ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/abolition-usa/archive/v01.n164

Internet Message Format | 1999-08-09 | 44KB

From: [e-mail] (abolition-usa-digest)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: abolition-usa-digest V1 #164
Reply-To: abolition-usa-digest
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk


abolition-usa-digest     Tuesday, August 10 1999     Volume 01 : Number 164




----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri,  6 Aug 1999 10:32:23 -0700 (PDT)
From: Nuclear Age Peace Foundation <[e-mail]>
Subject: (abolition-usa) A Season of Hiroshima

A SEASON OF HIROSHIMA
By David Krieger, President, Nuclear Age Peace Foundation

The season of Hiroshima arrives each August in the heat of summer.  The
first atomic bomb used in warfare was dropped on Hiroshima on August 6,
1945.  Three days later a second atomic bomb was dropped on Nagasaki.
Total destruction.  The flattening of cities, the incineration of all forms
of life.  It is a season of reflection and rededication to the future of
life.

Hiroshima was the awakening of the Nuclear Age.  It was a moment in history
when time stood still.  The clocks were frozen at 8:16 a.m.  The terrible
destructive power of the atomic bomb did not lead to the end of war as had
been hoped.  It led to the end of an innocence that could never be
regained, and to a horrific arms race that placed all humanity and most of
life in danger of annihilation.

Hiroshima taught us that time was not infinite for humanity, that the
future was not assured.  We had harnessed the awesome and awful power of
the atom and, with this, the power to destroy ourselves.

Hiroshima neither was nor is about victory or defeat.  Nor is it about the
Japanese, the Americans, or the people of any other single country.
Hiroshima belongs to all humanity, residing in our collective
consciousness.  It is universal.  We share in its destructive fire, its
suffering, its death, and its resilient hope for the future.

Some very different conclusions were drawn from the destruction of
Hiroshima.  The American lesson was that nuclear weapons can win wars and
are thus to be valued.  The American lesson is an abstract, without people
in the landscape.  The Japanese lesson was that nuclear weapons kill
indiscriminately and that the suffering continues for those who survive,
even into future generations.  For the Japanese, the landscape beneath the
bomb was filled with real people, some of whom survived to tell their
stories.

The spirit of Hiroshima, as reflected in the lives of the survivors, is
"Never Again!"  The promise on the Memorial Cenotaph at Hiroshima Memorial
Peace Park reads, "Let All Souls Here Rest in Peace; For We Shall Not
Repeat the Evil."  It is a promise not only to those who died, but to those
who lived.  It is a promise to all humanity and to the future.  The "We" in
the promise is all of us.  It is a promise to ourselves.

This August 6th marks the 54th anniversary of the bombing of Hiroshima.  It
is a time for reflection and taking stock of where we are.  Nuclear weapons
have now survived the end of the Cold War by nearly a decade.  More than
30,000 nuclear weapons remain in the arsenals of the nuclear weapons
states, mostly the United States and Russia.  More than 5,000 nuclear
weapons remain on hair-trigger alert, ready to be fired in a matter of
seconds.  India and Pakistan have shown their capacity to make and test
nuclear weapons.  Israel has recently taken possession of small submarines
said to be capable of launching nuclear armed missiles.

Before the proliferation of these weapons becomes even more widespread, it
is urgent to de-alert existing arsenals and express the clear intention in
the form of a treaty to eliminate them in a phased and controlled manner.
This would be in the interest of every person on the planet; and it is
disturbing that the United States has not provided more leadership in
moving in this direction.

My top five reasons for supporting U.S. leadership in the effort to
eliminate nuclear weapons are:

1    As the country that created and first used nuclear weapons, the
United States has a special responsibility to work for the elimination of
these weapons.
2    Existing obligations in the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of
Nuclear Weapons call for good faith negotiations on nuclear disarmament,
and many of the non-nuclear weapons states that are parties to this treaty
have criticized the nuclear weapons states for their failure to act on this
promise.  As a leading nation in the world, the United States should keep
its promises.
3    On July 8, 1996 the International Court of Justice declared that
any use or threat of use of nuclear weapons that would violate
international humanitarian law would be illegal.  Since nuclear weapons
cannot discriminate between civilians and combatants and cause unnecessary
suffering, they cannot be used or threatened to be used without violating
international humanitarian law.  As a leading nation in the world, the
United States should uphold international law.
4    The United States has strong defenses.  The only weapons that
threaten the security of the United States and its people are nuclear
weapons.  In a world without nuclear weapons, achieved through their phased
elimination under strict and effective international control, the United
States would be far more secure.
5    Nuclear weapons are highly immoral.  To base one's national
security on threatening to murder hundreds of millions of innocent
civilians is an immoral act.  To place the future of the human species and
much of life in jeopardy as a matter of public policy is debasing to a
society.  The United States should assert moral as well as pragmatic
leadership on this issue.

General George Lee Butler, a former Commander-in-Chief of the U.S.
Strategic Command, has become an ardent advocate of eliminating nuclear
weapons.  When he was in Santa Barbara in April to receive the Nuclear Age
Peace Foundation's 1999 Distinguished Peace Leadership Award, he argued,
"What is at stake here is our capacity to move ever higher the bar of
civilized behavior.  As long as we sanctify nuclear weapons as the ultimate
arbiter of conflict, we will have forever capped our capacity to live on
this planet according to a set of ideals that value human life and eschew a
solution that continues to hold acceptable the shearing away of entire
societies.   That simply is wrong.  It is morally wrong, and it ultimately
will be the death of humanity."

Throughout the world the season of Hiroshima will be commemorated by a
reaffirmation of the spirit of Hiroshima, and by protesting the continued
reliance on nuclear weapons by a small number of nations.  Information on
Hiroshima related events can be found on the worldwide web at
http://www.wagingpeace.org, the web site of the Nuclear Age Peace
Foundation.

Wherever you live, take note of this season, and spend some time in
contemplation on the meaning for humanity of the historic, somber events
which took place on August 6 and 9, 1945.  Take time also to encourage your
political leaders to move ahead on negotiations for the global elimination
of nuclear weapons.  It is the only way to assure that there will be no
more Hiroshimas.




- -
 To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 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, 6 Aug 1999 16:49:12 -0700
From: "David Crockett Williams" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (abolition-usa) "Cold Fusion" & RadWaste Remediation overview

From: Hal Fox <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
Subject: US Patent Office letter
Date: Friday, August 06, 1999 4:09 PM

Concerning the US Patent office and new energy research patents
involving cold fusion :

FUSION INFORMATION CENTER, Inc.
3084 East 3300 So.
SALT LAKE CITY, UT  84109
Voice: 801-466-8680  Fax: [phone]

August 3, 1999

To: Special Agent
Office of the Inspector General
Commerce Department
Room 7614
14th and Constitution, NW
Washington, DC  20230
Voice 202 482-0909 Fax [phone]

Dear Ms. Kimberlee Taylor,

Dr. Mitchell Swartz has informed me that you are interested in
information regarding cold fusion and low-energy nuclear reactions and
the policy of the Office of Patents and Trademarks with respect to
patent applications.  The following information may be of some interest:

A.  BACKGROUND

As the director of the first research laboratory at the University of
Utah Research Park, I was intensely interested in the March 23, 1989
announcement called by the University of Utah administration (not called
by Pons and Fleischmann).  The announcement of a new source of energy
was most exciting to me.  That day I began the plans for trying to be of
some help (systems engineering background, missile system specialist for
several years).  By mid April 1989 we had organized the Fusion
Information Center and obtained offices at the University of Utah
Research Park.

By July 1989, we had decided that information gathering and publishing
such information would be our best role.  Our first edition of Fusion
Facts was published in July 1989 and continued as a monthly publication
for several years before being incorporated as a part of the Journal of
New Energy, a peer-reviewed, quarterly, scientific journal (abstracted
from the first issue by Chemical Abstracts -- the world's foremost
scientific abstracting organization).


B.  THE ATTACKS ON COLD FUSION

By the fall of 1989 it was apparent that someone had organized and was
carrying out a campaign against the new technology of cold fusion.  Here
are the facts, insofar, as we have been able to gather and publish the
facts.  Please note that all of this was done in secrecy (except for the
ERAB sub committee).

A subcommittee of the Energy Research Advisory Board traveled to various
laboratories where successes in cold fusion had been claimed.  If the
research was measuring neutrons, they were told that it was background
radiation.  If the researcher was getting tritium, they were told that
it was contamination.  If excess heat was being produced, they were told
that they didn't have proper calorimetry.  Except for one small
paragraph in the ERAB final report, demanded by one of the honest
members of the committee, the report was entirely negative of cold
fusion.

An arrangement was made for someone in the Office of Patents (any type
of coercion or reward is unknown) to ensure that no cold fusion patent
application was accepted for patenting.  Each person, as far as we have
been able to determine, wAS sent the same information:  a copy of a
newspaper article from the New York Times saying that cold fusion
doesn't work; a copy of the paper by 16 Ph.D.s from MIT stating that
they could not replicate cold fusion (this is the paper where the
authors removed the data showing that they did get a small amount of
excess heat).

A person (representing powers-that-be in Washington, D.C.) called many
of the physics and chemistry departments at major universities in the
United States.  Here was his message as relayed to me from one such
department:  "If you have so much as a graduate student working on cold
fusion, you will get no contracts out of Washington."

All of the editors of the major scientific journals were contacted and
were instructed not to publish articles on cold fusion.  All editors but
one then set up barriers against cold fusion publications.  The one
editor who did not accept that type of instruction was Professor George
Miley, editor until this year of Fusion Technology, the international
journal of the American Nuclear Society.

An amount of $30,000 (or $40,000 - different sources) was given to
Random House to have a "hatchet job" done against cold fusion.  The
result was the widely acclaimed (by orchestration) book by Gary Taubes,
Bad Science, The Short Life and Weird Times of Cold Fusion c 1993.  For
one knowledgeable on the cold fusion development, it is obvious that
this book was a deliberate hatchet job.

In addition to the above well-orchestrated activities, some appointed,
or self-appointed scientists have been very active in traveling to
conventions, etc. and doing their best to challenge any positive cold
fusion results.  Two of these are (were) Dr. Douglas R.O. Morrison
(CERN, Switzerland) and Professor John R. Huizenga of University of
Rochester (chairman of the ERAB sub committee, if my memory is correct).

One of the most active protagonists has been Robert Parks, with some
association with the American Physical Society.  (The current president
of the American Physical Society, in a recent conversation, denies that
Robert Parks speaks for the society.)  Parks was instrumental in
preventing a recent conference from being held in a proffered auditorium
in a government facility.  Parks has an email list of many people in the
DOE and about once a month or more often sends out statements that
ridicule any cold fusion or low-energy nuclear reaction experiments,
papers, books, etc.

Please recognize that this was a very-well thought-out and orchestrated
scheme to destroy cold fusion.  These were clever and well-done
operations.  We have been told that were it not for Fusion Facts and its
rapid exchange of information of successes in various parts of the
world, cold fusion would have been dead.  That is more credit than we
deserve.


C.  THE COLLECTION OF PROFESSIONAL PAPERS

The Fusion Information Center, Inc. is believed to have accumulated the
world's largest collection of papers on cold nuclear fusion,
new-hydrogen energy (the Japanese label), low-energy nuclear reactions,
and other enhanced energy papers.  We have collected and reviewed over
3,000 papers on cold fusion and low-energy nuclear reactions, read the
papers, written reviews, and published the reviews.  Over 600 papers
from over 200 laboratories in 30 countries report some successes in
replicating or extending the original work of Pons and Fleischmann.  Dr.
Mitchell Swartz and I have presented papers on this extensive review of
the literature.

In addition, this office has published New Energy News, for the past six
years.  All members of the Institute of New Energy receive this
newsletter.  In addition, beginning in January 1996, this office began
publishing the Journal of New Energy, a quarterly, peer-reviewed,
scientific journal.  The reason was the lack of professional journals
that would publish some of the new-energy and new-science papers.  For
example, we have published six papers about torsion field fluctuations
which report on formerly highly-secret work done by over 25 laboratories
in the former USSR.  This journal has published two issues providing the
proceedings of two International Conferences on Low-Energy Nuclear
Reactions.

All of this published information (Fusion Facts, New Energy News, &
Journal of New Energy), covering a ten-year period, have now been
published on a CD-ROM.  If a copy of this CD-ROM would be of interest to
you, we would be pleased to send you a copy.

D.  THE ROLE OF THE DOE

As is well-known, political appointees to government agencies come and
go but the real work of the agency is accomplished by the network of
civil servants who bear the burden of continuing and exercising the
Congressional mandates for their offices.

Here is a summary of the current situation in DOE:

The DOE is required by law to handle the disposition of all high-level
nuclear wastes including weapons-related liquid wastes (such as at the
Hanford Site, Washington state) and the spent-fuel pellets from nuclear
power plants and from nuclear submarines.  In about 1993 or 1994 a
contact was given to the National Research Council to prepare a study on
the best methods for separation and/or transmutation of nuclear wastes.
The result was the following large publication printed and distributed
in 1996:
Nuclear Wastes: Technologies for Separations and Transmutation,
Committee on Separations Technology and Transmutation Systems, Board on
Radioactive Waste Management, Commission on Geosciences, Environment,
and Resources, National Research Council, published by National Academy
Press, Washington, D.C. c1996 by the National Academy of Sciences.

It is not known if the contract was awarded with counsel and advice on
the expected outcome.  However, the end result was a statement to the
effect that there is no known method of handling radioactive wastes that
is more cost-effective than geologic storage.  That has been and still
is the major objective of the DOE - geologic storage.  Any proposals
that claim to have new technology that will stabilize high-level
radioactive wastes are rejected.  In one DOE document asking for
proposals, it was explicitly stated that no cold fusion proposals would
be accepted.

Several laboratories, included our own, has demonstrated that there is
technology that appears to be effective in transmuting radioactive
wastes.  None of this work, to our knowledge, is government funded.
Apparently, the network of those opposing cold fusion and other
low-energy nuclear reactions is most effective throughout the DOE as
well as in the appropriate division of the Office of Patents.  It is
believed that this opposition group is mainly related to the hot-fusion
community of scholars and lobbyists and that the activities are being
largely supported by federal funds provided to the hot fusion community.

If you have any questions or would like to have more information, I
would be pleased to help in any way that I can, including my personal
testimony in any hearings.

Best personal regards,

Hal Fox, President, Fusion Information Center,
  Editor, FF, NEN, and JONE
http://www.padrak.com/ine




- -
 To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 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, 9 Aug 1999 14:04:30 -0700
From: "David Crockett Williams" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (abolition-usa) Y2K and the threat of global nuclear catastrophe

http://www.peg.apc.org/~guardian/guardian/965y2k.htm

The Guardian August 4, 1999

Y2K and the threat of global nuclear catastrophe


by Dr Hannah Middleton

Year 2000 (Y2K) problems are likely to affect the computer systems that
coordinate strategic nuclear weapons systems. Many respected experts are
warning that due to Y2K problems these systems, both in the US and Russia=
,
pose an unacceptable risk of accidental nuclear war. The immediate stakes
are so high, and the potential for global catastrophe so clear, that
mutually verified de-alerting in the face of the Y2K computer problem mus=
t
take precedence over all other considerations of politics and national
security.

The largest, oldest, and least Y2K compliant computerised systems in the
world are those that are part of the communications, command, control and
intelligence functions of the strategic nuclear weapons complexes of Russ=
ia
and the US.

The US Y2K compliance program for strategic nuclear weapons is not expect=
ed
to be anywhere near complete by December 1999. Similarly, the Russian
strategic nuclear weapon system will be subject to massive Y2K problems.

The Y2K problem

The Y2K problem is buried in millions of lines of software code that use
two digits to represent four-digit years. That will lead some software
around the world to read "00" not as 2000, but 1900, and possibly cause
computers to crash or issue false data. No one knows for sure what will
happen.

The biggest fear is that, even in modernised nations that have been worki=
ng
to lessen the impact of Y2K, a cascading effect will occur.

A US Senate Y2K panel reported that: "The interdependent nature of
technology systems makes the severity of possible disruptions difficult t=
o
predict.

An audit of one US nuclear reactor, conducted by the US Nuclear Regulator=
y
Commission, revealed that a single nuclear power plant had 1,304 separate
software items and embedded chips affected by the Y2K bug.

In the worst-case scenario, even systems that are Y2K compliant will be
infected with the Y2K bug as a result of their connection to non-complian=
t
systems. They, in turn, will contaminate others.

The nuclear hair-trigger

Both the US and Russia continue to keep the bulk of their nuclear missile=
s
on high level alert. Within just a few minutes of receiving instructions =
to
fire, a large fraction of the US and Russian land-based rockets (which ar=
e
armed with about 2,000 and 3,500 warheads respectively) could begin their
25-minute flights over the North Pole to their targets.

Less than 15 minutes after receiving the order to attack, six US Trident
submarines at sea could fire about 1,000 warheads and several Russian
ballistic missile submarines could launch between 300 and 400.

In sum, the two major nuclear weapons states are ready to fire a total of
more than 5,000 nuclear weapons at each other within half an hour.

Both powers operate a "launch on warning" policy, with nuclear forces in =
a
constant state of readiness to launch nuclear weapons on the mere warning
of an attack.

The rushed nature of the process, from warning to decision to action in 1=
5
minutes or so, risks causing an apocalyptic mistake. The possibility of
accidents is made worse by the Y2K problem.

US bases in Australia

At the stroke of midnight on December 31, inhabitants of the small Pacifi=
c
islands will become the first people to enter the year 2000. They will be
followed by the first industrialised countries =97 New Zealand, Australia
and Japan.

American officials will be watching to see how the Y2K phenomenon affects
them, to find out what happens when modern, computer-reliant nations cros=
s
into the new millennium?

The US military will be watching what happens at its military facilities =
in
Australia since any malfunctions in its nuclear command and control syste=
m
will show up first in the US bases, especially the ballistic missile laun=
ch
detection and other satellite intelligence collection systems at Pine Gap=
,
and the Trident submarine communications transmitter site at North West
Cape.

Nuclear accident

The greatest concern is that Y2K will cause malfunctions in the early
warning network and command-and-control system of the nuclear weapon
states, leading to an accidental or mistaken launch command.

The fallibility of these early warning systems has been demonstrated by
false alarms and even the accidental transmission of launch codes which
have occurred at both US and Russian nuclear missile installations, cause=
d
by computer error or misinterpretation of data.

On January 25, 1995, for example, a Russian radar warning system detected=
 a
rocket launch off Norway.

A ballistic missile launched from a US submarine in those waters could hi=
t
Moscow within 15 minutes, so an alert message was sent up the command cha=
in
all the way to Russian President Boris Yeltsin, who for the first time in
an emergency activated the "nuclear briefcase" carried by Russian leaders.

The unidentified "missile" turned out to be a US weather probe launched b=
y
the Norwegians.

Eliminating the risk

The risk of accidental nuclear war, however small, is not a risk the plan=
et
and humanity should be subjected to.

And the risk can be eliminated by taking nuclear weapons off hair-trigger
alert.

The Canberra Commission, organised by the Australian Government in 1996,
strongly recommended that strategic nuclear missiles be taken off hair-
trigger alert as a first step toward the elimination of nuclear weapons.

Whether it is seen as a first step to elimination of nuclear weapons, or =
as
a simple commonsense measure to ensure that we do not greet the new
millennium with global nuclear catastrophe, de-alerting makes good sense.

If strategic nuclear weapons are taken off alert, accidental nuclear war
between the US and Russia cannot happen. De-alerting will cost nothing an=
d
it can improve the atmosphere of trust between the nuclear powers. It can
be implemented by simple executive order.

There should be a "safety first" approach to Y2K and nuclear arsenals.

The only responsible solution is for them all to be taken off alert statu=
s,
preferably with the decoupling of nuclear warheads from delivery vehicles.
All strategic and tactical nuclear weapons should be placed in a status i=
n
which at least hours and preferably days would be required to launch them.

World-wide campaign

The danger that a Y2K-related computer malfunction could trigger an
accidental global nuclear war has impelled more than 170 international
peace, environmental, anti-nuclear, trade union, and church groups to wri=
te
to Presidents Yeltsin and Clinton, demanding that strategic nuclear weapo=
ns
be taken off their current hair-trigger launch status over the Y2K period.

The letter is being released on Hiroshima Day in Sydney, Adelaide,
Auckland, Moscow, London, New York, San Francisco, Toronto, and Costa Ric=
a.

You can help

Write to Foreign Minister Alexander Downer, asking him to make
representations to Presidents Clinton and Yeltsin to take strategic nucle=
ar
weapons off hair-trigger alert during the Y2K rollover period.

Back to index page


- -
 To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 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, 09 Aug 1999 17:29:26 -0400
From: Bob Tiller <[e-mail]>
Subject: (abolition-usa) Re: [y2k-nuclear] PACIFICA RADIO & PROGRAMMING FOR Y2K/NUKES

Good suggestion.  I would also encourage people to contact:
   -their local newspapers
   -their local radio stations, especially talk shows
   -their local television stations, including community cable programs
   -their local universities
   -national media such as NPR, Mutual Radio, AP, CNN

Shalom,
Bob Tiller



[e-mail] wrote:

>     Friends,
>              Our campaigns, both WASH - World Atomic Safety Holiday and the drive being spear headed by John Hallum strictly
> for de-alerting nuclear weapons in light of Y2K  obviously need as much media attention as possible. Hence, I'd like to
> suggest that we contact 3 sources via e-mail. Those sources are Pacifia radio's New Department[http://www.pacifica.org] at:
> [e-mail]  and Pacifica radio's "Democracy Now" at: [e-mail]   and "The Nation" magazine at:
> [e-mail]   ALL OF US, if we take just a few minutes  to contact these  sources may be able to make the difference
> as to whether this does or doesn't get out to enough people to make the difference as to whether a catastrophe[s] are
> prevented. We don't need any more Chernobyls or India and Pakistan accidently annihilating each other and spreading massive
> amounts of radiation throughout huge parts of the planet. See http://www.nirs.org   Any idea[s]/feedback are appreciated.
>
>    -Bill Smirnow
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> GET WHAT YOU DESERVE! A NextCard Platinum VISA: DOUBLE Rewards points,
> NO annual fee & rates as low as 9.9% FIXED APR. Apply online today!
> http://clickhere.egroups.com/click/606
>
> eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/y2k-nuclear
> http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications


- -
 To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 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, 10 Aug 1999 11:59:13 +1000
From: FoE Sydney - Nuclear Campaign <[e-mail]>
Subject: (abolition-usa) Re: [y2k-nuclear] Re: If one doesn't get us, the other will

At 10:32 AM +1000 8/8/99, Alan Phillips wrote:

Dear Alan,
Again I think I agree with a lot of what you are saying.

However, I do think that we need to at least put the political pressure
'on' for what we want.
It is a rule of politics that when you ask for something you might get a
part of what you ask - but if you only ask for that part in the first place
you don't get even that!

So I think that we have to be realistic and hard - nosed about our chances,
but still ask straightforwardly for for what we really think is essential.
- - Essential for the survival of life on the planet.

I guess that the other consideration is that for some of us - and even I
suspect for you, judging on what you've just written - this is truly a
'life and death' issue.

Failure to de- alert or failure to close down non y2k compliant nuke
reactors may well mean disaster. If it's just 'too difficult' for
governments, we just have to try harder because there really just isn't any
alternative.

Of course we might be lucky, and the grace of God may just get us through.
Let's hope it does, and those of you who believe in prayer, make use of it!

More specifically, in the case of Launch-on warning, it is precisely the
committment to LOW that makes de-alerting difficult. If we de- alert, then
no LOW.

Putting it the other way round, if we get rid of LOW, we have effectively
de- alerted, or semi- de- alerted. That is to say, we've ensured that there
is no hairtrigger response, which is effectively what we want over the
rollover period.

So we might as well ask for de- alerting, whilst providing positive
reinforcement for ANY move toward making the planet a bit safer place,
whether by getting rid of LOW, by instituting a 'strategic stabiluty
centre', or whatever.

I am very much worried by the fact that there has been so much
foot-dragging on the strategic stability centre.

Finally, I do think/hope that the very fact of our asking so loudly for
nuke weapons to be taken off hairtrigger alert, will push the US and
Russian governments, one way or another, to take SOME measures if not
exactly the ones we ask for, that are helpful, and help to ensure our
survival.

Let's be clear about our short - term objectives - surviving Y2K - our
medium term objective ( getting nuke - weapons de- alerted on a more
longterm basis, as per Canberra Commisssion reccommendations and numerous
UNGA resolutions) and  our long- term objective - (implementing the ICJ
opinion that nuke weapons are in fact illegal.)

I hope this all helps.

On a more practical level, I would like to suggest that within the next
couple of weeks we organise a letterwriting/faxing campaign to Yeltsin and
Clinton, asking for them to take weapons off hairtrigger alert over the y2k
rollover period.

Note however that I am NOT suggesting that we instantly do it right now.
Soon, though. Please wait a bit, so e can evolve an appropriate line,
organise model letters, select a date and appropriate targets, and not go
off half- cocked!

>Tom and John,
>
>My message to this listserver, which I think was titled "Y2K and
>Accidental Nuclear War" or "Y2K and Launch on Warning", was copied to
>several lists in Canada and somewhat unwittingly I seem to have started
>a campaign with the catch phrase "NO L-O-W 1999".
>
>I would like to explain my reasons for such a limited objective.
>
>Tom wrote: "The danger is more real even than nuclear missiles going
>off".  If you mean 'more probable' then I feel sure you are right.
>However, if you take "risk" as the probability of some accident
>*multiplied by* a measure of the amount of damage it would cause, the
>picture is different.  The unique disaster of a full-scale nuclear war
>between Russia and U.S.A. would be complete destruction of civilization,
>at least in the northern hemisphere and perhaps over the whole world,
>with the possibility of extinction of the human species.  So you have to
>multiply the probability by an almost infinite amount of damage.
>
>To act on that alone depends on a fair bit of guesswork, and it is not
>my main reason though it is a factor.
>
>My main reason is that I think there is no possibility of getting
>governments or nuclear control agencies in most countries to agree to
>shut down nuclear generators, whether or not it would be a wise
>precaution.  The point is, there would be powerful arguments against
>doing it.  It would be expensive in money and resources (the extra fuel
>for the non-nuclear generators), and it would increase the risk of any
>minor malfunction (Y2K-caused or other) in a non-nuclear generator
>setting off a widespread power blackout.  Even if the non-nuclear
>generators could handle the whole load, in most countries that use
>nuclear power they would be stretched to their limit.  (I think in some,
>like France, it would be impossible to maintain the public power
>supply.)  I am not saying that those risks do or do not outweigh the
>risk of a nuclear generator mishap - I simply do not know.  But they
>would supply powerful arguments for the people who do not want to do it,
>for any reason.  I feel sure it will not get done in Ontario (where I
>live), and I think not in N.America at all, because the arguments
>against will be strong.
>
>And similarly, on the nuclear weapons question, I would like to see all
>nuclear weapons taken right off alert, with a sure time delay of hours
>or days between a decision to launch and the launch starting.  But I do
>not think governments or military would agree to do that without
>verification.  Setting up verification, even if there were willingness
>and trust on both sides (which there is not), would take many months at
>least.  Such de-alerting is complicated, and needs different procedures
>for each different type of weapon, different for Russian and American
>weapons even of the same class.  Arranging sure methods of verification
>for all the procedures would also be complicated.  If the governments
>required legal agreements like a treaty, we would be talking years, not
>months.
>
>So to ask for something that could actually be done in the time
>available, I just ask them to abandon 'Launch on Warning'.  That does
>not need verification, and it can be done in the time it takes for the
>President to issue an order and the military to pass it down the chain
>of command.  If they decided on the morning of 31 December it could be
>in place by the evening.  It does not need both sides to do it
>simultaneously.  When one side does it, it halves that particular risk;
>then when the other side does it that particular risk becomes zero.  And
>Launch on Warning is by far the biggest risk factor for a purely
>accidental nuclear war.  Also, unlike shutting down nuclear generators,
>there is no reasonable-sounding argument against it, which in the case
>of the generators would make a big problem for whoever has to make the
>decision.
>
>I am not asking anyone to alter their campaign in mid-stream; but at
>least use this for a fall-back position if you get to the point of
>actual dialogue with people in the position to advise a decision.
>
>John, I am sure you were right to keep the message to Yeltsin and
>Clinton to the one point.  If a message about nuclear generators needs
>to be sent it should go as a separate issue.
>
>As Tom raised the question and John responded, I would appreciate both
>of your comments on this line of thinking.  And please say if you think
>these ideas should go on the listserver.  Often if one seems to be
>criticising well-intentioned people working for a cause, discussion
>becomes acrimonious.  I don't want that.
>
>Best wishes,
>Alan Phillips.



- -
 To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 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, 10 Aug 1999 13:32:21 -0700 (PDT)
From: Nuclear Age Peace Foundation <[e-mail]>
Subject: [none]

                 Sadako and the Shakuhachi

     We remember Hiroshima not for the past, but for the future.  We
remember Hiroshima so that its past will not become our future.  Hiroshima
is best remembered with the plaintiff sounds of the bamboo flute, the
Shakuhachi.  It conjures up the devastation, the destruction, the
encompassing emptiness of that day.  The Shakuhachhi reveals the tear in
the fabric of humanity that was ripped opened by the bomb.  Through that
tear we could all be sucked as into a black hole in the universe of decency.

     Nuclear weapons are not weapons at all.  They are a symbol of an
imploding human spirit.  They are a fire that consumes the crisp air of
decency.  They are a crossroads where science joined hands with evil and
apathy.  They are a triumph of academic certainty wrappedin the convoluted
lie of deterrence.  They are Einstein's regret.  They are many things, but
not weapons-not instruments of war, but of genocide and perhaps omnicide.

     Those who gather to retell and listen to the story of Hiroshima and of
Sadako are a community, a community committed to a human future.  We may
not know one another, but we are a community.  And we are part of a greater
community gathered throughout the world to commemorate this day, seeking to
turn Hiroshima to Hope.

     If we succeed, Sadako of a thousand cranes will be remembered by new
generations.  She will be remebered long after the names and spirits of
those who made and used the bomb will have faded into the haunting sounds
of the Shakuhachi.

                        David Krieger
                      Sadako Peace Day
                       August 6, 1999


Carah Lynn Ong
Coordinator, Abolition 2000
Nuclear Age Peace Foundation
1187 Coast Village Road PMB 121, Suite 1
Santa Barbara CA 93108

Phone [phone]  FAX[phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Website http://www.abolition2000.org

Join the Abolition-USA or Abolition-Global Caucus list serve to regularly
receive updates about the Abolition movement.  Both caucus' also provide a
forum for conversation on nuclear-related issues as well as they are used
to post important articles and information pertaining to nuclear abolition.


To subscribe to the Abolition-USA listerve, send a message (with no
subject) to:
[e-mail]
In the body of the message, write:
"subscribe abolition-usa" (do not include quotation marks)

To post a message to the Abolition-USA list, mail your message to:
 [e-mail]

To subscribe to the International Abolition-caucus, send a message (with no
subject) to: [e-mail]
In the body of the message, write:
"subscribe abolition-caucus" (do not include quotation marks)

To post a message to the International Abolition list, mail your message to:
[e-mail]



- -
 To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 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, 10 Aug 1999 17:45:06 -0400
From: peter weiss <[e-mail]>
Subject: (abolition-usa) Re:

Beautiful words, David
                        Peter

Nuclear Age Peace Foundation wrote:
>
>                  Sadako and the Shakuhachi
>
>      We remember Hiroshima not for the past, but for the future.  We
> remember Hiroshima so that its past will not become our future.  Hiroshima
> is best remembered with the plaintiff sounds of the bamboo flute, the
> Shakuhachi.  It conjures up the devastation, the destruction, the
> encompassing emptiness of that day.  The Shakuhachhi reveals the tear in
> the fabric of humanity that was ripped opened by the bomb.  Through that
> tear we could all be sucked as into a black hole in the universe of decency.
>
>      Nuclear weapons are not weapons at all.  They are a symbol of an
> imploding human spirit.  They are a fire that consumes the crisp air of
> decency.  They are a crossroads where science joined hands with evil and
> apathy.  They are a triumph of academic certainty wrappedin the convoluted
> lie of deterrence.  They are Einstein's regret.  They are many things, but
> not weapons-not instruments of war, but of genocide and perhaps omnicide.
>
>      Those who gather to retell and listen to the story of Hiroshima and of
> Sadako are a community, a community committed to a human future.  We may
> not know one another, but we are a community.  And we are part of a greater
> community gathered throughout the world to commemorate this day, seeking to
> turn Hiroshima to Hope.
>
>      If we succeed, Sadako of a thousand cranes will be remembered by new
> generations.  She will be remebered long after the names and spirits of
> those who made and used the bomb will have faded into the haunting sounds
> of the Shakuhachi.
>
>                         David Krieger
>                       Sadako Peace Day
>                        August 6, 1999
>
> Carah Lynn Ong
> Coordinator, Abolition 2000
> Nuclear Age Peace Foundation
> 1187 Coast Village Road PMB 121, Suite 1
> Santa Barbara CA 93108
>
> Phone [phone]  FAX[phone]
> Email: [e-mail]
> Website http://www.abolition2000.org
>
> Join the Abolition-USA or Abolition-Global Caucus list serve to regularly
> receive updates about the Abolition movement.  Both caucus' also provide a
> forum for conversation on nuclear-related issues as well as they are used
> to post important articles and information pertaining to nuclear abolition.
>
> To subscribe to the Abolition-USA listerve, send a message (with no
> subject) to:
> [e-mail]
> In the body of the message, write:
> "subscribe abolition-usa" (do not include quotation marks)
>
> To post a message to the Abolition-USA list, mail your message to:
>  [e-mail]
>
> To subscribe to the International Abolition-caucus, send a message (with no
> subject) to: [e-mail]
> In the body of the message, write:
> "subscribe abolition-caucus" (do not include quotation marks)
>
> To post a message to the International Abolition list, mail your message to:
> [e-mail]
>
> -
>  To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "[e-mail]"
>  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 "[e-mail]"
 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 #164
***********************************

-
 To unsubscribe to $LIST, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 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.