! (925) 443-7148 - is our phone (925) 443-0177 - is our fax Working for peace, justice and a healthy environment since 1983, Tri-Valley CAREs has been a member of the nation-wide Alliance for Nuclear Accountability in the U.S. since 1989, and is a co-founding member of the Abolition 2000 global network for the elimination of nuclear weapons, the U.S. Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons and the Back From the Brink campaign to get nuclear weapons taken off hair-trigger alert. - - 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: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 09:51:36 -0500 From: ASlater Subject: (abolition-usa) Report on Whether the US Needs A Uranium Industry Yggdrasil Institute: Can the Nuclear Industry Be Viable > in the U.S.? -- A New Report Asks this Crucial Question > >The Uranium Enrichment Project of Yggdrasil Institute has >just released "A Viable Domestic Uranium Industry?", a >report by Mary Byrd Davis which examines whether the United >States actually has -- and whether it SHOULD have -- such >an industry. It then draws a series of conclusions and >offers up a range of recommendations. A sample: "If the >industry cannot survive without federal subsidies, foreign >capital, and reduced public oversight, it should not >survive." The report also has two helpful appendices for >researchers: descriptive lists of major sites in the US >commercial fuel chain and of US nuclear power plants. > >To read this ground-breaking report, please visit: >http://www.earthisland.org/yggdrasil/uep11_01.html > - - 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, 25 Dec 2001 06:28:34 +0100 From: "tom" Subject: Re: (abolition-usa) Report on Whether the US Needs A Uranium Industry Happy New Year Jo. Lau - ----- Original Message ----- From: "ASlater" To: ; Sent: Monday, December 24, 2001 3:51 PM Subject: (abolition-usa) Report on Whether the US Needs A Uranium Industry > Yggdrasil Institute: Can the Nuclear Industry Be Viable > > in the U.S.? -- A New Report Asks this Crucial Question > > > >The Uranium Enrichment Project of Yggdrasil Institute has > >just released "A Viable Domestic Uranium Industry?", a > >report by Mary Byrd Davis which examines whether the United > >States actually has -- and whether it SHOULD have -- such > >an industry. It then draws a series of conclusions and > >offers up a range of recommendations. A sample: "If the > >industry cannot survive without federal subsidies, foreign > >capital, and reduced public oversight, it should not > >survive." The report also has two helpful appendices for > >researchers: descriptive lists of major sites in the US > >commercial fuel chain and of US nuclear power plants. > > > >To read this ground-breaking report, please visit: > >http://www.earthisland.org/yggdrasil/uep11_01.html > > > > - > 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. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 10:08:32 -0500 From: ASlater Subject: (abolition-usa) Sierra Club signs letter from Safe Energy Council > > > This note comes from the Corporate Accountability Network of the > Sierra Club. I pass it on because George Klein recently told me that the > Lower Hudson Group is joining with a number of other groups to press for the > decommissioning of the nuclear plants at Indian Point on the Hudson River. > > >> >> Carl Pope signed this >> >> Mandate for Securing America's Electricity Supply >> Overview >> >> As national, regional and local environmental and public interest >> organizations, we wish to express our profound sympathy for those affected >> by the terrible events of the past month. Now is the time for >> our country to put aside narrow and divisive interests and focus on >> protecting the safety of all who live in the United States. >> >> Specifically, we recognize that nuclear power reactors pose an unacceptable >> threat to the security of the United States. Commercial reactors are >> extremely vulnerable to attack from both foreign and domestic terrorists. >> The sobering reality is that security of nuclear power facilities can be >> neither completely guaranteed nor perfectly realized. >> >> Current security at U.S. nuclear reactors is unacceptable. Significant >> weaknesses in security were found at nearly one-half (47%) of U.S. >> commercial reactors tested in recent years. "'Significant' here means that a >> real attack would have put the nuclear reactor in jeopardy with the >> potential for core damage and a radiological release, i.e., an American >> Chernobyl," according to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) >> security expert. Structurally, no commercial nuclear reactor is designed to >> withstand the impact that destroyed the World Trade Center buildings, >> according to the NRC and the International Atomic Energy Commission. An >> attack on these facilities by truck bomb or aerial assault, or any number of >> other scenarios could spread lethal radiation, rendering uninhabitable an >> area the size of Pennsylvania, according to an analysis by the Atomic Energy >> Commission (now the NRC) in 1964. >> >> For these reasons, we call for the following actions to be taken by the >> appropriate authorities: >> >> #1. All NRC licensees must demonstrate that their nuclear facilities are >> protected against radiological sabotage by meeting a significantly more >> comprehensive Design Basis Threat (DBT). This includes reactor operators >> currently holding an operating license and applicants for license extension >> or new construction. >> >> A revised Design Basis Threat must both encompass currently analyzed threats >> from ground-based assault, and be broadened to include truck-bombs and >> aerial and water-borne attacks. Before receiving an operating license, a >> licensee must be able to demonstrate that it can guard against the revised >> Design Basis Threat so as to protect against core damage, a breach of >> reactor containment and/or damage to irradiated nuclear fuel. By definition, >> reactor designs that do not feature a reactor containment structure, such as >> the proposed Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR), must not be considered >> suitable for meeting any plausible Design Basis Threat. The upgraded DBT >> must be met through both enhanced physical security features and increased >> security force capabilities. >> >> Recognizing that nuclear reactors will continue to be vulnerable targets for >> some time after they have permanently ceased operation (until the core has >> cooled and the radioactive waste has decayed) the nuclear waste that is >> stored must be protected from intentional air and other modes of attack. All >> permanent and temporary radioactive waste storage, disposal, treatment and >> transfer sites must meet the strengthened Design Basis Threat to protect >> against attacks that could have disastrous consequences. >> >> #2. Congress must reject reauthorization of the Price Anderson Act, which >> limits the liability of the commercial nuclear industry. At a minimum, >> certain modifications must be made to the Price Anderson Act in light of the >> events of September 11 if Congress reauthorizes the Act. Any extension of >> indemnity to the operators of new or relicensed nuclear power plants and >> nuclear fuel cycle facilities should be made contingent upon the >> demonstrated ability of the licensee to protect against the revised Design >> Basis Threat outlined in point #1. In addition, the indemnification of U.S. >> Department of Energy (DOE) contractors should exclude cases of contractor >> gross negligence or willful misconduct. >> >> #3. Congress must indefinitely extend the moratorium on nuclear transport >> and expand it to cover all highly radioactive and radiotoxic waste and >> materials, including commercial shipments. On September 12 and again on >> October 7, Energy Secretary Abraham suspended DOE nuclear shipments, >> acknowledging that radiological shipments are potential terrorist targets. >> In the long term, government agencies should shift their focus from >> facilitation and encouragement of nuclear transport to minimizing the amount >> and frequency of radioactive shipments. U.S. delegates must advocate this >> position when participating in United Nations and other international fora >> that develop or recommend international transportation standards. >> >> #4. Congress must indefinitely shelve current proposals for centralized >> storage of nuclear waste. Such storage would establish additional nuclear >> targets without meaningfully reducing the risk at operating nuclear power >> plants. In addition to the dangers of transporting radioactive materials, a >> centralized storage facility would itself be a difficult-to-secure target. >> Specifically, the proposals for nuclear waste storage facilities at Yucca >> Mountain, Nevada, and on the Skull Valley Goshute Reservation in Utah, would >> irresponsibly create significant targets close to major population centers. >> Design proposals for both these facilities feature massive,exposed surface >> operations, which would establish potentially larger, highly vulnerable and >> more devastating targets for attack. >> >> #5. Congress must mandate that utility-funded security operations be >> increased at existing nuclear reactors and maintained throughout plant life >> and the on-site storage of irradiated nuclear fuel. Current security at U.S. >> nuclear reactors is unacceptable. The NRC and the International Atomic >> Energy Agency have acknowledged that the containment buildings housing >> nuclear reactors are not designed to withstand an attack of the type and >> scale used against the World Trade Center and Pentagon. Since 1991, despite >> months of advanced warning and beefed up security forces, nearly half (47%) >> of U.S. nuclear power plants failed to repel small mock terrorist attacks >> conducted by the NRC. These exercises did not assess the full Design Basis >> Threat that NRC regulations require nuclear power plants to protect against. >> Moreover, these exercises failed to assess the ability of nuclear plants to >> defend against attacks by truck bomb, aerial, and water-borne assault, three >> likely scenarios that fall outside the current Design Basis Threat. >> >> #6. Potassium iodide must be stockpiled with state and local health agencies >> within a radius of 50 miles around all nuclear reactors. While it is not a >> panacea, the NRC already has approved this program in concept, but has been >> reluctant to initiate it lest the public grasp that nuclear reactors are >> fundamentally unsafe. An epidemic of preventable childhood thyroid cancer >> has ravaged children in the Chernobyl-affected regions of Ukraine, Belarus >> and western Russia partly because potassium iodide was not distributed in >> the aftermath of the reactor explosion and fire. The health of thousands of >> children is believed to have been saved in Poland, where potassium iodide >> was distributed following the 1986 Chernobyl disaster. >> >> #7. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) must require the same or >> comparable security for general and commercial aviation and determine the >> practicality of instituting permanent effective no-fly-zones over commercial >> nuclear power plants. >> >> #8. All NRC licensees must provide a risk assessment of the survivability >> from terrorist attack on radiation containment and critical safety systems. >> >> #9. The NRC must take significant federal enforcement action, including the >> suspension or revocation of operating licenses, when repeated licensee >> failure of upgraded NRC-led security performance evaluations occurs. >> >> #10. All branches of government must ensure that the terrorist attacks do >> not result in the erosion of fundamental civil liberties. The hallmarks of >> our free society and our values are manifested and secured in the Bill of >> Rights. Therefore, it is essential that security programs and activities >> clearly differentiate between legitimate terrorist threats and the rights of >> the public to peacefully assemble, exercise free speech, organize and >> educate. >> >> #11. The mixed oxide nuclear fuel (MOX) program must be eliminated >> immediately. Giving the green light to a proposed commercial plutonium fuel >> fabrication plant in South Carolina fosters the creation of a plutonium >> economy and increases the likelihood of a terrorist-created catastrophe. The >> manufacture of MOX fuel for use in commercial U.S. nuclear reactors, >> establishes not only more deadly terrorist targets at the plants themselves >> (due to the greater amount of plutonium in the MOX fuel than current reactor >> fuel), but also creates thousands of transports between the fabrication site >> and the reactors, vulnerable to sabotage or theft. Such a project puts the >> trigger component of nuclear weapons into the commercial sector where it >> cannot adequately be protected. >> >> The NRC must refuse the licensing of the MOX plant and Duke Power must >> withdraw its reactors from the MOX program. Surplus weapons plutonium has no >> place as a commercial fuel and sends a dangerous message to the rest of the >> world that plutonium is a commodity, not a waste to be secured out of harm's >> way. The licensing of a plutonium fuel fabrication plant flies in the face >> of any government's avowal to protect its people from lethal attack or >> disaster. >> >> #12. The U.S. must initiate an expedited phaseout of nuclear power, improve >> energy efficiency in all sectors of our economy and initiate a rapid >> transition to renewable electricity sources. Linked through the extensive >> and fragile electrical grid system, we recognize that nuclear power plants >> are one of the most vulnerable components of our electric power >> infrastructure and present the largest risk of catastrophic damage. As such, >> nuclear power poses an unacceptable risk to our society and environment. >> >> The phaseout of nuclear power must take place within the context of a >> transition to a least-cost, environmentally sustainable national energy >> system, based on full exploitation of decentralized energy efficiency and >> renewable energy sources, available through existing technology. A >> distributed, sustainable energy system will provide numerous economic, >> public health and environmental benefits beyond reducing the terrorist >> threat to our nation's infrastructure. Such a transition will spur >> innovation and channel resources into more labor-intensive sectors of the >> economy, providing the nation with an engine for continued economic growth >> and job creation. >> >> In conclusion, we believe that this is the direction we must take: We will >> either shift from our use of nuclear power to a new era of sustainable >> electricity production for our country, or we will remain vulnerable to our >> reactors and, very possibly, pay an unthinkable price. We can and must do >> better for our families, our country, our freedom and the planet. >> >> Sincerely, >> >> Scott Denman >> Executive Director >> Safe Energy Communication Council >> Washington, DC >> >> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > - - 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 #497 *********************************** - 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.