ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/abolition-usa/archive/v01.n191

Internet Message Format | 1999-10-04 | 45KB

From: [e-mail] (abolition-usa-digest)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: abolition-usa-digest V1 #191
Reply-To: abolition-usa-digest
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk


abolition-usa-digest     Tuesday, October 5 1999     Volume 01 : Number 191




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

Date: Fri,  1 Oct 1999 14:23:20 -0700 (PDT)
From: Nuclear Age Peace Foundation <[e-mail]>
Subject: (abolition-usa) BMD Fact Sheet

Ballistic Missile Defense Fact Sheet*

Backgound on the BMD Organization

The Ballistic Missile Defense Organization is a division within the
Department of Defense and is responsible  for managing, directing and
excuting the Ballistic Missile Program.  The three areas currently being
pursued by the BMD Program are:  Theater Missile Defense (TMD), National
Missile Defense (NMD) and advanced ballistic missile defense technologies.
The NMD system is a space and missile tracking system.  It includes six
fundamental components:  a ground based interceptor; a ground based radar;
early warning  radars; foward based X-band radars; Space Based Infrared
System; and battle management, command, control and communications.   In
July 1999, President Clinton signed legislation that will permit the
deployment of the NMD system "as soon as technologically feasible."  The
President and Congress are contemplating the deployment of a system that
has little possibility of success.   Instead of wasting billions testing
undeveloped technology, defense efforts should concentrate on the
enforcement of treaties to prevent the development of other
counter-technologies.

     REASONS TO OPPOSE THE BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE PROGRAM

*The NMD system is costly and inefficient.  According to the Welch Report,
issued in February 1998 by an independent team of missile defense experts,
there have been only 4 successful interceptions out of 17 tests conducted
by the BMD program.  Over $120 billion has  already been spent on BMD
programs.  In a July 29,1999 interview with the Los Angeles times, John
Pike of the Federation of American Scientists noted that quality standards
remain a serious concern, especially when one miss could cause horrendous
casualties and irreparable damage.

*The NMD will threaten international relations and violate the
Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty.  According to the Constitution, only
the President of the US has the authority to carry out, modify or terminate
a treaty. President Clinton has announced that he will make a decision in
June 2000 whether or not to deploy the NMD system.  If Russia disagrees
with the Presidential decision, it is likely to respond by using the same
argument to no longer honor other international treaties such as the
Biological and Chemical Weapons Convention.

*Development of the NMD system will increase the proliferation of nuclear
technology.  According to the Central Intelligence Agency, countries
developing ballistic missiles have the capability to also develop
anti-missile systems.

*BMD programs will spur additional offensive technologies that will
threaten the security of the US.  Russia and China each have developed
numerous countermeasures and probably will be willing to sell those
technologies.

*Corporations seem to be the only ones benefitting from BMD programs.
Companies such as Lockheed Martin, Raytheon and Boeing are being awarded
long-term contracts to work on a project that has almost zero possibility
of success.


Action You Can Take to Keep Outer Space for Peaceful Uses Only

*Write a letter to President Clinton and to your Congressional
representative.  In your letter request an end to BMD funding and an end to
the nuclearization and weaponization of outer space.
*Educate yourself and others in your community about nuclear issues.

For More Information
Scientific American, August 1999
"Why National Missile Defense Won't Work" by George Lewis, Theodore Postol
and John Pike

Websites

Http://www.wagingpeace.org
The Nuclear Age Peace Foundation

Http://www.fourthfreedom.org
The Fourth Freedom Forum

Http://www.fas.org
The Federation of American Scientists

Http://www.psr.org
Physicians for Social Responsibility

Http://www.clw.org
Council for a Livable World

Http://www.ines2000.org
INES, the International Network of Engineers and Scientists for Global
Responsibility

*Prepared by the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation on 9/24/99.  Please circulate
this information as widely as possible, but remember to cite the source.


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.wagingpeace.org/abolition2000

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: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 13:44:48 -0700
From: "David Crockett Williams" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (abolition-usa) AP:  White House Aims To Save Test Ban

http://wire.ap.org/APnews/center_story.html?FRONTID=3DNATIONAL&STORYID=3D=
APIS6VR
6EI00


OCTOBER 02, 16:12 EDT

White House Aims To Save Test Ban

By TERENCE HUNT
AP White House Correspondent

WASHINGTON (AP) =97 The White House launched ``a hurry up offense'' Satur=
day
to save a global nuclear test ban treaty, racing to build support for the
landmark agreement while accusing Senate Republicans of trying to kill it
with an unexpectedly quick vote.

After two years of inaction and without any hearings on the treaty, Senat=
e
GOP leaders abruptly decided Thursday to hold a vote Oct. 12.

``This is not what the Founding Fathers meant by advise and consent,'' Sa=
ndy
Berger, the national security adviser, said in an interview Saturday. ``T=
his
is hit and run.''

The administration and its allies accused Republicans of rushing the vote=
 in
hopes of defeating the treaty. Democrats fear they are about 15 votes sho=
rt
of the 67 needed to ratify the agreement.

Trying to build support, President Clinton will speak about the treaty
Tuesday when he signs a major defense bill at the Pentagon.

To demonstrate military backing for the agreement, Clinton will gather
testimonials Wednesday from former chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,
former astronaut and Sen. John Glenn, and Nobel laureate physicists.

Republicans say the treaty is flawed, in part because it would not preven=
t
countries such as North Korea, Iraq and Iran from testing.

``We think it would put us in a weakened position internationally,'' Sena=
te
Majority Leader Trent Lott, R-Miss., said Friday. ``But since there have
been all these calls and demands for a vote, we have offered to vote.''

Traditionally, major treaties are debated at length in committee hearings
before coming to a vote in the Senate.

``There has not been one day of hearings,'' Berger said. ``This process h=
as
been short-circuited. We're dealing here with the most serious and sober
matter that comes before the Senate and we have a hurry up offense.''

The treaty calls for an outright ban on all nuclear testing. It has been
signed by 152 nations, including the United States but it has been ratifi=
ed
only by 47 countries, the most recent Bulgaria on Wednesday. More
significantly, the treaty has been ratified by only 23 of the 44
nuclear-capable countries that must ratify it for it to take effect.

To win ratification, the treaty requires approval by a two-thirds vote in
the Senate. Even if all 45 Democrats support the treaty, 22 other
Republicans must vote ``yes'' for it to be ratified.

The Senate Armed Services Committee will open three days of hearings on t=
he
treaty beginning Wednesday. The treaty normally would be considered by th=
e
Senate Foreign Relations Committee but its chairman, Sen. Jesse Helms,
R-N.C., is one of its foremost opponents. Defense Secretary William Cohen
and Gen. Henry H. Shelton, chairman of the Joint Chiefs, will present the
administration's case.

Cohen is cutting short a trip to Asia to return to Washington for a meeti=
ng
Monday of Clinton's national security team. In Singapore, Cohen said
Saturday that ratification of the treaty would send a strong signal to In=
dia
and Pakistan, as well as other nations, to temper their nuclear ambitions.

A former Republican senator, Cohen said he wants ``to talk to former
colleagues and ask them to keep an open mind.'' Shelton, also in Asia, ma=
y
return early, too.

``It's a verifiable treaty,'' Cohen said, adding that the United States h=
as
the technology to ensure nuclear tests are not conducted.

The United States stopped nuclear testing in 1992 and relies on
supercomputer simulations to test the nuclear arsenal. ``This is about
whether we can stop other countries from testing,'' Berger said.

``For the United States to say, `No,' we're going to go the other way, we=
're
going to go in the direction of the nuclear testers, is crazy,'' Berger
said.


home ] us news ] world ] business ] sports ] weather ] search ] help ]



Copyright 1999 Associated Press. All rights reserved.
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Comments and questions





- -
 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: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 16:43:07 -0700 (PDT)
From: [e-mail] (marylia)
Subject: (abolition-usa) NIF problems: Nature magazine editorial + news article

Dear peace and enviro friends:
Good News -- Nature magazine recently published both an editorial and a
news article covering the cost overruns, nuclear weapons mission and some
of the technical difficulties of the National Ignition Facility. I think
Nature did a good job, and that you will find these two pieces useful and
illuminating. (Hardcopy available on request.) Read on...

NATURE
International weekly journal of science
Volume 401, Issue no. 6750
September 16, 1999

Page 195
(editorial)
LASER FACILITY UNDER SCRUTINY
Sudden and Unexpected Cost Overruns at the US National Ignition Facility
Have Once Again Called into Question the Ability of the Department of
Energy to Build Major Scientific Facilities On Time And On Budget

        When Bill Richardson, a US energy secretary who has spent most of
1999 mired in the repercussions of the Chinese spying scandal, visited the
Lawrence Livermore nuclear weapons laboratory in June, it seems that for
once he had something to celebrate. The National Ignition Facility (NIF), a
$1.2 billion laser device currently under construction at Livermore to
study inertial confinement fusion, was on schedule and on budget (see
Nature 399, 622; 1999).

        It's therefore little wonder that Richardson blew his top when he
found out at the beginning of this month that both propositions look
dubious, to the tune of two years and several hundred million dollars,
respectively, and that this has been common knowledge inside the
laboratory--and, perhaps, in his department--at least since April (see page
201).

        It is not yet entirely clear what issues are dogging the NIF. The
Department of Energy (DoE) says that the main problem is that Livermore's
original plan, for its own scientists and engineers to assemble the
facility's 192 giant lasers on site, would not provide a sufficiently
dust-free environment to ensure the reliable operations of the powerful but
sensitive laser optics. Bringing in a outside contractor with experience of
clean rooms to do this properly will, according to the DoE, delay the
project and rapidly inflate its cost.

        But other technical problems lurk in the background. Richardson is
confounded to discover that the most up-to-date and reliable information on
the status of the project has been arriving from watchdog groups outside
the laboratory, rather than from his own officials. Taxpayers and the
Congress are entitled to share his exasperation.

        From the start, the NIF, the largest component of the energy
department's stockpile stewardship programme for nuclear weapons, has
looked tricky to execute. It is really a cut-price version of an abandoned
$3 billion plan for a laser microfusion facility, and some experts doubt
that it will achieve the fusion ignition promised in its name.

        The project has been justified in terms of the stockpile
stewardship mission, as ensuring the safety and reliability of US nuclear
weapons. But the safety issue is a complete red herring, and the
reliability argument is subject to fierce debate, even inside Livermore
(see Nature 386, 645-647; 1997). The NIF's real function, in fact, is to
serve as a sandbox for US weapons scientists until nuclear weapons
development and testing can resume.

        Beyond that unhappy circumstance, the main value of the NIF is that
it could help to establish the potential of inertial confinement fusion as
a energy source. But the energy interest has always taken second place, as
the project is paid for from the nuclear weapons budget. Proposals to
establish a new nuclear weapons agency inside the DoE, together with the
retrenchment of the NIF to deal with the cost overruns, threaten to further
marginalize energy research on the facility.

        The full extent of the NIF's troubles remain unclear, and various
investigations will soon be under way. They will no doubt focus on how a
$1.2 billion project could be as much as $300 million over budget before
the alarm is sounded; hopefully, the energy department and the Livermore
laboratory will come up with more convincing explanations than those
offered so far.

Pages 201, 202
(news)
LASER PROJECT 'FACES OPTICS HURDLE'
by Colin Macilwain

WASHINGTON-     The Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California
has changed the top three managers of the National Ignition Facility (NIF),
a $1.2 billion laser project under construction there, and is reviewing the
project to determine the full extent of its difficulties.

        The US Department of Energy (DoE), which owns the lab, has said
that one issue--the need for clean-room conditions in the laser assembly
area--accounts for most of the cost overruns on the project, which it
admitted this month ran to hundreds of millions of dollars (See Nature 401,
101; 1999).

        But some observers say that the project is dogged with other,
harder technical problems, including difficulties in manufacturing several
thousand large, precision optical components for its 192 laser beams.

        Last week, Livermore officials were unavailable to discuss the
optics of the clean-room issues. But they are expected to do so after an
initial project review by the new management team.

        The clean-room issue came to light after Ed Moses, then head of
another laser project at the laboratory, began an internal study of the
laser assembly plans in January. By April he had concluded that the
existing plan would not provide a clean enough environment.

        Since then, project officials have been arguing about what to do,
with Moses consulting outside experts, including engineers from Intel, the
microchip manufacturer.

        As this argument raged in June, both Bruce Tarter, the laboratory's
director, and Bill Richardson, the energy secretary, were stating in public
that the project was on time and within budget. The argument only became
public after Mike Campbell, the laboratory's associate directory for
lasers, resigned on August 27, ostensibly because he had not told the lab
that he never completed his PhD.

        As Campbell quit, Tri-Valley CAREs, a laboratory watchdog group,
told reporters and senior government officials in Washington that the NIF
was up to $300 million over budget. Richardson confirmed this within days,
blaming the lab, and announced that an outside contractor would be brought
in to ensure clean-room conditions during NIF assembly. Two other top NIF
managers were replaced, and Moses took over as NIF project manager.

        But Tri-Valley CAREs claims that Campbell's resignation and the
clean-room issue are smokescreen that masks deeper problems. The watchdog
group says its information comes from Livermore scientists worried about
how the problems with the NIF are eating into other research budgets.

        "The cleanliness problem is by no means the only problem," says
Marylia Kelley, president of Tri-Valley CAREs. "Some lab staff are derisive
about that being the only problem."

        Kelley says the optics--especially the potassium dihydrogen
phosphate crystals used to generate the lasers--cannot be produced to
sufficient quality and have been failing under test. The NIF specification
required rapid-growth crystallization, ten times faster than that used in
previous laser projects, to produce these components at the right cost.

        One senior NIF scientist, speaking in Washington last week, was
optimistic that the optics will be working in time. But the Livermore lab
refuses to discuss the issue, and the DoE's denials of these problems are
less than complete. "All of my information is that it is the complexity of
the laser infrastructure, and not the optics" that have caused the cost
overruns, says an official who has been speaking for Richardson on the
issue.

        The House of Representatives Science Committee will probably ask
the General Accounting Office to investigate the NIF. The new management
team and a panel of outside experts to be assembled by Richardson will
determine where the project goes next.

        The DoE says that the problems will have no impact on planned NIF
collaborations in weapons research with the United Kingdom and France,
except insofar as they delay the project's completion.

        But non-weapons scientists fear that the overruns will move the NIF
towards weapons research at the expense of experiments into obtaining
energy from inertial confinement fusion. "It has gradually been happening
anyway," says Steve Dean of Fusion Power Associates, a fusion-energy lobby
group.

        Observers say that the new managers are primarily weapons people.
Also, a reduced-specification NIF that fails to achieve ignition--a
prospect which Livermore officials privately acknowledge--will be more
useful to weapons scientist than to fusion-energy researchers, who need
ignition to prove the potential worth of inertial confinement fusion as an
energy source.

                                        (end)

Note: www.nature.com is the magazine's web site where summaries of articles
can be viewed free of charge.


Marylia Kelley
Tri-Valley CAREs
(Communities Against a Radioactive Environment)
2582 Old First Street
Livermore, CA USA 94550

<http://www.igc.org/tvc/> - is our web site, please visit us there!

[phone] - is our phone
[phone] - 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
international Abolition 2000 network for the elimination of nuclear
weapons.



- -
 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: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 09:19:31 -0700 (PDT)
From: [e-mail] (marylia)
Subject: (abolition-usa) Criticality accident at Livermore Lab/1963

Dear peace and enviro advocates: Like many of you, I am sure, I have spent
the last few days talking to media about the Tokaimura criticality accident
and its various (and very real) implications for nuclear programs in the
U.S. and elsewhere in the world. In that context, I have been calling the
1963 uranium criticality accident at Livermore Lab to the attention of the
media, as well as the more recent 1997 and 1998 criticality safety
violations in the Livermore Lab's plutonium facility. Here is an article
from Saturday's paper on these connections. Read on... Peace, Marylia

Latest nuclear incident recalls 1963 event at Livermore Lab

Saturday October 02, 1999
By Glenn Roberts Jr.
STAFF WRITER, [Alameda Newspaper Group, from the Tri-Valley Herald]

LIVERMORE -- At midnight on March 26, 1963, an explosive sound crackled
over an intercom as researchers at then-Lawrence Radiation Laboratory
conducted an experiment using 104 pounds of uranium.

A television monitor in the control room went blank, and seconds later the
picture of the experiment chamber flashed on again, showing pieces of the
uranium "melting and breaking apart." As in Thursday's accident in Japan, a
fission chain-reaction occurred, releasing a burst of radiation.

Alarms sounded, and all four workers in the building rushed outside. About
22 pounds of uranium melted over the floor of the experiment vault, and
about 33 pounds of the material burned, according to an account of the
accident in a 1964 edition of Health Physics, a journal of the Health
Physics Society.

With a cache of plutonium and uranium and a spotted record in handling the
materials, Lawrence Livermore Laboratory could learn a lesson from the
accidental release of radiation Thursday from a nuclear fuel fabrication
plant in Japan, lab critics say.

There are many steps involved in the handling of radioactive materials,
said Marylia Kelley, executive director for Tri-Valley Communities Against
a Radioactive Environment, an anti-nuclear group based in Livermore.

"Accidents are possible at each step, and no accident is like another. In a
way, that is one of the dangers," Kelley said.

Livermore Lab has had a series of safety violations in recent years, and
the incident in Japan shows the importance of following the safety
practices to the letter, she said.

"It's not that Japan didn't have adequate safety [rules]. The workers
violated the safety regulations," she said.

After reports of several safety violations surfaced in 1997, much of the
activity at the lab's plutonium storage facility, called Superblock, was
halted for several months while workers were retrained and rules were
revised.

These safety infractions put workers at risk of exposure and put
radioactive materials at higher risk of creating a dangerous reaction, said
David Lappa, a lab engineer who has criticized the lab's response to
reports of safety violations.

Lappa, who has said some lab workers possibly violated the safety rules
intentionally, filed a civil lawsuit in 1998 against his lab bosses and the
University of California system that manages the lab.

The lawsuit is related to a report on plutonium safety violations at the
lab that he opposed because he felt it was watered down. He believes he was
subsequently retaliated against by his bosses.

The amount of plutonium that Livermore Lab stores on-site is measured "in
the hundreds of pounds" Lappa said. "It's a very dangerous material to
handle."

While he said the recent lab safety problems may not have been on the verge
of a criticality -- a nuclear fission chain-reaction that can emit high
levels of radiation -- the missteps certainly increased the risk of such an
event.

"They've had very serious problems, as the records show," he said.

"The purpose of the rules is to reduce the likelihood of the accident."

David Schwoegler, a Livermore Lab spokesman, said the lab deals with small
amounts of nuclear material in a dry form, which is much more stable than
the liquid treatment process used at the plant in Japan.

"The events that went on there don't take place here at all," he said. And
experiments have safety margins that are designed to prevent dangerous
materials from reaching critical levels, he added.

He said that the 1963 experiment gone awry was called a criticality
experiment. It was designed to measure a rising energy release as the
amount of plutonium under study was increased, though the actual
criticality event was not anticipated, Schwoegler said.
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
             =A9 1999 by MediaNews Group, Inc. and ANG Newspapers


Marylia Kelley
Tri-Valley CAREs
(Communities Against a Radioactive Environment)
2582 Old First Street
Livermore, CA USA 94550

<http://www.igc.org/tvc/> - is our web site, please visit us there!

[phone] - is our phone
[phone] - 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
international Abolition 2000 network for the elimination of nuclear
weapons.



- -
 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: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 20:51:12 -0400
From: "Howard W. Hallman" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (abolition-usa) CTBT

Dear Abolitionists:

You will recall that in the Abolition 2000 Statement, the third item calls
for a Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.  On October 12 the U.S. Senate will
decide whether the United States will ratify the CTBT.  Sixty-seven votes
are required for ratification.  At the moment all 45 Democrats and three
Republicans have announced support for the treaty.  This means at least
another 19 Republicans must vote for the CTBT if ratification is to occur.
There are approximately 40 undecided Republicans from 30 states who should
be pressed by voters in their states to vote for the CTBT.  This list is
attached.

If you live in one of the 30 states, please get in touch with your senator.
 Get your friends, relatives, and other members of your organization to
contact the senator.  If you know people in other states with swing-vote
senators, get in touch with them.

Defeat of the CTBT would be a serious setback for the cause of nuclear
abolition.  It would make it much more difficult to achieve adoption of
other steps leading to the elimination of nuclear weapons.  Please join
those of us who are working hard to achieve Senate ratification of the CTBT.

Shalom,
Howard Hallman

##

Swing Vote Senators on the CTBT
Address letters to the senator at:
____ Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

State    Senator    Office Building    Telephone
Alaska    Frank Murkowski    322 Hart    [phone]
    Ted Stevens        522 Hart    [phone]
Arizona    John McCain    241 Russell    [phone]
Colorado    Wayne Allard    513 Hart    [phone]
    Ben Nighthorse Campbell    380 Russell    [phone]

Delaware    William Roth, Jr.    104 Hart    [phone]
Florida    Connie Mack    517 Hart    [phone]
Georgia    Paul Coverdell    200 Russell    [phone]
Idaho        Mike Crapo    111 Russell    [phone]
Indiana    Richard Lugar    306 Hart    [phone]

Illinois    Peter Fitzgerald    555 Dirksen    [phone]
Iowa        Chuck Grassley    135 Hart    [phone]
Kansas        Sam Brownback    303 Hart    [phone]
        Pat Roberts    302 Hart    [phone]
Kentucky    Jim Bunning    818 Hart    [phone]
        Mitch McConnell    361-A Russell    [phone]

Maine        Susan Collins    172 Russell    [phone]
        Olympia Snowe    250 Russell    [phone]
Michigan    Spencer Abraham    329 Dirksen    [phone]
Minnesota    Rod Grams    257 Dirksen    [phone]
Missouri    John Ashcroft    316 Hart    [phone]
        Christopher Bond    274 Dirksen    [phone]
Montana    Conrad Burns    187 Dirksen    [phone]

Nebraska    Charles Hagel    346 Russell    [phone]
New Hampshire    Judd Gregg    393 Russell    [phone]
New Mexico    Pete Domenici    328 Hart    [phone]
Ohio        Mike DeWine    140 Russell    [phone]
        George Voinovich    317 Hart    [phone]

Oregon        Gordon Smith    404 Russell    [phone]
Pennsylvania    Rick Santorum    120 Russell    [phone]
South Carolina Strom Thurmond    217 Russell    [phone]
Tennessee    William Frist    567 Dirksen    [phone]
        Fred Thompson    523 Dirksen    [phone]
Texas        Kay Bailey Hutchinson    284 Russell    [phone]

Utah        Robert Bennett    431 Dirksen    [phone]
        Orrin Hatch    131 Dirksen    [phone]
Virginia    John Warner    225 Russell    [phone]
Washington    Slade Gorton    730 Hart    [phone]
Wyoming    Mike Enzi    290 Russell    [phone]
        Craig Thomas    109 Hart    [phone]


Howard W. Hallman, Chair
Methodists United for Peace with Justice
1500 16th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20036
Phone/fax: [phone]; e-mail: [e-mail]

Methodists United for Peace with Justice is a membership association of
laity and clergy.  It has no affiliation with any Methodist denomination.

- -
 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, 04 Oct 1999 11:32:24 -0400
From: ASlater <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (abolition-usa) BMD Fact Sheet

Dear Friends,
At a Star Wars Working Group for the Abolition 2000 USA Network, we discussed
BMD with Bruce Gagnon, the coordinator for the effort to prevent the
nuclearization and weaponization of space, Karl Grossman, Rob Greene, Alyn
Ware, Janet Cuevas, and other savvy activists on space wars.  What Bruce and
Karl emphasized,was that the Ballistic Missile "Defense" system is a stalking
horse for the US Space Command's "Vision for 2020--a report which proclaims,
"US Space Command--dominating the space dimensions of military operations to
protect US interests and investment.  Integrating Space Forces into
warfighting
capabilities across the full spectrum of conflict.ö So as abolitionists we
need
to make the case against all of it--not just ballistic missile "defense"
which
is only the first step on the road to a ruinous arms race to the heavens. The
fact sheet should incorporate material from the "2020 Vision" report in order
to give the public the whole context.  Alice Slater

At 05:23 PM 10/01/1999 -0400, you wrote:
>Ballistic Missile Defense Fact Sheet*
>
>Backgound on the BMD Organization
>
>The Ballistic Missile Defense Organization is a division within the
>Department of Defense and is responsible  for managing, directing and
>excuting the Ballistic Missile Program.  The three areas currently being
>pursued by the BMD Program are:  Theater Missile Defense (TMD), National
>Missile Defense (NMD) and advanced ballistic missile defense technologies.
>The NMD system is a space and missile tracking system.  It includes six
>fundamental components:  a ground based interceptor; a ground based radar;
>early warning  radars; foward based X-band radars; Space Based Infrared
>System; and battle management, command, control and communications.   In
>July 1999, President Clinton signed legislation that will permit the
>deployment of the NMD system "as soon as technologically feasible."  The
>President and Congress are contemplating the deployment of a system that
>has little possibility of success.   Instead of wasting billions testing
>undeveloped technology, defense efforts should concentrate on the
>enforcement of treaties to prevent the development of other
>counter-technologies.
>
>     REASONS TO OPPOSE THE BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE PROGRAM
>
>*The NMD system is costly and inefficient.  According to the Welch Report,
>issued in February 1998 by an independent team of missile defense experts,
>there have been only 4 successful interceptions out of 17 tests conducted
>by the BMD program.  Over $120 billion has  already been spent on BMD
>programs.  In a July 29,1999 interview with the Los Angeles times, John
>Pike of the Federation of American Scientists noted that quality standards
>remain a serious concern, especially when one miss could cause horrendous
>casualties and irreparable damage.
>
>*The NMD will threaten international relations and violate the
>Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty.  According to the Constitution, only
>the President of the US has the authority to carry out, modify or terminate
>a treaty. President Clinton has announced that he will make a decision in
>June 2000 whether or not to deploy the NMD system.  If Russia disagrees
>with the Presidential decision, it is likely to respond by using the same
>argument to no longer honor other international treaties such as the
>Biological and Chemical Weapons Convention.
>
>*Development of the NMD system will increase the proliferation of nuclear
>technology.  According to the Central Intelligence Agency, countries
>developing ballistic missiles have the capability to also develop
>anti-missile systems.
>
>*BMD programs will spur additional offensive technologies that will
>threaten the security of the US.  Russia and China each have developed
>numerous countermeasures and probably will be willing to sell those
>technologies.
>
>*Corporations seem to be the only ones benefitting from BMD programs.
>Companies such as Lockheed Martin, Raytheon and Boeing are being awarded
>long-term contracts to work on a project that has almost zero possibility
>of success.
>
>
>Action You Can Take to Keep Outer Space for Peaceful Uses Only
>
>*Write a letter to President Clinton and to your Congressional
>representative.  In your letter request an end to BMD funding and an end to
>the nuclearization and weaponization of outer space.
>*Educate yourself and others in your community about nuclear issues.
>
>For More Information
>Scientific American, August 1999
>"Why National Missile Defense Won't Work" by George Lewis, Theodore Postol
>and John Pike
>
>Websites
>
>Http://www.wagingpeace.org
>The Nuclear Age Peace Foundation
>
>Http://www.fourthfreedom.org
>The Fourth Freedom Forum
>
>Http://www.fas.org
>The Federation of American Scientists
>
>Http://www.psr.org
>Physicians for Social Responsibility
>
>Http://www.clw.org
>Council for a Livable World
>
>Http://www.ines2000.org
>INES, the International Network of Engineers and Scientists for Global
>Responsibility
>
>*Prepared by the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation on 9/24/99.  Please circulate
>this information as widely as possible, but remember to cite the source.
>
>
>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.wagingpeace.org/abolition2000
>
>
Alice Slater
Global Resource Action Center for the Environment (GRACE)
15 East 26th Street, Room 915
New York, NY 10010
tel:  [phone]
fax:  [phone]
email:  [e-mail]

GRACE is a member of Abolition 2000, a global network working for a treaty
to eliminate nuclear weapons.

- -
 To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "[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, 04 Oct 1999 12:01:53 -0400
From: ASlater <[e-mail]>
Subject: (abolition-usa) Re: Senate test ban treaty vote scheduled Oct. 12

Dear John,
You say there could be a Democratic amendment to the CTBT.  Could that
incorporate the features of Markey Resolution HR.Con Res. 74 which provides
that no funds in the stockpile stewardship program be spent on the design,
research, development of new nuclear weapons?  How can we get this into the
debate? Regards, Alice Slater

Here is an important historical parallel which I recently posted:

Excerpt on the Partial Test Ban Treaty(1963)from biography of Robert McNamara,
Promise and Power: The Life and Times of Robert McNamara:

McNamara's own testimony to the Senate on the test ban--A succinct case,
skillfully argued--revealed new facts about US superiority to reassure the
public and disarm the right... The foes of the test ban in Congress, who were
ready to do battle with Kennedy and expected to gain momentum from military
testimony, were disappointed.  The chiefs did testify for the treaty, because
in the locked room they had demanded an enormous price:  more funding for the
weapons labs, preparation to test quickly in case the Soviets violated the
agreement, and other conditions.  The net effect was to strengthen the weapons
labs, expand US underground testing, and continue the arms race."

You can see the current conditions for the so called "Comprehensive Test Ban
Treaty" at http://www.acda.gov/ctbtpage/ltr_tran.htm; or go to
www.gracelinks.org/nuke/ and click on the section under US Abolition program
that urges us to ratify a "clean" CTBT without the stockpile stewardship
program.

Alice Slater
Global Resource Action Center for the Environment (GRACE)
15 East 26th Street, Room 915
New York, NY 10010
tel:  [phone]
fax:  [phone]
email:  [e-mail]

GRACE is a member of Abolition 2000, a global network working for a treaty
to eliminate nuclear weapons.

- -
 To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "[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, 05 Oct 1999 10:23:45 -0400
From: ASlater <[e-mail]>
Subject: (abolition-usa) Fwd: EGGLETON: Canada willing to defy UN & Intl. Law

Dear Friends,
Thought you'd find this letter from the Canadian Veterans Against Nuclear Arms
of interest.  Peace, Alice Slater

>Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 19:43:34 -0400
>Subject: EGGLETON: Canada willing to defy UN & Intl. Law
>Priority: non-urgent
>X-FC-MachineGenerated: true
>To: [e-mail]
>X-FC-Forwarded-From: [e-mail]
>From: [e-mail] ([e-mail])
>
>4 October 1999   David Morgan   Vancouver BC
>
>Dear Fellow Peace Activists:
>
>Below is a copy of my letter to the G&M.  It is largely the same as one
>that I sent out on 28 March this year, four days after the first NATO
>bombs fell on Yugoslavia. It looks more and more as if  Chretien has
>opted for  Washington/NATO  ahead of the UN and that his cabinet follows. A
>Canadian foreign policy "Grand Canyon" has opened up since the expansion
>of NATO and all of us have to consider whether we are on the UN side
>of this canyon or the Washington/NATO side chosen by Chretien.
>
>Best wishes,
>
>David Morgan
>
>****************************************************************************
>*******
>
>The Editor,
>The Globe & Mail
>3 Oct'99
>
>Dear Sir:
>
>Does Defence Minister Art Eggleton speak for the Canadian Government
>when he says "Canada willing to defy the UN if need be?" (G&M 2 Oct'99,
>"Will fight if Cause is Right.")
>
>"If the cause is ""just"" and allies are willing, Canada is ready to go to
>war again for humanitarian reasons, even if the action defies international
>law and the United Nations Charter," Eggleton reportedly told a Harvard
>conference.
>
>Art Eggleton is thus like a man who says:  "I do not like what my neighbour
>is doing on his property, but if I go to the police it will take far too
>long for the law to arrest him, charge him, take him to court and try him.
>The law is too slow and inconvenient for me. Therefore I will take the law
>into my own hands and attack him myself."
>
>Any magistrate in the world recognizes this kind of thinking.  Any
>magistrate in the world will tell you that this kind of thinking threatens
>society with lawlessness,  anarchy and gangsterism.  The effects of this
>kind of thinking among nations are no different.
>
>Any historian in the world recognizes this kind of thinking.  Any historian
>will tell you that it was international lawlessness and anarchy which
>led to the two terrible world wars of this century.
>
>It was precisely to avoid international lawlessness and anarchy and its
>devastating effects that the United Nations was founded in 1945 at the end
>of World War II, the most terrible war in history.
>
>Us veterans of Veterans Against Nuclear Arms  experienced World War II, and
>many of our members saw front line service and saw the bloodshed and misery
>of this war at first hand.   To us veterans and for many others, therefore,
>the United Nations is a very precious organization, founded, as its charter
>states,   "... to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war..."
>The United Nations Organization has literally been paid for with blood..
>
>To see the United Nations Organization starved for funds by the U.S.A., the
>world's richest nation, to see it marginalized and ignored; to see it
>perverted by Washington into an instrument of death and destruction through
>the sanctions on Iraq, a perversion so cruel, so long sustained and so
>blatant that the Assistant Secretary General of the United Nations himself,
>Denis Halliday, resigned in September '98 from his 34 year U.N. career in
>protest; to see Washington defy the authority of the U.N. Security Council
>by making bombing attacks on Khartoum, on Afghanistan, on Iraq  and,
>through
>NATO, on Serbia; to see all of this,  is an outrage to us,
>as it is, we believe, to most Canadians.
>
>And further, to see Prime Minister Jean Chretien of Canada support these
>lawless, aggressive and brutal acts, to order Canadian forces to take part
>in the bombing of Serbia, and now to hear Defence Minister Art Eggleton say
>that "Canada is ready to defy the UN if need be," causes us to ask the
>following questions:
>
>Does this Canadian government no longer support the rule of international
>law through the United Nations?
>Is this government content to see Washington, or NATO or any other country
>or alliance in the world usurp the authority of the United Nations?
>And finally we ask this question:
>How aggressive, how belligerent and how reckless does the course of the
>foreign policy of Washington have to become before this Prime Minister and
>this government of Canada, will diverge from it, and restore Canada to its
>lawful, proud and widely popular role of a world peacemaker?
>
>Yours truly,
>David Morgan, National President,
>Veterans Against Nuclear Arms
>**************************
>*   David Morgan,        *
>*   240 Holyrood Road,   *
>*   North Vancouver,     *
>*   BC, V7N 2R5 CANADA   *
>*   Tel: [phone]    *
>*   Fax: [phone]    *
>*   <[e-mail]>    *
>**************************
>
Alice Slater
Global Resource Action Center for the Environment (GRACE)
15 East 26th Street, Room 915
New York, NY 10010
tel:  [phone]
fax:  [phone]
email:  [e-mail]

GRACE is a member of Abolition 2000, a global network working for a treaty
to eliminate nuclear weapons.

- -
 To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "[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 #191
***********************************

-
 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.