ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/abolition-usa/archive/v01.n202

Internet Message Format | 1999-10-21 | 42KB

From: [e-mail] (abolition-usa-digest)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: abolition-usa-digest V1 #202
Reply-To: abolition-usa-digest
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk


abolition-usa-digest     Friday, October 22 1999     Volume 01 : Number 202




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

Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 10:21:20 -0500
From: "Boyle, Francis" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (abolition-usa) FW: Scots court rules nuclear arms illegal

- -----Original Message-----
From: MichaelP [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, October 22, 1999 3:40 AM
To: unlikely.suspects
Subject: Scots court rules nuclear arms illegal


This decision is based on  1996 ruling by the International Court of
Justice .


=================
GUARDIAN (London)                    Friday October 22, 1999

Women cleared as court rules nuclear arms illegal
by  Gerard Seenan

The (brit.) government was last night facing demands to order an immediate
review of its nuclear weapons programme after a Scottish sheriff ruled
Trident was illegal under international law.

The calls came after three women who admitted damaging a Trident nuclear
submarine installation were cleared after Sheriff Margaret Gim blett's
ruling that they had been acting to prevent a crime under international
law and had reasonable excuse for the actions.

The Trident Ploughshare anti-nuclear campaigners caused around #100,000
worth of damage when they "disarmed" Maytime, a floating laboratory at the
Faslane naval base, near Lochgoilhead, Argyll, on June 8.

Sheriff Gimblett, sitting at Greenock sheriff court, yester day ordered a
jury to acquit Angela Zelter, 48, Ellen Moxley, 63, and Ulla Roder, 45, of
charges of malicious mischief and theft, ending a trial which had lasted 4
weeks.

The lord advocate is likely to appeal against the decision. A spokesman
for Trident Ploughshare said the ruling left the government's nuclear
weapons policy in tatters.

"The pressure is now on the lord advocate to ask the gov ernment to
conduct a full legal audit of Trident - or to begin criminal charges," he
said.

After refusing to guarantee they would not attack any other nuclear
instillation, the three women remain at Cornton Vale prison, Stirling.

They were arrested by ministry of defence police more than three hours
after they boarded the Maytime, a barge which was part of the Trident
nuclear instillation. The three damaged computers and machinery with
superglue, sand and syrup, before throwing the equipment overboard into
Loch Goil. John Mayer, defending,said a 1996 ruling by the international
court of justice made Trident and all nuclear weapons illegal.

But the sheriff told the women they did not have free rein to carry out
reckless acts.

A spokeswoman for the ministry of defence said: "The ministry of defence
is confident that our nuclear weapons are not illegal and we must remember
that the actual court cases were about malicious damage."

The Scottish National party, which has pledged to rid Scotland of
Britain's nuclear weapons, welcomed the ruling. But the Scottish
Conservative party said it was a charter for "loony pacifists". The women
said they would still support direct action, but would no longer be taking
part themselves.
========
INDEPENDENT (London) October 22


Britain's nuclear arsenal is 'illegal'

By Jack O'Sullivan and Robert Verkaik

22 October 1999

The legality of Britain's nuclear arsenal was called into question
yesterday when a Scottish judge ruled that three women who broke into and
caused #80,000 of damage to a nuclear base acted lawfully.

In a landmark decision, Sheriff Margaret Gimblett accepted their defence
that Britain's Trident nuclear programme was illegal under international
law and that they had been acting simply to prevent a crime.

The judgment, based on a controversial 1996 ruling by the International
Court of Justice in The Hague, caused dismay in government circles. The
Scottish Executive announced last night that an appeal on a point of law
was being considered.

Menzies Campbell, defence spokesman for the Liberal Democrats, attacked
the sheriff's directions to the jury as "plainly wrong". Mr Campbell said
that Sheriff Courts were only at an intermediate level in Scottish law,
adding: "This issue will have to go the High Court which has the ultimate
responsibility in criminal law matters in Scotland."

After the ruling, the jury at Greenock Sheriff Court was ordered to acquit
the women of three charges of maliciously damaging equipment at Faslane
naval base near Lochgoilhead, Argyll. Angela Zelter, 48, Ellen Moxley, 63,
and Bodil Ulla Roder, 42, walked free to cheers at the end of a
four-and-a-half week trial. They were arrested after boarding a barge that
was part of the Trident installation.

Sheriff Gimblett said: "Yesterday I made it clear that the courts do not
allow crimes to be committed to prevent other crimes except in very
special circumstances. There were such circumstances in this case."
However, she warned the women not to believe that they might be similarly
treated if they took further direct action.

Richard Plender, QC, an expert in international law, said he was surprised
by the Greenock ruling. He said advisory opinions of the International
Court of Justice are not binding and they only affect the relationship
between countries, not between an individual and the state. A spokeswoman
for the Ministry of Defence said the Government was "confident" that its
nuclear policy was legal under international law.

However, the Greenock decision will be seen as giving the green light to
further direct action against British nuclear bases and a flood of appeals
against convictions of activists.

Speaking after the verdict, Ms Zelter said the ruling was a turning point,
and called for a full independent inquiry into the legality of Britain's
nuclear deterrent arsenal.



=================================


*** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material
is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest
in receiving the included information for research and educational
purposes. ***






- -
 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, 22 Oct 1999 10:32:56 -0500
From: "Boyle, Francis" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (abolition-usa) BELGIUM: More results from Ploughshares trial

Dear Dan: This is great news. My hearty congratulations to Pol and all the
anti-nuclear campaigners in Belgium. I remember years ago when they were out
at the Nevada Nuclear Test Site and the United States government knowingly
and  criminally blew off a nuclear bomb right under them. Incredible courage
on Mother Earth's part. And then the United States government had the
audacity to charge them with a crime. Well  now Pol and his friends have
struck back: A might blow against the Nuclear Empire!
My best regards to ALL in Belgium. Let the Belgian People throw out all the
NATO  nukes and rid themselves from this  Nuclear Tyranny!
Francis A. Boyle
Professor of International Law


- -----Original Message-----
From: Dan Kinch [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, October 22, 1999 10:18 AM
To: [e-mail]
Subject: More results from Ploughshares trial


Dear Mr. Boyle--

I'm forwarding to you an e-mail from friends in
Belgium. Apparently, the Belgian Prime minister has
decided in the light of the Loch Goil trial results,
to make public the number and location of NATO nuclear
weapons in Belgium. An astonishing turn of events.

This is from Pol D'Huyvetter [[e-mail]]of
For Mother Earth.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Mailinglist For Mother Earth International network
- -------------------------------------------------

For immediate release

                Breakthrough around Belgian NATO nukes
            Illegality of nuclear weapons confirmed by Scottish
Court

Brussels, October 21 1999 - Following years of
campaigning by several peace
organisation, today the Belgian Prime-Minister Guy
Verhofstadt stated in
the parliament that he will soon disclose information
around the suspected
NATO nuclear weapon base of Kleine Brogel.

For the past years For Mother Earth and the Flemish
branch of the War
Resisters International have demanded such openness
actively with regular
'citizens inspections'. Since December 1995 more then
400 non-violent peace
campaigners were arrested during the inspections of
the NATO base. Amongst
the arrested there were famous authors, actors, as
well as MP's from
several political parties. The openess of the
'citizens inspections' which
were based on international law were succesful in
disarming the complete
Belgian legal system.

To this date the Belgian government kept a 'nor
confirmed nor denied' NATO
policy around the probable deployment of 10 tactical
US nuclear bombs
stored in Kleine Brogel. Deployment is suspected to
have started in 1962 or
1963. The controversial US nuclear bombs are also
stored in the Germany,
Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, UK and Turkey.

Today the organisers of the Citizens Inspections ask
to start an open
parliamentary debate as soon as possible. They wish to
confront the
historic July 8th 1996 Advisory Opinion of the
International Court of
Justice around the illegality of nuclear weapons with
the disclosed
information concerning the US nuclear weapons deployed
in Belgium.

                    Nukes outlawed in Scotland

Following over three weeks of court hearings, today
the Scottish judge
Margaret Gimblett of the Greenock Sheriff Court
dropped all charges against
three Ploughshares activists during a ground-breaking
trial confronting
international law to the British Trident nuclear
deterrent. The release of
the three Ploughshares women confirms the opinion of
the World Court
concerning the illegality of the use or threat to use
nuclear weapons .

The ruling of the World Court also called for the
implementation of Article
VI of the 1968 Non-Proliferation Treaty, calling for a
global Treaty
banning nuclear weapons. The peace movement is now
gathering momentum in
supporting a historic UN nuclear disarmament
resolution calling for a step
by step elimination of nuclear weapons. This 'New
Agenda Coalition'
resolution, tabled by amongst others EU-members Sweden
and Ireland, is
expected to be adopted with a large majority in the UN
First Committee in
the first half of November. Especially the US, the UK
and France are
pressuring other NATO members to turn down this
renewed global call for
nuclear disarmament, endangering the complete
non-proliferation regime.
However some peace campaigners expect more
independence and support from
some NATO member states for this timely disarmament
resolution. The refusal
by the US Senate to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban
Treaty last week has
clearly send shock-waves to political capitals around
the world.

==>>>> Contacts, pictures and info for press

* In Belgium
  ----------
  For Mother Earth                Forum voor Vredesactie
  Pol D'Huyvetter    [phone]    Hans Lammerant
[phone]
  <http://www.motherearth.org>

* Greenock Trial in Scotland:
  ---------------------------
  contact David McKenzie or Jane Tallents
  Greenock: +44-1475.785893 (mobile: [phone]).
  Trident Ploughshares <http://www.gn.apc.org/tp2000/>
  Scottish CND website
<http://ds.dial.pipex.com/cndscot/>

* NAC - UN New York
  -----------------
  UN website <http://www.un.org/ga/54/first/first.htm>

end


- -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
For Mother Earth/Voor Moeder Aarde vzw,
Lange Steenstraat 16/d, 9000 Gent, Belgium
Phone      [phone]
Fax        [phone]
Mobile     [phone]
E-mail     [e-mail]
WWW:       http://www.motherearth.org/




=====

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com

- -
 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, 22 Oct 1999 11:43:45 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: (abolition-usa) Re: NO!Scottish  Sheriff worried about her job/Trident2 Condemned

Dear Francis,

I get six (6) copies of each of your reports. I didn't even know I was on
that many lists. Yes, I can delete, but it is a bother. I don't know what
JUSTWATCH is,not sure what tp2000@gn is, nor NUKENET.

Having taken on the "joyous burden" of running as the Socialist Party's
candidate for President, my "spare time" is now very non-existent.

Bless you if you can help cut the flood of Francis Boyle posts. All of value
and interesting, but one can only read things once.

David McReynolds

- -
 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, 22 Oct 1999 10:48:33 -0500
From: "Boyle, Francis" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (abolition-usa) JAPAN:TRIDENT2 CONDEMNED IN SCOTLAND!Sheriffs decision

Dear Friend: Thanks we need to get this Scottish Decision all over Japan,
especially in light of the call for the nuclear arming of Japan  by that
Deputy Defense Head.
Best regards,
Francis Boyle.

- -----Original Message-----
From: Nichigu Asangha [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 1999 9:42 PM
To: Boyle, Francis
Cc: abolition 2000 campaign jp
Subject: Re: TRIDENT2 CONDEMNED IN SCOTLAND!Sheriffs decision
Importance: High


!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Dear
yes,
    I forwarded your post to one of the largest campaigner organization
whose address is as follows:
"abolition 2000 campaign jp" <[e-mail]>
with my earlier comment on its initial campaign going on at this moment
covering almost all the renouned intelectuals of all fields of studies and
works.
I sugest you to sontact with this site.
and its URL is:
http://www.jca.apc.org/2000campaign/
signed by:
"nichigu asangha"<[e-mail]>

>                            Please forward.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scottish CND [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Thursday, October 21, 1999 11:18 AM
> To: Multiple recipients of list
> Subject: Sheriffs decision on Trident
>
>
> Greenock Sheriff Court 2.08 pm Wednesday 20th October 1999
>
> Sheriff Margaret Gimblett:
>
> The defence is based on two matters:
>
> Firstly the three accused consider Trident was being used illegally
> based on an understanding on what international law said and on advice
given
> to them;
> if they were right that the use and threat of nuclear weapons was illegal,
> not just
> possession, then they had a right given the enormity of the risks of
nuclear
> weapons
> to try and do something to stop that illegality.
>
> Secondly they had an absolute necessity, in which case it didn't matter
> whether
> Trident is illegal or not, the necessity was there.
>
> In considering this I have really not a great deal to go on other than
what
> the
> ICJ said in 1996 and their opinion, which although advisory, acknowledges
in
> words
> what is authoritative and agreed by all.  On the face of it
> very careful consideration should be given to its terms.
>
> In reaching their opinion the ICJ based the opinion on all the body of law
> that
> went before it which was carefully outlined. That law was canvassed in
> court.
> The opinion did not say possession of nuclear weapons was illegal,
> nowhere does any law say that.
>
> Even our own High Court of Judiciary has said that possession of nuclear
> weapons is not itself illegal.  They did not consider the law except
> as far as it related to possession.  The Helen John case can be
> distinguished. Here there is a defence of international law and
> necessity, but the whole defence hinges on the use made of nuclear
> weapons now and the percieved threat or threats made by the nuclear
> state.  The use or threat of use, I would conceed that the ICJ did
> not say that in all circumstances threat or use of nuclear weapons
> was universally prohibited.  Equally there no conventional law that
> authorises
> the threat or use of nuclear weapons.
>
> They issued what may be considered an enigmatic decision which has been
read
> on a number of occassions "the threat or use of nuclear
> weapons would be generally contrary to the rules and principles of
> international law applicable in armed conflict and in particular the
> principles and rules of humanitarian law.  However, in view of the current
> state
> of international law and of the elements of fact at its disposal, the
Court
> cannot
> conclude definitively whether the threat or use of nuclear weapons
> would be lawful or unlawful in an extreme circumstance of
> self-defence, in which the very survival of the State would be at
> stake."
>
> The last words are important.  We do not know what they meant by
generally,
> but their final
> conclusion implies that the use or threat could only apply in very
> tight circumstances of sefl defence the very survival of the state.
> The President of the ICJ said "I cannot overemphasise that the inability
> of the court to go further than the formal pronouncement at which it has
> arrived cannot in any way be interpreted as a half-open door to
recognition
> of the legality of the threat or use of nuclear armaments."
>
> Also the way in which the judges voted showed that a majority voted
> against the use of nuclear weapons.  Lord Murray quote on this very
helpful
> given the status of Lord Murray:
>
> "Turning to the central matter the judges were divided until the
President's
> casting
> vote.  The court decided that the threat or use of nuclear weapons is
> unlawful under all
> circumstances except last resort self-defence to avoid annihilation.
Three
> of the
> judges dissenting took the opposite view to the other four dissenters.
Four
> said that
> nuclear threat or use in not unlawful.  The other three considered that
> nuclear threat
> or use is always unlawful.  It follows that an absolute majority of 10 out
> of 14 judged
> that the threat or use of nuclear weapons is either entirely illegal or
> generally
> illegal subject to one possible exception.  A two thirds majority rejected
> the general
> lawfulness of nuclear weapons."
>
> I have the ividious task of deciding on international law as it relates to
> nuclear weapons.
> I am only a very junior sheriff without the wisdom or experience of those
> above me. I have
> a knowledge of the repercussions which could be far reaching.  As a
sheriff
> I took an oath
> to act without fear or favour in interpreting the law.
>
> A point of international law has been raised here and I have to answer it.
> I take comfort from the fact that there are other higher courts which can
> rectify any
> mistake.
>
> In the absence of anything other than the ICJ and having regard to the
> article by Lord
> Murray, in particular the part relating to treaties and conventions  ...
>
> Lord Murrays article concludes "there then are the principles on which
> the lawfulness of the proposed use of a particular weapons are to be
> assessed .. to be noted that in so far as they consist of international
> customary law they are part of the domestic laws of this country."
>
> I listened carefully to Professor Boyle and have taken into account all
the
> evidence in this case from him and the other experts and in the
> absence of any expert contradictory
> evidence from the crown, I have to conclude that the three accused in
> company with many others were justified in thinking that Great
> Britain in their use of Trident, not simply possession, the use and
> deployment of Trident allied with that use and deployment at times of
> great unrest, coupled with a first strike policy and in the absence
> of indication from any government official then or now that such use
> fell into any strict category suggested suggested in the ICJ opinion
> .. the threat or use of Trident could be construed as a threat, has
> indeed been construed by others as a threat and as such is an
> infringement of international and customary law.
>
> The three took the view that if Trident is illegal, given the horrendous
> nature
> of nuclear weapons, they had the obligation in terms of
> international law to do whatever little they could to stop the deployment
> and use of nuclear weapons in situations which could be construed as
> a threat.
>
> It follows, if I consider that Angie Zelter, Ulla Roder and Ellen Moxley
> were justified in the first leg of their defence and having given that
> as the principle reason the crown has a duty to rebut that defence.
> They have not done so and so I uphold the three defence submitions
> in so far as they refer to malicious and willful damage.
>
> I uphold the comments of Mr McLaughlin with regard to malice. Gordon
> says "no act is punishable unless it is committed with a criminal
> mind ..."  I have heard nothing which would make it seem to me that
> the accused acted with criminal intent  Therefore I will instruct the
> jury that they should acquit all three accused on charges 1 to 3
> which leaves only the alternative in charge 4, they should also be
> acquited on the first alternative in charge 4.
>
> I anyone else takes such action they do so at their peril.  The law
> is not clear on nuclear arms.  I may be totally wrong.  If it goes to
> appeal I may not be upheld and every case depends on whatever
> circumstances.  What I have said is with regard to the very special
> circumstances of this trial and in the light of international tension
> around June 8th.
>
>
>
>

- -
 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, 22 Oct 1999 11:07:22 -0500
From: "Boyle, Francis" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (abolition-usa) Netherlands: NO!Scottish  Sheriff worried about her job/Trident2  Condemned

Dear Ak:
    Thanks for the words of support. I will be sure to send them to
Scotland. Keep up your good work in the Netherlands. We need the Dutch
People to throw out all the NATO Nukes.
Best regards,
Francis.

- -----Original Message-----
From: Ak Malten [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, October 22, 1999 10:58 AM
To: Boyle, Francis
Subject: Re: NO!Scottish Sheriff worried about her job/Trident2
Condemned


Dear Francis,

congratulations with the Ploughshare 2000 success. Thank you for the work
you have done to push for this, so far.

Please send my greetings and support to Angie Zelter, Ulla Roder and
Ellen Moxley and thank them for the hard work they have done and their
endurance in the name of Peace. An enormous part of this success is theirs!

If you would draft and send out a letter in support of
Sheriff Margaret Gimblett I would not hesitate to sign it, but be happy
to.

    It is my opinion Sheriff Margaret Gimblett did a great job upholding
    International Law!! With all my heart I thank her for doing so!!!!

    It would be a slam in the face of International Law if
    Sheriff Margaret Gimblett would loose her job, because of that fact.

Ak Malten,

Global Anti-Nuclear Alliance

- ---original message follows---
At 08:45 22-10-99 -0500, you wrote:
>Mailinglist 'Citizens Inspections to Prevent War Crimes'
>-------------------------------------------------------
>
>Dear Friends:
>    As I said before, Sheriff Margaret Gimblett is one of the very best
>judges i have ever appeared before since i did my first anti-nuclear case
in
>the spring of 1982. She is very bright, very professional and very
>courageous. I submit that we must ALL mobilize to her support and make it
>very clear to the  British Establishment that the ENTIRE WORLD  wants her
to
>keep her job.
>Francis A. Boyle
>Professor of International Law
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Scottish CND [mailto:[e-mail]]
>Sent: Friday, October 22, 1999 4:54 AM
>To: Multiple recipients of list
>Subject: Sheriff worried about her job
>
>
>Sheriff Margaret Gimblett has said that she is worried about her job after
>her historic decision about Trident on 21 October.  In an exclusive
>interview with the Scottish Express from her home on the Isle of Bute she
>said:
>
>"I have the highest respect for these CND women, but I myself am not a CND
>supporter: I am totally apolitical.  I am rather worried about my job after
>this.  I certainly won't be expecting a mention in the Queens Honours
list."
>
>
>
>

- ---end---


=============================================================
  The Global Anti-Nuclear Alliance (GANA) -- is a member of
  The Abolition 2000 Network, A Global Network to Eliminate
  Nuclear Weapons

Address: c/o Ak Malten
        Irisstraat 134          Tel:[phone]
        2565TP The Hague        Fax:[phone]
        The Netherlands         E-Mail: [e-mail]

GANA's website:

       http://www.cornnet.nl/~akmalten/welcome.html

The ICJ Advisory Opinion on Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons,
 **including ALL the Separate Opinions of ALL the Judges**,
    the Canberra Report, the CTBT Text and Protocol,
         the NPT text and the 1925 Gas Protocol,
              the Nuremberg Principles and
   the MODEL Nuclear Weapons Convention can be found at:

       http://www.cornnet.nl/~akmalten/docs.html
=============================================================

- -
 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, 22 Oct 1999 11:19:24 -0500
From: "Boyle, Francis" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (abolition-usa) Australia: Sheriff Margaret Gimblett:The Trident 2 case.

Dear Ian:
    Thanks for this support from Australia. I remember years ago when i
worked on the case of the Vega, sister ship of the Rainbow Warrior,for
Greenpeace.The Vega tried to impede passage by  a nuclear armed US Warship
in Aussie waters. The US captain tried to ram the Aussies, who were pushed
out of the way by another boat at the last minute. Instead of trying the US
Captain for attempted murder, the Australian government prosecuted the
Aussies on the Vega. We got them  all off. But now it is time for the
Aussies to strike back against US nuclear weapons installations in
Australia. Please use the Greenock Decision to liberate Australia from US
Nuclear Tyranny.
Best regards,
Francis Boyle

- -----Original Message-----
From: Ian & Lyn Fry [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, October 22, 1999 11:11 AM
To: [e-mail]
Cc: Francis Boyle
Subject: Sheriff Margaret Gimblett:The Trident 2 case.


To those whom it may concern.

This is to record my disquiet at the possibility that Sheriff Margaret
Gimblett could face disciplinary action as a consequence of her decision
in the Trident 2 case.

I believe that at this stage of humanity's social evolution and
technical understanding it is the responsibility of governments to
review their policies on the development and use of such weapons with
the aim of completely eliminating them.

The message of enlightenment and goodwill which will flow from such a
review will further the prospects of peace far more than the message of
repression which mushrooms out from every decision to prosecute those
who legitimately oppose the use of such weapons or, worse, from a
decision to appeal against or to reverse the decision reached in the
recent case, or worse still, from any action to rebuke, discipline or
disadvantage the sheriff who reached the decision.

Please convey my sentiments to the authorities who may be involved in
this instance, and my message of support to Sheriff Margaret Gimblett.

Thank you.

Ian Fry
18 Cremorne Street, Fitzroy, Victoria 3065, Australia.

- -
 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, 22 Oct 1999 11:27:56 -0500
From: "Boyle, Francis" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (abolition-usa) RE: NO!Scottish  Sheriff worried about her job/Trident2 Condemned

Dear David and All: I am posting simultaneously to those anti-nuclear lists
i am on to make sure the GREENOCK MESSAGE gets out to the world. Under these
dramatic circumstances, I hope people  will not mind using their delete
buttons. I suspect things will die down over the weekend. Have a good one.
Francis.
- -----Original Message-----
From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, October 22, 1999 10:44 AM
To: [e-mail]; [e-mail];
[e-mail]; [e-mail];
[e-mail]; [e-mail];
[e-mail]
Subject: Re: NO!Scottish Sheriff worried about her job/Trident2
Condemned


Mailinglist 'Citizens Inspections to Prevent War Crimes'
- -------------------------------------------------------

Dear Francis,

I get six (6) copies of each of your reports. I didn't even know I was on
that many lists. Yes, I can delete, but it is a bother. I don't know what
JUSTWATCH is,not sure what tp2000@gn is, nor NUKENET.

Having taken on the "joyous burden" of running as the Socialist Party's
candidate for President, my "spare time" is now very non-existent.

Bless you if you can help cut the flood of Francis Boyle posts. All of value

and interesting, but one can only read things once.

David McReynolds

- -
 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, 22 Oct 1999 11:49:23 -0500
From: "Boyle, Francis" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (abolition-usa) Trident2 Condemned in Scotland: Headlines and quotes

It is quite revealing that the British government never showed up in the
Scottish Court to defend their Trident2s despite the fact that they did send
a Ministry of Defense man to monitor the entire proceedings in court. I
personally know of only one case where someone from the Pentagon actually
showed up to defend a Trident 2:that of the Plowshares Resister George
Ostensen in Wisconsin, where the ELF Commander showed up and
testified,basically perjuring himself. So we got a split-verdict:acquitted
on one count of sabotage against the ELF/Trident2, convicted on the second
count of sabotage. But in the Plowshares case of Tom and Donna
Howard-Hastings a decade later, we got outright acquittals on  sabotage
charges for a Plowshares Action directed against the same ELF/Trident2
facility. In this case, we had a retired US naval submarine commander
testify under oath that it was "well known" in the Navy that the primary
purpose of ELF/Trident2 would be to start a nuclear war.No one from the
Pentagon showed up this second time around to defend the ELF/Trident2. fab.

- -----Original Message-----
From: Scottish CND [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, October 22, 1999 11:35 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: Headlines and quotes


Headlines 22 October 99

The following are some of the headlines and quotes following the Greenock
Sheriffs decision:

NUCLEAR SUBS ARE ILLEGAL SAYS SHERIFF

Evening Times, Glasgow, 21 Oct

SHERIFF BANS THE BOMB

Scottish Mirror, 22 Oct

HOW FOUR MIDDLE-AGED LADIES SANK UK DEFENCE

Daily Record, 22 Oct

Trident nuclear deterrent ruled "illegal weapon"

Scottish Daily Mail, 22 Oct

WE'VE WON NUCLEAR WAR

Scottish Sun, 22 Oct

Sheriff judges Trident nuclear defences illegal

Herald, 22 Oct

Outcry as sheriff rules nuclear weapons illegal

Scotsman, 22 Oct

..

..

Quotations

"I am rather worried about my job. I certainly won't be expecting a mention
in the Queens Honours list"

Sheriff Margaret Gimblett, quoted in the Scottish Express

"Trident is a product of the Cold War and has no place in Scotland or indeed
anywhere in the UK ..World history had been made in Greenock Sheriff Court."

- - Dorothy Grace Elder MSP (SNP)

"In an academic argument we are confident that there are circumstances in
which it would be legal to use nuclear weapons"

- -MoD spokeswoman quoted in the Scotsman

"Given the kind of signals this nonsense will have sent out to pacifist
loonies everywhere, there should be a clear warning from the government that
attacks on military establishments and installations will not be tolerated."

- - Phil Gallie MSP (Conservative)

"It is the Lord Advocates business and it would be wrong of me to comment on
the merits or the substance"

- - Donald Dewar MSP (First Minister)

"There were four brave women in that court today - three in the dock and one
on the bench"

Jane Tallent, Trident Ploughshares 2000

"What the women did was fantastic. They are modern-day heroines. I salute
their courage. These women have taken non-violent action against one of the
most serious threats to humanity - Trident itself - and won"

Tommy Sheridan MSP (Scottish Socialist Party)




- -
 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, 22 Oct 1999 13:30:17 -0400 (EDT)
From: Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space <[e-mail]>
Subject: (abolition-usa) Alaska Chosen as BMD Site  (fwd)

Bruce K. Gagnon
Coordinator
Global Network
PO Box 90083, Gainesville, Fl 32607
Web site:  http://www.globenet.free-online.co.uk/
[phone]
 =20
 =20
=20
 PENTAGON EYES ALASKA DEFENSE SYSTEM=20
=20
=20
=20
By Robert Burns
AP Military Writer
Thursday, Oct. 21, 1999; 4:43 p.m. EDT

WASHINGTON =96=96 The Pentagon has decided that if President Clinton choose=
s to=20
deploy a national defense against ballistic missile attack, it should be=20
based in Alaska, a spokesman said Thursday.=20

Kenneth Bacon, speaking for Defense Secretary William Cohen, said the=20
question of location is one of several elements of the 1972 Anti-Ballistic=
=20
Missile treaty that would have to be revised if the United States went ahea=
d=20
with construction. Clinton may make such a decision as early as June.=20

Russia is strongly opposed to the United States building a national missile=
=20
defense =96 even the limited version the Clinton administration envisions =
=96 and=20
has so far refused to renegotiate the ABM treaty.=20

U.S. and Russian officials opened a new round of discussions on the ABM=20
treaty Thursday in Moscow, but there was little sign that the Russians woul=
d=20
change their minds. State Department spokesman James Rubin said, "We are=20
committed to work with Russia to negotiate changes to the ABM treaty requir=
ed=20
for possible deployment of a national missile defense and to make progress =
on=20
further strategic arms reductions."=20

Bacon said the United States could build an anti-missile base at Grand Fork=
s,=20
N.D., where it briefly operated one in the 1970s. That would be permissible=
=20
under the ABM treaty, but the pact does not allow for more than one site or=
 a=20
change from one site to another.=20

"For a variety of reasons =96 mainly to achieve complete (defensive) covera=
ge=20
of the United States =96 we've decided that we have to move that site to=20
Alaska," Bacon said. "So the first thing we're proposing is to be able to=
=20
move that site." He said there were other elements of the treaty that need =
to=20
be renegotiated, too.=20

Air Force Lt. Col. Rick Lehner, spokesman for the Pentagon office in charge=
=20
of developing missile defenses, said anti-missile interceptors based in Nor=
th=20
Dakota could not protect the entire United States. He said his office had n=
ot=20
been informed that the Pentagon had decided on Alaska.=20

Lehner's office has scheduled public hearings in North Dakota next week on=
=20
the results of its draft review of the environmental impact that an=20
anti-missile system would have on the state. In announcing the environmenta=
l=20
impact review Oct. 6, the Pentagon said no decision had been made on where =
an=20
anti-missile system would be based.=20

=A9 Copyright 1999 The Associated Press=20
=20
  =20

    =20



- -
 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, 22 Oct 1999 12:46:57 -0500
From: "Boyle, Francis" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (abolition-usa) PACIFIC: Trident2 Condemned in Scotland

Dear Richard:
    Thanks so much for this message on behalf of Pacific Islanders.Your
Peoples have born the primary brunt of Western Nuclear Colonial Imperialism.
We citizens of the Nuclear Weapons States must never forget the Nuremberg
Crimes against Humanity that have been inflicted upon you Pacific Islanders
in our names.
Aloha.
Francis.

- -----Original Message-----
From: richard n salvador [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, October 22, 1999 12:15 PM
To: Boyle, Francis
Subject: Francis: Please note the Correction: Adlridge's and Myers BOOK



in their book which you should ADD to my original message:

3rd paragprha
- ---

For us particularly in Belau/Palau, it is a sweet, sweet vindication of 20
years of struggle, an idea that formed the basis of our very own
decolonization and independence movement. Our ally, Roger S. Clark, in a
preface to Robert Aldridge's and Ched Myers's   BOOK

about our nuclear-free
Constitution movement and Belau's resistance against the nuclear empire,
added a powerful comment to our long struggle:



- ---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 07:08:24 -1000
From: richard n salvador <[e-mail]>
To: "Boyle, Francis" <[e-mail]>
Subject: From the Pacific, we send our support, appreciation, and
commendation.



Dear Professor Boyle (Francis),

Aloha and Greetings again from Hawaii and the Pacific,

We offer our congratulations to Angela Zelter, Ellen Moxley, and Ulla
Roder, for their courageous acts and for your efforts in helping to
guarantee their victory. Half a world away, we, too, share in this
victorious event whose immediate and eventual impacts must reverberate
around the world. But the victory for us in the Pacific is one we welcome
in a long and arduous process of de-legitimizing the logic of militarism
generally and of resisting nuclear weapons in particular!

The veterans of the 20-year campaign of the Nuclear Free and Independent
Pacific movement, too, must be happy to witness a historic development to
our continuing struggle against nuclear violations of our region of the
world primarily because this case takes place at the heart of the nuclear
empire, thus delegitimizing policies of which we have struggled painfully
against in that empire's peripheries. We look to the dismantling of this
massive nuclear empire in all of the Nuclear Weapons States, a future we
can be proud of working to co-create.

For us particularly in Belau/Palau, it is a sweet, sweet vindication of 20
years of struggle, an idea that formed the basis of our very own
decolonization and independence movement. Our ally, Roger S. Clark, in a
preface to Robert Aldridge's and Ched Myers's about our nuclear-free
Constitution movement and Belau's resistance against the nuclear empire,
added a powerful comment to our long struggle:

"It is a tale that raises questions about many cosmic things: about the
survival of the planet, about the aftermath of the War in the Pacific,
about the attitude of peoples most affected by the United States, British
and French nuclear testing in the Pacific, about self-determination of
small territories, about modernization and indigenous cultures, about
decision-making procedures in post-traditional societies, about
fundamental human rights including the right to survival and the right to
peace, about the relationship between the earth, the sky and the people,
about the nature of security in the world with The Bomb."


We congratulate the courageous women as well as their many supporters
throughout the UK, Europe, the United States, and around the world.

Sincerely,

Richard N. Salvador
(citizen of Belau/Palau)

University of Hawaii at Manoa
Honolulu, Hawaii


- -
 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 #202
***********************************

-
 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.