From: owner-abolition-usa-digest@lists.xmission.com (abolition-usa-digest) To: abolition-usa-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: abolition-usa-digest V1 #336 Reply-To: abolition-usa-digest Sender: owner-abolition-usa-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-abolition-usa-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk abolition-usa-digest Friday, July 7 2000 Volume 01 : Number 336 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2000 11:25:28 -0700 From: nukeresister@igc.org (Felice and Jack Cohen-Joppa) Subject: (abolition-usa) Re: Washington, D.C. Gathering to Free Vanunu FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact Sam Day, ph. (608)257-4764 GATHERING WILL SPOTLIGHT ISRAELI NUCLEAR WHISTLEBLOWER WASHINGTON - Activists from across the United States will gather here September 26-28 for a conference, vigil and protest rally marking the 14th anniversary of the kidnapping and imprisonment of Mordechai Vanunu, a former technician who blew the whistle on Israel's clandestine nuclear weapons program. Daniel Ellsberg, who himself narrowly escaped prison 29 years ago for leaking the secret Pentagon papers about the Vietnam War, will give the September 26 banquet address. Other speakers will include: Rabbi Philip J. Bentley of Temple Sholom, Floral Park, NY, president of the Jewish Peace Fellowship; Bishop Thomas J. Gumbleton of Detroit, a Catholic activist; Elizabeth McAlister of the Jonah House peace and justice community in Baltimore; and Mary and Nicholas Eoloff, St. Paul, Minnesota, Vanunu's American adoptive parents. The conference will be followed by a dawn-to-dusk vigil at the Israeli Embassy and Capitol Hill lobbying on September 27 and a noon-hour protest rally at the embassy on September 28, all demanding Vanunu's freedom and nuclear disarmament. It was on September 30, 1986, that Israeli agents kidnapped Vanunu in Rome and returned him to Israel in chains after he had told a British newspaper, the London Sunday Times, about the production of a massive nuclear arsenal at the Dimona nuclear weapons reactor, where he had worked as a mid-level technician. Protest rallies at Israeli embassies and consulates around the world are customarily held on the anniversary of that date, but this year's Washington observance is being held two days early out of respect for Rosh Hashanah, a Jewish high holiday, which falls this year on September 30. Vanunu was convicted of espionage and treason at a closed-door trial in Israel and sentenced to 18 years in prison. He was held in solitary confinement for more than 11 years until March of 1998, when he was allowed onto the grounds of Ashkelon Prison. But he is still kept under tight security restrictions limiting access to the outside world. Vanunu's release on humanitarian grounds is sought by Amnesty International, the European Parliament, the Federation of American Scientists, the Jewish and Episcopal peace fellowships, and many religious, cultural, and political leaders, including 36 members of Congress, who last year called on President Clinton to urge Israel to release the prisoner-of-conscience. The Barak and previous Israeli governments claim that Vanunu cannot be released because he might reveal secrets that would threaten Israeli security. But American and British nuclear weapons experts dispute this. Last year a retired Livermore National Laboratory nuclear weapons designer, Dr. Ray E. Kidder, conducted a four-month study of the Vanunu case and concluded in a letter to the Israeli judiciary that Vanunu has no nuclear information not already available to the public. Prodded by some of its Palestinian members, the Israeli Knesset last February held its first open debate on Israel's unacknowledged nuclear weapons program. This in turn has fueled growing public concern about the secrecy surrounding the aging desert reactor and the continuing punishment of the man who first brought the weapons program to public attention. The "Washington Gathering to Free Vanunu" conference will be held at the Methodist Building, 110 Maryland Ave. NE, with evening banquet at the Church of the Brethren, 4th St. and North Carolina Ave. SE. Participants in the September 28 protest rally will gather at the Van Ness St. entrance to the UDC-Van Ness St. Metro stop at 11:45 for the three block walk to the embassy at the corner of International Drive and Van Ness St. For more information contact the U.S. Campaign to Free Mordechai Vanunu, 2206 Fox Ave., Madison, WI 53711, Phone/fax 608/257-4764, website: www. nonviolence.org/vanunu, email: samday@chorus.net xxx PLEASE INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING IN ANNOUNCEMENT AND/OR CALENDAR SECTIONS OF PUBLICATIONS: WASHINGTON GATHERING TO FREE VANUNU: Three Days of Support for Israel's Nuclear Whistleblower - Activists from across the U.S. will gather September 26-28 for a conference, vigil and protest rally marking the 14th anniversary of the kidnapping and imprisonment of Mordechai Vanunu, Israeli nuclear whistleblower. Events calling for Vanunu's immediate and unconditional release are: A September 26 conference, from 9 a.m. - 5 p.m., followed by a dinner and evening program; a dawn to dusk vigil at the Israeli Embassy and Capitol Hill lobbying on September 27; and a noon-hour mass rally at the Israeli Embassy on September 28. Conference speakers include Daniel Ellsberg, Rabbi Phillip Bentley, Elizabeth McAlister, Bishop Thomas Gumbleton and Nicholas and Mary Eoloff, Mordechai's adoptive parents. For more information, contact The U.S. Campaign to Free Mordechai Vanunu, 2206 Fox Avenue, Madison, WI 53711, phone/fax 608-257-4764, email samday@chorus.net xxx - - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 15:43:44 -0400 From: ASlater Subject: (abolition-usa) Fwd: >Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 10:59:43 -0400 >Subject: >To: aslater@gracelinks.org >From: pwork@igc.org (pwork@igc.org) > >A friend in England, the journalist Felicity Arabuthnot, asks for reliable >contacts to give solid information on the fire near Hanaford and what >dangers it may pose. Can you help? > >thanks, Patricia Watson, Peacework > - - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 16:07:46 -0400 From: Hisham Zerriffi Subject: Re: (abolition-usa) Fwd: The best people to contact are: Bob Alvarez, former advisor to Sec. of Energy Richardson for Environment, Safety and Health. He can be reached at kitbob@erols.com Gerry Pollett, Heart of America Northwest, hoanw@earthlink.net Tom Carpenter, The Government Accountability Project, tomc@whistleblower.org At 03:43 PM 7/6/2000 -0400, ASlater wrote: >>Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 10:59:43 -0400 >>Subject: >>To: aslater@gracelinks.org >>From: pwork@igc.org (pwork@igc.org) >> >>A friend in England, the journalist Felicity Arabuthnot, asks for reliable >>contacts to give solid information on the fire near Hanaford and what >>dangers it may pose. Can you help? >> >>thanks, Patricia Watson, Peacework >> > >- > To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" > with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. > For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send > "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. > ***************************************************************** Hisham Zerriffi Senior Scientist Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER) 6935 Laurel Ave. Suite 204, Takoma Park, MD 20912 Phone: (301) 270-5500 Fax: (301) 270-3029 E-mail: hisham@ieer.org Web: http://www.ieer.org ***************************************************************** - - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 17:28:14 +1000 From: FoE Sydney - Nuclear Campaign Subject: (abolition-usa) PRESS RELEASE AND SOLIDARITY LETTER John Hallam Friends of the Earth Sydney, 17 Lord Street, Newtown, NSW, Australia, 2042 Fax (61)(2)9517-3902 ph (61)(2)9517-3903 nonukes@foesyd.org.au http://homepages.tig.com.au/~foesyd EMBARGOED TO SAT.8/JULY AUSTRALIAN PEACE COMMITTEE PEOPLE FOR NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT W.A. FRIENDS OF THE EARTH AUSTRALIA US TO CONDUCT 'STAR WARS' MISSILE TEST: NOBEL PRIZEWINNERS, AUSTRALIAN SENATE, SAY NO. While protesters assemble at Vandenberg Airforce Base in the US to protest the 'star wars' test of the proposed national missile defence system, (NMD), 50 Nobel prizewinners including physicist Hans Bethe, once involved in the US weapons program, and prominent quantum physicists Murray Gell-Mann and Steven Chu, have written a letter to President Clinton asking him to reject the scheme, Greenpeace is sailing a vessel into the hazard zone, and the Australian Senate last Thursday passed a motion calling on the US not to proceed with the scheme. Australian antinuclear organizations and parliamentarians Carmen Lawrence, Lyn Allison, Natasha Stott- Despoja, Ian Cohen MLC and Lee Rhiannon MLC have signed a letter of solidarity with US and international organizations including Abolition 2000, a global network of over 2000 anti nuclear weapons groups, who are protesting the test. The missile test, scheduled for 7pm Friday California time, (noon Saturday Sydney time), is a critical input into President Clinton's decision as to whether to authorize the deployment of this weapons system. Critics of NMD say it will create another arms race which will wipe out painfully gained agreements made at the recent nuclear nonproliferation treaty review conference in New York, where 187 countries including the official nuclear weapons states, signed on to an agreement to accomplish the 'total and unequivocal' elimination of their nuclear weapons arsenals. The same conference affirmed that the ABM treaty, which this system will violate, is the 'cornerstone' of strategic stability. The Non-Aligned Movement, the New Agenda Coalition, the European Union, Sweden, France, and Germany, have urged the US not to walk away from the ABM treaty, as Candidates Bush and Gore have threatened. The Australian Senate echoed those sentiments a week ago with a motion calling on the US not to proceed with NMD. Russia and China have warned that deployment of this system will lead to further arms racing, and Russia has threatened to tear up all arms agreements if the US walks away from the ABM treaty. Contact: John Hallam, FOE Australia, 61-2-9517-3903 h9810-2598 Irene Gale AM,Australian Peace Committee, 08-8364-2291 Jo Vallentine, PND-WA, 08-9272-4252 Carah Ong, Abolition 2000, Calif, USA, 1-805-965-3443 FRIENDS OF THE EARTH AUSTRALIA AUSTRALIAN PEACE COMMITTEE PEOPLE FOR NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT-WESTERN AUSTRALIA PEOPLE FOR NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT - NSW INTERNATIONAL VOLUNTEERS FOR PEACE NSW ANTI BASES COALITION PAX CHRISTI NSW BIG SCRUB ENVIRONMENT CENTRE ENVIRONMENT CENTRE OF THE NORTHERN TERRITORY (ECNT) ENVIRONMENT CENTRE OF W.A., SENATOR LYN ALLISON SENATOR NATASHA STOTT-DESPOJA CARMEN LAWRENCE MP, IAN COHEN MLC (NSW) LEE RHIANNON MLC (NSW) SOLIDARITY WITH VANDENBERG AFB NMD PROTEST Dear Participants in the planned July 7 Protest, at Vandenburg Airforce Base against the NMD Test, The groups listed here wish to declare their solidarity with your vigil and protest against the July 7 test of the National Missile Defence (NMD) system. The Australian Senate has passed a resolution in which it urges the US government not to proceed with a national missile defence system. The current National Missile Defence (NMD) proposal and indeed, any proposal for ballistic missile defence, would be strategically destabilizing, costly, and would fail to deliver the security it promises to the American people, while putting the rest of the world, as well as the US, at an increased risk of nuclear exchange. The UN Secretary General, the European Union, Germany, France, Sweden, the New Agenda Coalition, and the Non-Aligned movement have all spoken out strongly against this proposal. It is urgent that all governments, as many have already done, speak out against a weapons proposal that may re-ignite the nuclear arms race with no real security advantage to those who deploy it. We wish you every success in your protest on July 7. Senator Lyn Allison, Democrats, Vic., Senator Natasha Stott-Despoja, Democrats, S.A., Carmen Lawrence MP for Fremantle, House of Representatives, Ian Cohen MLC, NSW., Lee Rhiannon MLC, NSW., Jo Vallentine, People for Nuclear Disarmament, W.A., Morrie Mifsud, People for Nuclear Disarmament NSW., Rita, Coordinator, International Volunters for Peace NSW., Irene Gale AM, Australian Peace Committee, Dennis Doherty, Pax Christi NSW, Hannah Middleton, Anti-Bases Coalition, NSW, Big Scrub Environment Centre, Lismore, NSW., Kirsten Blair, Environment Centre of the Northern Territory, Environment Centre of Western Australia, John Hallam, Friends of the Earth Australia. - - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2000 11:29:18 -0500 From: Kevin Martin Subject: (abolition-usa) op-ed from today's New York Times on Star Wars A beautiful op-ed from today's NY Times. Use it to write your own letters to the editor! Now is the time to spur a real flurry of citizen concern over this massive fraud upon taxpayers at the behest of the corporate weapons lobby. Van Gosse Peace Action Kevin Martin Project Abolition http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/oped/07post.html New York Times July 7, 2000 We Can't Tell the Missiles From the Mylar By THEODORE A. POSTOL and GEORGE N. LEWIS AMBRIDGE , Mass. -- A success in today's well-publicized test of a missile defense weapon system, the Clinton administration claims, will establish that national missile defense technology is ready for deployment. But unfortunately, bagging the sort of precooked and strapped-down chicken of a target that is being used today will do nothing of the sort. If Americans want a real test of the Pentagon's missile defense system, they should insist that it be designed by someone other than the Pentagon. The Defense Department discovered a program-stopping flaw in its system in tests three years ago: The system can easily be fooled by decoys nearly as simple as the traffic cones we encounter on the street or the Mylar balloons that are so popular at the zoo. The first response to this discovery was to try to conceal it. Then the Defense Department dumbed down all the development tests planned for the missile defense program so the somewhat different version of the so-called "kill vehicle" that is now being used would never have to be tested against competently designed, simple decoys. In the near-vacuum of space where the missile defense would operate, there is no air drag to cause light decoys to move differently from heavy warheads, so it is relatively easy to create cheap impostors. The Pentagon has stated that for the 100-interceptor defense system that President Clinton is likely to recommend, the kill vehicle -- the interceptor that "shoots down" the incoming missile -- will have the primary responsibility for picking out the warhead. Since all the objects the kill vehicle will see are far away, they will appear as points of light -- like stars in the night sky -- all moving in about the same way. Instead of the 10 objects that confounded the kill vehicle in the first test, in 1997, today's test, like the two before it, will use only a single mock warhead and a large balloon. The balloon has been carefully designed to be nearly 10 times brighter than the warhead, and the kill vehicle will be programmed to home on the dimmer of the two targets. The Pentagon claims that the warhead and the ineffective large balloon decoy it is testing against are representative of the missile threat from an idealized imagined adversary -- an adversary presumed to be capable of building intercontinental range ballistic missiles, and nuclear warheads that are sufficiently light and compact to be mounted on such missiles, but at the same time so bungling as to be unable to hide the warhead inside a Mylar balloon decoy released along with empty balloons or to build warhead-shaped cone decoys. A recent technical study by the Union of Concerned Scientists and the M.I.T. Security Studies Program showed that the same simple countermeasures that can defeat the kill vehicle could also defeat all of the other sensors envisioned in the Clinton administration plan. If every one of the currently planned national missile defense tests proved to be an unqualified success, we would be still stuck with a defense system that had not been realistically tested and would have no hope of performing successfully in a real-world attack. What the country needs, and what the president should give us, is an independent commission of accomplished scientists who are not connected to the Pentagon to look into the claims being made about this ill-conceived national missile defense system. Before forking over $60 billion to pay for such a system, Americans deserve an answer to the obvious question as to whether it will work. Theodore A. Postol is professor of science, technology, and national security policy at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. George N. Lewis is associate director of the institute's Security Studies Program. - - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2000 11:47:08 -0500 From: Kevin Martin Subject: (abolition-usa) Star Wars test tonight Dear Friends of Peace, Below is a message from DontBlowIt.org, a new website sponsored by several peace and disarmament organizations. The site is set up for "e-activism", and is well worth a visit. Other suggested activities around this Star Wars test -- write a letter to the editor of your local newspaper and call in to radio talk shows this weekend and early next week denouncing Star Wars as the exorbitant, reckless, provocative, illegal sham that it is. Kevin Martin Director, Project Abolition ***** Tonight, the Pentagon plans to test launch the proposed National Missile Defense system - a $60 billion "Star Wars" program that many scientists and defense officials believe to be expensive, unproven and threatening to Russia and China. You can help stop this dangerous program! Please forward this message around to your friends and family and ask them to send a free e-postcard to President Clinton at: http://DontBlowIt.org There are still over 36,000 nuclear weapons around the world - enough to destroy the planet several times over. Tell President Clinton "Don't Blow It!" We should be reducing nuclear weapons world wide, not testing a "Star Wars" anti-missile system that may spark a new arms race. This National Missile Defense is really a National Missile Offense - one that would threaten our, and our kids' future. Please tell your family and friends to visit http://DontBlowIt.org and help make nuclear weapons a thing of the past. Many Thanks, Laura Kriv DontBlowIt.org P.S. Please don't forward this message indiscriminately - spam only hurts our cause. - - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2000 13:54:35 -0400 From: ASlater Subject: (abolition-usa) Fwd: [manhattangreens] Fwd: ZNet Commentary / Ed Herman / July 7 / The NYT Versus Nade >Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2000 09:58:19 -0400 >Subject: [manhattangreens] Fwd: ZNet Commentary / Ed Herman / July 7 / The NYT Versus Nade >Priority: non-urgent >X-FC-MachineGenerated: true >To: manhattangreens@egroups.com >From: bwanajoseph@aol.com (bwanajoseph@aol.com) > >>> If you pass this comment along to others, please include an >>> explanation that Commentaries are a premium sent to >>> Sustainer Donors of Z/ZNet and that to learn more about the >>> project folks can consult ZNet (http://www.zmag.org) and >>> specifically the ZNet Sustainer Pages >>> (http://www.zmag.org/Commentaries/donorform.htm. >>> >>> >>> >>> THE NEW YORK TIMES VERSUS NADER--AND DEMOCRACY >>> By Edward S. Herman >>> >>> In its editorial, "Mr. Nader's Misguided Crusade" (June 30), >>> the New York Times assails Nader's candidacy and campaign on >>> grounds that are partly fraudulent and misleading (as I >>> describe below). But it is also clear that this attack is >>> based ultimately on the owners-editors satisfaction with the >>> political and economic status quo, which Nader is calling >>> into question. The editors claim that the two parties offer >>> voters a "clear-cut choice," so that there is "no driving >>> logic for a third-party candidacy this year." It follows for >>> them that Nader is just an ego driven "spoiler," even though >>> it is conceded that he has a "right to run." >>> >>> According to the Times, while Nader is close to Gore on the >>> issues, he rejects him because Gore is "too much of an >>> incrementalist." This misrepresents the serious differences >>> on the issues, but it also ignores Nader's fundamental >>> argument--that Gore and Bush are both hostages to big money, >>> so that just as Clinton served the monied interests with >>> only token gestures to the majority, Gore is sure to do the >>> same. It is not Gore's incrementalism, but rather what Gore >>> is likely to do given his and his party's financial >>> obligations, that differentiates Nader from Gore. >>> >>> In his excellent acceptance speech at the Green Party >>> Convention on June 25, Nader made numerous suggestions for >>> needed policy changes--resting on "peoples" rather than >>> "corporate yardsticks"--that neither Gore nor Bush have >>> addressed. Among other matters, Nader mentioned: (1) An >>> ending to the support of foreign dictators and the >>> introduction of "foreign policies that support the peasants >>> and the workers for a change." (2) A sharp reduction of a >>> bloated military budget that is badly out of control, a >>> situation resting on the fact that weapons manufacturers >>> "foist weapons systems on the Pentagon, working with a >>> PAC-greased supine Congress." Nader would finally declare >>> that long elusive "peace dividend" that will surely continue >>> to escape Gore-Bush. (3) Labor laws that "facilitate the >>> organization of trade unions" and that provide the kind of >>> statutory "social wage" that most European countries have >>> had in place for many years. (4) Major public investments in >>> schools, health clinics, mass transit, drinking water >>> systems and other services that directly benefit the >>> majority. (5) An attack on inequality via a revised tax >>> system that no longer serves the corporate elite. (6) An >>> ending of the "epidemic of silent environmental violence," >>> that rests on corporate domination, as in the continued >>> subsidized logging of the national forests. >>> >>> Across the board, Nader laid out a philosophy and program >>> that was sensitive to majority and not corporate needs. He >>> also stresses the importance of relieving America's children >>> from "the most intense marketing onslaught in history" and >>> the dangers of "giving too much power to the merchant >>> mind...because its singular focus and its self-driven >>> impulses run roughshod over the more non- commercial values >>> that define a worthy society." This attack on advertising, >>> consumerism, and the "let-the-fur-fly" individualism and >>> business culture that business domination has spawned must >>> have sent cold chills down the spines of the editorial >>> board. >>> >>> The New York Times never reproduced Nader's acceptance >>> speech, although it has found endless space for trivial >>> charges and counter-charges between Bush and Gore, fine >>> details of their personal histories, and the status of the >>> horse race between the approved duopolists. The blackout of >>> Nader's speech made it easier for them to make the false >>> editorial claim of little difference between Gore and Nader. >>> But it also allowed the paper to keep the issues under >>> cover. >>> One of Nader's campaign aims was to force a discussion of >>> major issues that the duopolists and their backers don't >>> want addressed. In their treatment of Nader the Times has >>> gone to some pains to evade those issues and to make like >>> all the real ones are being debated between Gore and Bush. >>> Thus, in addition to failing to give its readers Nader's >>> acceptance speech, it has covered his campaign with great >>> superficiality, not discussing his criticisms and programs, >>> but reporting on his financial wealth ("Nader Reports Big >>> Portfolio in Technology," June 19), his attack on the >>> corporate financing of the presidential debates (June 20), >>> and the possible effects of his candidacy on Gore's >>> electoral prospects (June 22). So the Times not only refuses >>> to evaluate Nader as a candidate in terms of his relative >>> integrity and intelligence, it is unwilling to allow him to >>> discuss basic issues in a public forum. It says his "only >>> realistic role" this year might be to throw the election to >>> Bush--but that may be because the Times (and its confreres) >>> will not permit Nader to serve an educational function. >>> >>> But the Times's dismissal of Nader does rest in large >>> measure on his policy positions and democratic philosophy. >>> The editors are explicitly satisfied with the range of >>> policy options Gore and Bush allow. When they claim that >>> Gore and Nader are not far apart on environmental issues, >>> they do not discuss whether or not Gore would follow up any >>> promises with action--they do not review the Clinton record >>> in this regard, or analyse the effects of financial >>> dependency on the gaps between promises and realization. But >>> that is because they don't care that much about the >>> realization of any populist promises. >>> >>> The Times does allow that Nader is different on "trade" >>> policy, with Nader the "protectionist" and Gore and Bush >>> both allegedly better serving the interests of the working >>> class. "Protectionism runs counter to much of what Mr. Nader >>> has fought for over the years." (The editors note that >>> foreign competition has had beneficial effects on the auto >>> industry.) The Times bias here is long-standing, and so is >>> their misrepresentation of the contesting positions and >>> facts. The paper has long buried polls that show the working >>> class opposed to the trade agreements that it and the >>> corporate community favor. The editors can never put it this >>> way, but essentially they claim that the working class >>> doesn't recognize its own true interests, only big business >>> and the Times do, and that by a coincidence once again >>> what's good for GM is good for us all. They also distort >>> Nader's position, which is not anti-trade, but is against >>> rules that take the right to control foreign investment and >>> trade out of the hands of democratic communities, in some >>> cases giving them over to distant bureaucracies without >>> democratic accountability. >>> >>> The Times speaks for the plutocratic establishment; Nader >>> opposes that establishment; and the paper's news and >>> editorial position hostile to Nader follows accordingly. But >>> it also notable, and a bit more sinister, that the paper >>> will not even allow Nader's positions to be honestly >>> presented and the issues he wants to address to be debated. >>> The plutocracy reaches deeply into constraining the public's >>> right to know. >>> >>> >>> >>> > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Lonely? Get Firetalk! >Free, unlimited calls anywhere in the world. >Free voice chat on hundreds of topics. >http://click.egroups.com/1/5477/5/_/421112/_/962978304/ >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: >manhattangreens-unsubscribe@eGroups.com >Return-Path: >Received: from rly-za03.mx.aol.com (rly-za03.mail.aol.com [172.31.36.99]) >by air-za05.mail.aol.com (v75.18) with ESMTP; Fri, 07 Jul 2000 00:31:52 >-0400 >Received: from tao.ca (tao.ca [198.96.117.188]) by rly-za03.mx.aol.com >(v75.18) with ESMTP; Fri, 07 Jul 2000 00:31:23 -0400 >Received: (from znet@localhost) > by tao.ca (Collective/TAO6) id e671fYq20545 > for znetcommentary-outgoing; Thu, 6 Jul 2000 21:41:34 -0400 >X-Authentication-Warning: dojo.tao.ca: znet set sender to >owner-znetcommentary@tao.ca using -f >Received: from jafar.securewebs.com (jafar.securewebs.com [208.249.217.2]) > by tao.ca (Collective/TAO6) with ESMTP id e671brj20323 > for Thu, 6 Jul 2000 21:37:53 -0400 >Received: from sysopma [140.186.48.22] by jafar.securewebs.com > (SMTPD32-5.00) id A0683C4E0084; Thu, 06 Jul 2000 19:28:56 PST >Reply-To: >From: "Michael Albert" >To: >Subject: ZNet Commentary / Ed Herman / July 7 / The NYT Versus Nader >Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2000 21:36:54 +0100 >Message-ID: >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >X-Priority: 3 (Normal) >X-MSMail-Priority: Normal >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) >Importance: Normal >X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 >Sender: owner-znetcommentary@tao.ca >Precedence: first-class > >Please note...Sustainers can access Sustainer Account >information to change email address or cc number, id, pw, >etc. at: http://zena.secureforum.com/user_login.cfm. If you >forgot your username and password, you can have it sent to >your email address via this link. > >Sustainers also please check out the new bio page for >commentators, which also lists each writers commentaries and >Z articles, too: http://zmag.org/bios > >If you pass this comment along to others, please include an >explanation that Commentaries are a premium sent to >Sustainer Donors of Z/ZNet and that to learn more about the >project folks can consult ZNet (http://www.zmag.org) and >specifically the ZNet Sustainer Pages >(http://www.zmag.org/Commentaries/donorform.htm. > >And here is today's ZNet Commentary Delivery. > > >THE NEW YORK TIMES VERSUS NADER--AND DEMOCRACY >By Edward S. Herman > >In its editorial, "Mr. Nader's Misguided Crusade" (June 30), >the New York Times assails Nader's candidacy and campaign on >grounds that are partly fraudulent and misleading (as I >describe below). But it is also clear that this attack is >based ultimately on the owners-editors satisfaction with the >political and economic status quo, which Nader is calling >into question. The editors claim that the two parties offer >voters a "clear-cut choice," so that there is "no driving >logic for a third-party candidacy this year." It follows for >them that Nader is just an ego driven "spoiler," even though >it is conceded that he has a "right to run." > >According to the Times, while Nader is close to Gore on the >issues, he rejects him because Gore is "too much of an >incrementalist." This misrepresents the serious differences >on the issues, but it also ignores Nader's fundamental >argument--that Gore and Bush are both hostages to big money, >so that just as Clinton served the monied interests with >only token gestures to the majority, Gore is sure to do the >same. It is not Gore's incrementalism, but rather what Gore >is likely to do given his and his party's financial >obligations, that differentiates Nader from Gore. > >In his excellent acceptance speech at the Green Party >Convention on June 25, Nader made numerous suggestions for >needed policy changes--resting on "peoples" rather than >"corporate yardsticks"--that neither Gore nor Bush have >addressed. Among other matters, Nader mentioned: (1) An >ending to the support of foreign dictators and the >introduction of "foreign policies that support the peasants >and the workers for a change." (2) A sharp reduction of a >bloated military budget that is badly out of control, a >situation resting on the fact that weapons manufacturers >"foist weapons systems on the Pentagon, working with a >PAC-greased supine Congress." Nader would finally declare >that long elusive "peace dividend" that will surely continue >to escape Gore-Bush. (3) Labor laws that "facilitate the >organization of trade unions" and that provide the kind of >statutory "social wage" that most European countries have >had in place for many years. (4) Major public investments in >schools, health clinics, mass transit, drinking water >systems and other services that directly benefit the >majority. (5) An attack on inequality via a revised tax >system that no longer serves the corporate elite. (6) An >ending of the "epidemic of silent environmental violence," >that rests on corporate domination, as in the continued >subsidized logging of the national forests. > >Across the board, Nader laid out a philosophy and program >that was sensitive to majority and not corporate needs. He >also stresses the importance of relieving America's children >from "the most intense marketing onslaught in history" and >the dangers of "giving too much power to the merchant >mind...because its singular focus and its self-driven >impulses run roughshod over the more non- commercial values >that define a worthy society." This attack on advertising, >consumerism, and the "let-the-fur-fly" individualism and >business culture that business domination has spawned must >have sent cold chills down the spines of the editorial >board. > >The New York Times never reproduced Nader's acceptance >speech, although it has found endless space for trivial >charges and counter-charges between Bush and Gore, fine >details of their personal histories, and the status of the >horse race between the approved duopolists. The blackout of >Nader's speech made it easier for them to make the false >editorial claim of little difference between Gore and Nader. >But it also allowed the paper to keep the issues under >cover. >One of Nader's campaign aims was to force a discussion of >major issues that the duopolists and their backers don't >want addressed. In their treatment of Nader the Times has >gone to some pains to evade those issues and to make like >all the real ones are being debated between Gore and Bush. >Thus, in addition to failing to give its readers Nader's >acceptance speech, it has covered his campaign with great >superficiality, not discussing his criticisms and programs, >but reporting on his financial wealth ("Nader Reports Big >Portfolio in Technology," June 19), his attack on the >corporate financing of the presidential debates (June 20), >and the possible effects of his candidacy on Gore's >electoral prospects (June 22). So the Times not only refuses >to evaluate Nader as a candidate in terms of his relative >integrity and intelligence, it is unwilling to allow him to >discuss basic issues in a public forum. It says his "only >realistic role" this year might be to throw the election to >Bush--but that may be because the Times (and its confreres) >will not permit Nader to serve an educational function. > >But the Times's dismissal of Nader does rest in large >measure on his policy positions and democratic philosophy. >The editors are explicitly satisfied with the range of >policy options Gore and Bush allow. When they claim that >Gore and Nader are not far apart on environmental issues, >they do not discuss whether or not Gore would follow up any >promises with action--they do not review the Clinton record >in this regard, or analyse the effects of financial >dependency on the gaps between promises and realization. But >that is because they don't care that much about the >realization of any populist promises. > >The Times does allow that Nader is different on "trade" >policy, with Nader the "protectionist" and Gore and Bush >both allegedly better serving the interests of the working >class. "Protectionism runs counter to much of what Mr. Nader >has fought for over the years." (The editors note that >foreign competition has had beneficial effects on the auto >industry.) The Times bias here is long-standing, and so is >their misrepresentation of the contesting positions and >facts. The paper has long buried polls that show the working >class opposed to the trade agreements that it and the >corporate community favor. The editors can never put it this >way, but essentially they claim that the working class >doesn't recognize its own true interests, only big business >and the Times do, and that by a coincidence once again >what's good for GM is good for us all. They also distort >Nader's position, which is not anti-trade, but is against >rules that take the right to control foreign investment and >trade out of the hands of democratic communities, in some >cases giving them over to distant bureaucracies without >democratic accountability. > >The Times speaks for the plutocratic establishment; Nader >opposes that establishment; and the paper's news and >editorial position hostile to Nader follows accordingly. But >it also notable, and a bit more sinister, that the paper >will not even allow Nader's positions to be honestly >presented and the issues he wants to address to be debated. >The plutocracy reaches deeply into constraining the public's >right to know. > - - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2000 16:50:49 -0500 From: Kevin Martin Subject: (abolition-usa) sample letters on tonight's rigged Star Wars test Dear Friends, Below are two sample letters to the editor on tonight's Star Wars test. Please feel free to sign and send as is to your local paper, or make whatever changes you deem necessary. Kevin Martin Director, Project Abolition ***** Letter #1 (May need modification depending on the outcome of Friday=92s test.) To the editor: Friday night the military launched another test of Star Wars, the proposed missile defense system that weapons contractors have been toying with for the past several years. =93Toying=94 is the only way to describe efforts to deploy a modified version of Ronald Reagan=92s 1980=92= s vision of a national missile defense. The Pentagon=92s Star Wars testing scheme cannot be taken seriously -- it is clearly rigged. A recent Time magazine article outlined the toy-like quality of the test, which was unrealistic in the extreme compared to an actual nuclear attack. Technicians launching the interceptor rocket for the test knew the proportions and dimensions of the missile =96 they knew how fast it would travel, how large it was, how powerful it was, that there was only one, and even the time that it was launched. Yes, our Star Wars experts actually listened to the countdown of the missile launch. We can only hope our future enemies might be so gracious as to allow us the same knowledge about their nuclear missiles before they launch them at us. It=92s as if our Pentagon officials know that the system won=92t work and are therefore carefully rigging their own tests. Our political system is equally rigged. The four top Star Wars contractors, Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, TRW, and Boeing, have been toying with our politicians for decades. Over the last 3 =BD years, those four contractors spent $40 million on campaign contributions and congressional lobbying to ensure increased Pentagon spending and contracting. No wonder our senators and representatives are in favor of a missile defense system that will not work, will waste billions of dollars, and will start a new global arms race. President Clinton is also toying with the idea of leaving a presidential legacy, and it looks like he might see Star Wars, whether or not it works, as his big chance to lay down something impressive in the next generation of history books. No matter what Clinton or Pentagon officials they say about the test, don=92t be fooled. Star Wars is rigged for disaster. Sincerely, Jane B. Activist Local Peace Group Letter #2 On Friday night, the U.S. conducted the third test of the Star Wars missile defense system. Many critics of Star Wars cite the system=92s exorbitant cost (at least $60 billion, according to the Congressional Budget Office) and threat to nuclear arms control in voicing opposition to the plan. Let=92s say we=92re willing to pay the economic and international politic= al costs of moving ahead with Star Wars. The question then becomes will the system work? To know that, one must first ask does the Pentagon have in place a rigorous testing program to determine whether it will work? Judging from Friday=92s test and those planned over the next four years, the answer is no. The $100 million test =96 that=92s right, one hundred million dollars -- = was conducted under ridiculously easy conditions akin to lobbing a baseball underhand to Mark McGwire, watching him hit the ball out of the park, and calling it a success. The test tells us more about the political power of the major weapons contractors -- Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon and TRW, all of which stand to make a killing off Star Wars -- than it does about whether the system will work or not. President Clinton, who is to decide whether to move ahead with Star Wars this fall, should listen to the 50 Nobel laureates, independent physicists, the international community, and the American people and decide against deploying Star Wars. If he instead listens to Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon and TRW, his legacy will be re-starting the nuclear arms race. Sincerely, Joan Q. Public Your Peace Group - - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------ End of abolition-usa-digest V1 #336 *********************************** - To unsubscribe to $LIST, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe $LIST" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message.