From: owner-abolition-usa-digest@lists.xmission.com (abolition-usa-digest) To: abolition-usa-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: abolition-usa-digest V1 #374 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 Thursday, September 7 2000 Volume 01 : Number 374 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 18:21:29 -0400 From: ASlater Subject: (abolition-usa) Addendum to Sunflower: Green Party Platform Dear Friends, The recent edition of the Sunflower, always most welcome and appreciated, quoted the miserable Democratic and Republican platforms on Star Wars. Below is the Green Party party platform, adopted in Denver this past June, on nuclear weapons and Star Wars. Alice Slater The Green Party would press for the immediate start of the negotiation of a treaty to abolish nuclear weapons, and for the completion of those negotiations by the year 2002. We would cut off all funding for the development, testing, production, and deployment of nuclear weapons, and also cut off funding for nuclear weapons research. All nuclear weapons should be taken off alert and all warheads removed from their delivery vehicles. . CONSOLIDATION of the nuclear weapons complex should move toward alternative civilian technologies and non-proliferation work, not toward a new generation of nuclear weapon design and production. The Green Party, recognizing the need for de-escalating the arms race which continues unabated in spite of the end of the 'Cold War", strongly opposes putting nuclear weapons, lasers and other weapons in space in a new militarization policy that is in clear violation of international law. Alice Slater Global Resource Action Center for the Environment (GRACE) 15 East 26th Street, Room 915 New York, NY 10010 tel: (212) 726-9161 fax: (212) 726-9160 email: aslater@gracelinks.org http://www.gracelinks.org GRACE is a member of Abolition 2000, a global network for the elimination nuclear weapons. - - 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, 07 Sep 2000 18:58:18 -0400 From: ASlater Subject: (abolition-usa) SURVEY OF PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES EXPOSES DIFFERENCES ON NUCLEAR WEAPONS >FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Adam Eidinger or Howard Hallman >September 7, 2000 202-986-6186 >or 301-896-0013 > >SURVEY OF PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES EXPOSES DIFFERENCES ON NUCLEAR WEAPONS > >Bush and Gore Fail to Answer Morality Question > >WASHINGTON, DC =AD On behalf of 48 religious leaders from a cross-section >of faith groups, Catholic Bishop Thomas Gumbleton and United Methodist >Bishop C. Dale White have released a new ten question survey of >presidential candidates on nuclear weapons and disarmament. Replies >from George W. Bush, Al Gore, and Ralph Nader reveal policy differences >on several issues. Only Nader answered all ten questions of the survey. >Neither Reform Party candidate responded. The complete survey results >are available online at http://www.umc-gbcs.org/whatsnew.htm . > >During a news conference today, the religious leaders expressed concern >that neither George W. Bush nor Al Gore answered a question on the >morality of possession, threatened use, and actual use of nuclear >weapons. >=93It=92s disappointing when faith and values are commonly used to describe >the guiding philosophy of the major party candidates and neither Bush >nor Gore will address the question of the morality of nuclear weapons,=94 >said Howard Hallman, coordinator of the survey and chair of Methodists >United for Peace with Justice. Nader responded by saying, =93Nuclear >weapons have no moral or practical use for any purpose except as a >deterrent to nuclear threats.=94 Calling the U.S. refusal to adopt a >no-first-use policy =93political immorality=94, Nader said that if elected >president, the =93U.S. will never be the first to use a nuclear weapon in >any conflict.=94 > >Another question left unanswered by Bush and Gore was how they plan to >carry out the obligation under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty >(NPT) to achieve nuclear disarmament. A review of the treaty on its >30th anniversary at the United Nations last May produced the strongest >commitment ever to the total elimination of nuclear weapons. Yet the >Clinton/Gore Administration has not laid out a plan to achieve this >goal. As a presidential campaigner, Vice President Gore has not offered >a proposal, nor has Governor Bush. Nader, though, presented a six point >plan that over time would meet the goals of the NPT. > >Other questions exposed sharp disagreements. Both Gore and Nader favor >Senate ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) as an >important step to stopping the spread of nuclear weapons. Bush opposes >ratification, saying that the treaty =93offers only words and false hopes >and high intentions.=94 > >On the possibility of taking nuclear weapons off hair-trigger alert, >Bush and Nader agree that the U.S. should commence de-alerting its >nuclear stockpile. Gore emphasized that the U.S. and Russia at this >time do not have nuclear weapons targeted at one another. But on the >possibility of separating warheads from delivery vehicles, Gore >expressed a concern for what might happen in a period of crisis if >either side tried to reunite warheads with their delivery systems. > >On the START III negotiations the survey reveals a strong commitment by >all three candidates to further reductions of the U.S. strategic >arsenal, but only Nader specifically said he would be willing to reduce >the number of nuclear weapons below the Russian proposed limit of 1,000 >warheads > >For a copy of the survey results please contact Adam Eidinger at >202-986-6186 or Howard Hallman at 301-896-0013. > >### >Presidential Candidates Views on Nuclear Disarmament Issues >Responses of > George W. Bush, Albert Gore, Jr., and Ralph Nader >to Ten Questions Posed by 48 Religious Leaders > >On August 18, 2000 forty-eight religious leaders from a cross-section of >faith groups and geographic areas wrote to the presidential candidates >of the Democratic, Green, Reform, and Republican parties, asking a >series of questions on nuclear disarmament issues. From the responses >of the candidates and their campaign staffs we obtained the views of >Governor George W. Bush (Republican), Vice President Albert Gore, Jr. >(Democratic), and Mr. Ralph Nader (Green). The two Reform Party >candidates declined to respond. The questions and the candidates' >answers (and lack of answers) are presented below. > >Religious Leaders=92 Perspective > >We look forward to a wholesome debate among the presidential candidates >on significant issues that are of great importance to the American >people. Among these issues one of the most important is the future of >the world's nuclear arsenal. Our own perspective is that the time has >come for the United States to provide creative leadership to achieve the >global elimination of nuclear weapons > >For decades numerous religious denominations, interfaith organizations, >and religious leaders have questioned the morality of nuclear weapons >and have called for their elimination. > >The Sixth Assembly of the World Council of Churches in 1983 stated: "We >believe that that the time has come when the churches must unequivocally >declare that the production and deployment as well as the use of nuclear >weapons are a crime against humanity and that such activities must be >condemned on ethical and theological grounds. Furthermore, we appeal >for the institution of a universal covenant to this effect so that >nuclear weapons and warfare are delegitimized and condemned as >violations of international law." > >Speaking for the Holy See, Archbishop Renato Martino in October 1997 >told the First Committee of the United Nations General Assembly: >"Nuclear weapons are incompatible with the peace we seek for the 21st >century. They cannot be justified. They deserve condemnation.... The >world must move to the abolition of nuclear weapons through a universal, >non-discriminatory ban with intensive inspection by a universal >authority." > >In a message on January 1, 2000 His Holiness the Dalai Lama called for a >step-by-step approach to external disarmament. He stated, "We must >first work on the total abolishment of nuclear weapons and gradually >work up to total demilitarization throughout the world." > >In the United States numerous denominations have called for the >elimination of nuclear weapons. Recently 21 heads of communion and other >religious leaders joined with 18 retired generals and admirals to point >out that "the long-term reliance of nuclear weapons in the arsenals of >the nuclear powers, and the ever-present danger of their acquisition by >others, is morally untenable and militarily unjustifiable. They >constitute a threat to the security of our nation, a peril to world >peace, a danger to the whole human family." Therefore, they called for >"action leading to the international prohibition of these weapons." > Questions to the Candidates and Their Replies > >(1) What are your views on the morality of possession, threatened use, >and actual use of nuclear weapons? To what extent do you agree or >disagree with the broad consensus that has emerged within the faith >community on the inherent immorality of nuclear weapons? > >Governor Bush: Views unknown. > >Vice President Gore: Views unknown. > >Mr. Nader: "Nuclear weapons have no moral or practical use for any >purpose except as a deterrent to nuclear threats. The U.S. government=92s >refusal to adopt a no-first-use policy is a striking example of >political immorality. If elected President, I would immediately adopt a >policy that the US will never be the first to use a nuclear weapon in >any conflict, and would urge other nuclear powers to do the same. > >"More broadly, as the first country to use nuclear weapons, and the >perennial leader in new technologies for these horrifying weapons of >mass destruction, the United States has a moral obligation to take the >lead in working for their elimination. The 1968 Non-Proliferation >Treaty gives us a legal obligation to work for elimination, as well. >Gen. George Lee Butler, the retired former commander of both the >Strategic Air Command and the U.S. Strategic Command has been eloquent >in support of abolition." > >(2) We are encouraged that the United States has joined with Russia, >United Kingdom, France, and China in making a commitment to "an >unequivocal undertaking to accomplish the total elimination of their >nuclear arsenals." This occurred in the Final Document of the 2000 >Review Conference of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). This >commitment carries forward the obligation for good faith negotiations on >nuclear disarmament as expressed in Article VI of the NPT, an agreement >signed by the United States in July 1968 and ratified by the U.S. Senate >in March 1969. If elected president, what specifically will you do >during your four-year term to fulfill this commitment? > >Governor Bush: Views unknown. > >Vice President Gore: Views unknown. > >Mr. Nader: "I would: >? Take all nuclear missiles off =91hair-trigger=92 high-alert status, and >urge the Russian President to do the same. The greatest danger of a >global nuclear disaster is an accidental launch. De-alerting will not >undermine the United States=92 ability to deter a nuclear strike. There >are over 3,000 nuclear warheads on American submarines. Enough are at >sea and on alert at any time to assure sufficient retaliation capacity >even after a massive first strike. >? Adopt a no-first-use policy, and urge other nuclear powers to do the >same. >? Stop nuclear testing, including sub-critical and virtual testing. I >would make the ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) >one of my top legislative priorities. >? Prohibit the deployment of U.S. nuclear weapons outside the United >States. >? Push for the ratification of the START II treaty, which Russia has >already ratified, work with Congress and the Joint Chiefs of Staff to >further reduce the US nuclear arsenal to around 1500 warheads as >expeditiously as possible, and begin negotiating a START III agreement >that will bring missile levels below 1,000. >? Begin talks with all nuclear nations to develop a framework and a >final date for the abolition of nuclear weapons." > >(3) For instance, do you favor multilateral negotiations to achieve a >global nuclear weapons convention that provides for total elimination of >nuclear weapons within a timebound framework with effective verification >and enforcement? > >Governor Bush: Views unknown. > >Vice President Gore: Views unknown. > >Mr. Nader: "Yes. Working toward total elimination is the only moral and >rational course. The United States, as the sole superpower, has the >responsibility to take the lead in such negotiations." > >(4) There are interim steps to take in the quest for the elimination of >nuclear weapons. For example, the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) >provides a means of controlling the spread of nuclear weapons. If >elected president, will you seek ratification of the CTBT by the United >States Senate? > >Governor Bush: "Our nation should continue its moratorium on testing. >But in the hard work of halting proliferation, the Comprehensive Test >Ban Treaty is not the answer. The CTBT does not stop proliferation, >especially to renegade regimes. It is not verifiable. It is not >enforceable. And it would stop us from ensuring the safety and >reliability of our nation=92s deterrent, should the need arise. On these >crucial matters, it offers only words and false hopes and high >intentions =AD with no guarantees whatever. We can fight the spread of >nuclear weapons, but we cannot wish them away with unwise treaties." > >Vice President Gore: "I support ratification of the Comprehensive Test >Ban Treaty, and I will continue to fight for its ratification. Because >of the Treaty's importance to the long-term national security interests >of our country, I intend to take this issue to the American people >during my campaign for the Presidency, and if elected, my first act as >President will be to put the Treaty back before the Senate with a demand >from the American people for its ratification." > >Mr. Nader: "Nuclear testing poses a grave threat to the environment and >public health, and increases the danger of nuclear war by promoting the >development of new nuclear-weapons technology. I would both immediately >halt all U.S. nuclear test explosions, including sub-critical and >virtual testing, and make the ratification of the CTBT a high priority." > >(5) Many experts have pointed out the inherent danger of keeping U.S. >and Russian strategic nuclear weapons on hair-trigger alert. If elected >president, will you embark upon a de-alerting initiative to take >strategic weapons off hair-trigger alert? If so, please provide >specifics. > >Governor Bush: "The United States should remove as many weapons as >possible from high-alert, hair-trigger status -- another unnecessary >vestige of Cold War confrontation. Preparation for quick launch -- >within minutes after warning or an attack -- was the rule during the era >of superpower rivalry. But today, for two nations at peace, keeping so >many on high alert may create unacceptable risks of accidental or >unauthorized launch. So, as president, I will ask for an assessment of >what we can safely do to lower the alert status of our forces." > >Vice President Gore: In another questionnaire when asked about Admiral >Stansfield Turner's proposal that the U.S. take the initiative to create >a reciprocal reduction in nuclear alert status by separating warheads >from delivery systems and moving the components hundreds of miles away >to a storage sites monitored by verification teams, Vice President Gore >responded as follows: "Right now, U.S. nuclear warheads are not >targeted against Russian targets, and the Russians are similarly >"de-targeted." I have concerns about Admiral Turner's ideas because of >the way in which they might work out in a period of crisis if either >side tried to reunite warheads with their delivery systems. This issue >is one that requires further detailed study." > >Mr. Nader: "Due to Russia=92s collapsing military infrastructure, the >danger of an accidental nuclear launch is greater now than it was at any >time during the Cold War. I would immediately take all U.S. nuclear >missiles off of =91hair-trigger=92 high-alert status, and strongly urge >President Putin to do the same. Again, this will not undermine the >country=92s ability to effectively deter a nuclear strike. Taking nuclear >weapons off high-alert status is the single most important step we could >take towards preventing a nuclear disaster." > >(6) During the past fifteen years progress has been made in reduction of >nuclear weapons through treaties between the United States and the >Soviet Union, then Russia. Two treaties were negotiated under >President Ronald Reagan: the Intermediate Nuclear Force (INF) Treaty to >eliminate an entire class of nuclear weapons and the first Strategic >Arms Reduction Treaty (START I). Another treaty, START II, was >negotiated under President George Bush. Russian President Vladimir >Putin has indicated a willingness to negotiate a START III agreement to >reduce the number of deployed strategic warheads to 1,000 on each side. >However, we understand that the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff insist upon >keeping 2,500 warheads in active service because of the targeting >requirements of current U.S. policy. If elected president, will you >change U.S. policy so that deeper bilateral cuts in strategic weapons >can occur? Will you negotiate a START III agreement with Russia? What >level of strategic warheads will you seek? > >Governor Bush: "America should rethink the requirements for nuclear >deterrence in a new security environment. The premises of Cold War >nuclear targeting should no longer dictate the size of our arsenal. As >president, I will ask the Secretary of Defense to conduct an assessment >of our nuclear force posture and determine how best to meet our security >needs. While the exact number of weapons can come only from such an >assessment, I will pursue the lowest possible number consistent with >national security. It should be possible to reduce the number of >American nuclear weapons significantly further than what has already >been agreed to under START II, without compromising our security in any >way. We should not keep weapons that our military planners do not >need. These unneeded weapons are the expensive relics of dead >conflicts. And they do nothing to make us more secure." > >Vice President Gore: "I believe in the value of nuclear deterrence for >the foreseeable future, but I do not think that we need incremental >increases in our nuclear arsenal. In fact, I am interested in seeing our >nuclear arsenal reduced substantially through arms control. This >Administration is working on the entry into force of the START II >Treaty, negotiation of a START III Treaty providing for even deeper >reduction in weapons pointed at the United States, and an agreement with >Russia to adjust the ABM Treaty to make it possible to defend ourselves >against rogue states." > >Mr. Nader: "I would push for immediate ratification of START II, and >immediately begin negotiations of a START III agreement that will bring >missile levels below 1,000. Once we have achieved this level of >disarmament we would be in a position to begin talks with all nuclear >nations for the negotiation of deeper cuts and the eventual abolition of >nuclear weapons. > >"The Center for Defense Information reports that the Pentagon=92s >remarkably bloated list of targets for nuclear warheads has actually >grown since the end of the Cold War. I would provide the presidential >leadership that has been lacking to reduce the target list, which is a >major technical barrier to the negotiation of a START III agreement." > >(7) Complementary to nuclear arms reduction through treaties is the >undertaking of reciprocal initiatives through executive action. This >was the approach used by President Bush in 1991 when he took unilateral >action to deactivate a large number of U.S. strategic weapons and >to withdraw most U.S. tactical nuclear weapons stationed outside the >United States. A few weeks later Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev >reciprocated with similar actions. Would you as president use similar >reciprocal initiatives to achieve such objectives as de-alerting and >significant reductions in the nuclear arsenal? If so, please provide >specifics. > >Governor Bush: "These changes to our forces should not require years >and years of detailed arms control negotiation. There is a precedent >that proves the power of leadership. In 1991, the United States invited >the Soviet Union to join it in removing tactical nuclear weapons from >the arsenal. Hugh reductions were achieved in a matter of months, >making the world much safer, more quickly. Similarly, in the area of >strategic nuclear weapons, we should invite the Russian government to >accept the new vision I have outlined, and act on it. But the United >States should be prepared to lead by example, because it is in our best >interest and the best interest of the world." > >Vice President Gore: Views unknown. > >Mr. Nader: "I would use reciprocal initiatives in parallel with treaty >negotiation. In particular, as discussed earlier, I would act >immediately to take all nuclear weapons off of high alert, and work to >reduce the number of deployed, strategic warheads to 1500. Both of >these could safely be done unilaterally, with strong urging that Russia >follow suit" > >(8) We note that numerous retired generals, admirals, and national >security civilian officials have indicated that nuclear weapons have no >war-fighting utility. We also know that Presidents Truman and >Eisenhower chose not to use nuclear weapons in the Korean War and that >Presidents Johnson and Nixon chose not to use nuclear weapons in the >Vietnam War. Do you see any utility for nuclear weapons in war? If >so, please tell us the categories of targets you as commander-in-chief >would consider legitimate to strike with nuclear weapons. > >Governor Bush: "Deterrence remains the first line of defense against >nuclear attack." Governor Bush's views are unknown on war-fighting >utility of nuclear weapons or specific targeting. > >Vice President Gore: "America must maintain its nuclear strength, with >adequate offensive forces to ensure deterrence." Vice President Gore's >views are unknown on war-fighting utility of nuclear weapons or specific >targeting. > >Mr. Nader: "The only practical use of nuclear weapons is as a deterrent >to nuclear threats from other countries. They should not be used for >any other purpose whatsoever." > > (9) If your reply indicates that nuclear weapons are useful only to >deter other nuclear weapons, would not the wisest and safest course of >action be to achieve the universal elimination of nuclear weapons >through such measures as previously identified? > >Governor Bush: No comment. > >Vice President Gore: No comment. > >Mr. Nader: "I agree completely. As I have said above, we should set >complete elimination of nuclear weapons as a long-term goal, and >immediately begin taking concrete steps to de-alert, deactivate and >eliminate nuclear weapons." > >(10) Are there other initiatives you plan to undertake for the >elimination of nuclear weapons? > >Governor Bush: "If elected President, one of my highest foreign policy >priorities will be to check the contagious spread of weapons of mass >destruction, and the means to deliver them. We must work to constrict >the supply of nuclear materials and the means to deliver them by making >this a priority with Russia and China. Our nation must cut off the >demand for nuclear weapons by addressing the security concerns of those >who renounce these weapons. And our nation must diminish the evil >attraction of these weapons for rogue states by rendering them useless >with missile defense. > >"In an act of foresight and statesmanship, Sen. Richard Lugar and Sen. >Sam Nunn realized that existing Russian nuclear facilities were in >danger of being compromised. Under the Nunn-Lugar program, security at >many Russian nuclear facilities has been improved and warheads have been >destroyed. I=92ll ask the Congress to increase substantially our >assistance to dismantle as many of Russia=92s weapons as possible, as >quickly as possible." > >Vice President Gore: "I support the program that our Administration has >developed with North Korea to forestall plutonium production >development, a central element of which is to support the financing of a >non-threatening type of reactor for nuclear energy. I also support our >efforts to work with Russia to reduce the size of its nuclear weapons >establishment, such as the Nuclear Cities Initiative, and I have >personally engaged, through the U.S-Russia Binational Commission, in >efforts that have resulted in the safe demilitarization of over 1500 >Russian nuclear warheads. Similarly, I have worked for removal of >nuclear weapons, plutonium, and enriched uranium from the states of the >former Soviet Union." > >Mr. Nader: "I would phase out the use of nuclear power in the United >States, stop the US government from promoting nuclear power abroad, and >work toward the global abolition of nuclear energy. History shows that >it is impossible to separate the =93peaceful atom=94 from the potential >proliferation of nuclear weapons. As part of the phase-out, I would >immediately ban the conversion of plutonium into Mixed Oxide (MOX) fuel, >a particularly ill-advised procedure. I would push for a global ban on >the production of weapons-usable fissile materials. > >"I would halt all research into the design of new nuclear weapons, >including improving existing types and creating new types. The U.S. has >all the nuclear weapons that it ever needs. Further research is likely >to destabilize our position by making other countries feel threatened, >and could damage our security directly when our ideas leak out and are >copied. There are no benefits except to contractors at our national >labs and military contractors in general. It is time to put the >interests of the people of this country and the world above the profits >of General Dynamics and Lockheed-Martin. > >"I would abandon research into the useless and wasteful National Missile >Defense program, and re-confirm the United States=92 support for the ABM >treaty. > >"I would cancel the Department of Energy=92s plans to produce tritium, and >push for legislation to ban the production of tritium in the United >States. Current tritium plans assume no progress on arms control. The >U.S. has a sizable inventory of tritium, and tritium can be recovered >from scrapped nuclear warheads. If we can even approach levels already >negotiated in START II, or discussed for START III, there will be no >need for new tritium far into the future. If elected President, I will >devote my energy to making sure that nuclear arms are reduced lower >still." > > >Sources > >Governor George W. Bush. Information provided by campaign staff: (1) >Speech on "New Leadership on National Security" given in Washington, >D.C. on May 23, 2000; (2) not yet published answers to questions from an >arms control organization. > >Vice President Albert Gore, Jr. (1) Answers to questions posed by >Council for a Livable World, November 1999; (2) speech at International >Press Institute, Boston, MA, April 30, 2000; (3) Al Gore web site. > >Mr. Ralph Nader. Statement entitled "Ralph Nader's Response to >Interfaith Questionnaire on Elimination of Nuclear Weapons", received >September 6, 2000. > Signers of Letter to Presidential Candidates > > Gary Baldridge, Global Missions Coordinator >Cooperative Baptist Fellowship >Atlanta, GA > >The Most Reverend Victor H. Balke >Bishop, Catholic Diocese of Crookston >Crookston, MN > >Bruce Birchard, General Secretary >Friends General Conference >Religious Society of Friends (Quakers) >Philadelphia, PA > >The Rev. Leonard B. Bjorman, Co-Chair >Presbyterian Peace Fellowship >Syracuse, NY > >The Right Reverend Frederick H. Borsch >Bishop, Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles >Los Angeles, CA > >J. Daryl Byler, Director >Washington Office >Mennonite Central Committee U.S. > >Bishop Kenneth L. Carder >Nashville Area, United Methodist Church >Nashville, TN > >C. Wayne Carter, General Secretary (Interim) >Friends United Meeting >Richmond, IN > >The Rev. Dr. Forrest Church, Senior Minister >All Saints Unitarian Church >New York, NY > >The Most Reverend Matthew H. Clark >Bishop, Catholic Diocese of Rochester > >Rochester, NY > >The Right Reverend John P. Croneberger >Bishop Coadjutor, Episcopal Diocese of Newark >Newark, NJ > > > >The Rev. Dr. James Dunn, Visiting Professor >Wake Forest Divinity School >Winston-Salem, NC > >The Most Reverend Patrick F. Flores >Archbishop, Catholic Archdiocese of San Antonio >San Antonio, TX > >The Rev. Dr. James Forbes, Jr., Senior Minister >Riverside Church >New York, NY > >Rabbi Arthur Green >Professor, Brandeis University >Waltham, MA > >The Most Reverend Thomas Gumbleton >Auxiliary Bishop, Catholic Archdiocese of Detroit >Detroit, MI > >The Right Reverend Ronald H. Haines >Bishop, Episcopal Diocese of Washington >Washington, DC > >Howard W. Hallman, Chair >Methodists United for Peace with Justice >Bethesda, MD > >The Right Reverend Sanford Z.K. Hampton >Assistant Bishop, Episcopal Diocese of Olympia >Seattle, WA > >Dr. Susannah Heschel >Eli Black Professor of Jewish Studies >Dartmouth College >Hanover, NH > >Kathleen S. Hurty, Executive Director >Church Women United >New York, NY > >Thomas J. Jeavons, General Secretary >Philadelphia Yearly Meeting >Religious Society of Friends (Quakers) >Philadelphia, PA > > >Rabbi Mordechai Liebling >Jewish Reconstructionist Federation > and The Shefa Fund > >Rabbi Michael Lerner >Editor, TIKKUN Magazine >San Francisco, CA > >Rabbi Richard N. Levy >Director of Rabbinical Studies, Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of >Religion >Los Angeles, CA > >The Most Reverend Raymond A. Lucker >Bishop, Catholic Diocese of New Ulm >New Ulm, MN > >Bishop Ernest S. Lyght >New York Area, United Methodist Church >White Plains, NY > >The Rev. Dr. Clinton M. Marsh, Former Moderator >Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) >Atlanta, GA > >Bishop Joel B. Martinez >Nebraska Area, United Methodist Church >Lincoln, NE > >Rabbi Paul Menitoff, Executive Vice President >Central Conference of American Rabbis >New York, NY > >The Right Reverend William D. Persell >Bishop, Episcopal Diocese of Chicago >Chicago, IL > >Don Reeves, General Secretary (Interim) >American Friends Service Committee >Philadelphia, PA > >Judy Mills Reimer, Executive Director >Church of the Brethren General Board >Elgin, IL > >The Rev. Meg A. Riley, Director >Washington Office for Faith in Action >Unitarian Universalist Association >Washington, DC >Rabbi David Saperstein, Director >Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism >Washington, DC > >Dr. Ronald J. Sider, President >Evangelicals for Social Action >Wynnewood, PA > >Dr. Glen Stassen, Professor >Fuller Theological Seminary >Pasadena, CA > >The Rev. Ron Stief, Director >Justice and Witness Ministries >United Church of Christ >Washington, DC > >The Most Reverend Walter F. Sullivan >Bishop, Catholic Diocese of Richmond >Richmond, VA > >Bishop Melvin G. Talbert >California-Nevada Area, United Methodist Church >West Sacramento, CA > >The Rev. John H. Thomas >General Minister and President >United Church of Christ >Cleveland, OH > >Rabbi Arthur Waskow, Director >The Shalom Center >Philadelphia, PA > >The Rev. Dr. Daniel W. Weiss, General Secretary >American Baptist Churches USA >Valley Forge, PA > >Bishop C. Dale White >United Methodist Church >Newport, RI > >Marilyn M. White, Co-Chair >Presbyterian Peace Fellowship >League City, TX > >The Right Reverend Arthur B. Williams, Jr. >Bishop Suffragan, Episcopal Diocese of Ohio >Cleveland, OH >The Rev. Dr. Albert C. Winn, Former Moderator >Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) >Winston-Salem, NC > > >The Rev. L. William Yolton, Executive Secretary >Presbyterian Peace Fellowship >Alexandria, VA > > > > >September 7. 2000 > > >For further information, contact the facilitator of this project: > >Howard W. Hallman, Chair >Methodists United for Peace with Justice >6508 Wilmett Road >Bethesda, MD 20817 > >Phone/fax: 301 896-0013 >E-mail: mupj@igc.org > =20 - - 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, 07 Sep 2000 17:33:31 -0700 From: Shundahai Network Subject: (abolition-usa) NUCLEAR FREE GREAT BASIN GATHERING <<>I<<>I<<>I<<>I<<>I<<>I<<>I<<>I<<>I<<>I<<>I<<>I<<> Email text flyer: NUCLEAR FREE GREAT BASIN GATHERING <<>I<<>I<<>I<<>I<<>I<<>I<<>I<<>I<<>I<<>I<<>I<<>I<<> NUCLEAR FREE GREAT BASIN GATHERING October 6TH - 9TH, 2000, Peace Camp - Newe Sogobia Across from the main entrance to the Nevada Test Site, 65 miles Northwest of Las Vegas, NV, Mercury Exit off Hwy 95. http://www.shundahai.org/great_basin_2k.html You are invited to join us in the heart of the beautiful but fragile Great Basin Desert to learn about and strategize on nuclear and indigenous issues within our bio-region. Study the successes of other anti-nuclear campaigns, Celebrate our uniqueness and diversity and help build a strong and unified Alliance for a Nuclear Free Great Basin. The Great Basin bio region is a beautiful, diverse and fragile areas stretching through five states. Home to strong indigenous people and cultures, high mountainous alpine lakes and forests, as well as many endangered and threatened plants and wildlife. Sadly, this land has experienced the deadly effects of nuclear weapons testing as well as the disposal of radioactive and toxic waste in leaking dumps. Man made low level radiation causes cancer, premature aging, immune system suppression, birth defects and genetic mutations. Daily shipments of nuclear and hazardous materials travel on our roads and railways to be dumped in the Great Basin. A serious nuclear accident could cause deaths and sickness, irreversibly contaminating large areas, and the U.S. has plans to continue and expand the radioactive assault on our air, water and land. Now is the time to create a Nuclear Free Great Basin. Together we can work effectively with other regional Nuclear Free alliances to change nuclear policies, protecting Mother Earth and our future generations. NUCLEAR FREE GREAT BASIN GATHERING Current Schedule FRIDAY, OCT 6TH: Registration; Welcome to Newe Sogobia and Nevada Test Site and weekend orientation; National and International Nuclear Free Campaigns, successes and failures. Plan Yucca Mountain Citizens Inspection Team Action SATURDAY, OCT 7TH: Nuclear issues within the Great Basin, panel discussion and strategizing workshop; Indigenous issues within the Great Basin, panel discussion and workshop; Strategy proposals for Great Basin Nuclear Free Campaign, discussion; Concert and Celebration SUNDAY, OCT 8TH: Create time-line for Great Basin Nuclear Free Campaign, workshops; Building an Alliance for a Nuclear Free Great Basin, workshop; Plan Yucca Mountain Citizens Inspection Team Action MONDAY, OCT 9TH: Convoy to Yucca Mountain Sunrise Ceremony at the base of Yucca Mountain Rally and Yucca Mountain Citizens Inspection Team Action; Final plenary evaluation meeting held at Yucca Mountain Daily Sunrise Ceremonies and Sweatlodges will be held. Meals and water will be provided Be prepared for Desert Camping, hot days and cool nights Donations are accepted to cover costs For more information please call: 702-647-3095 Sponsored By: Shundahai Network, and Citizen Alert http://www.shundahai.org/great_basin_2k.html The Nuclear Free Great Basin Gathering will be held in solidarity with the October 7th Actions to stop the Ballistic Missile Defense system. http://www.space4peace.org/http://www.space4peace.org/ ><<><< ><<><< ><<><< ><<><< ><<><< ><<><< ><<><< ><<><< ><<><< ><<><< ><<><< ><<><< SHUNDAHAI NETWORK "Peace and Harmony with all Creation" out,out5007 Elmhurst St., Las Vegas, NV 89108-1304 Phone:(702) 647-3095 (FAX) 647-9385 Email: shundahai@shundahai.org 0000,0000,fefehttp://www.shundahai.org ---once again, updated daily Shundahai Network is proud to be part of: US Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons Abolition 2000: A Global Network to Eliminate Nuclear Weapons People of Color/ Disenfranchised Communities ><< ><<><< ><<><< ><<><< ><<><< ><<><< ><<><< ><<><< ><<><< ><<><< ><<><< - - 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, 07 Sep 2000 17:47:34 -0700 From: Shundahai Network Subject: (abolition-usa) Las Vegas Declared Nuclear Free Zone! Hi Friends, Just wanted to share this good news with you! PRESS RELEASE CONTACT: Susi Snyder September 6, 2000 702-647-3095 LAS VEGAS DECLARED NUCLEAR-FREE ZONE This morning the Mayor and City Council of Las Vegas passed resolution R-85-2000, declaring Las Vegas a Nuclear Free Zone. This resolution opposes legislation that would allow the transportation, storage or production of spent nuclear fuel, high-level nuclear waste, and low-level radioactive waste within the City of Las Vegas. The resolution also supports the on site storage of spent nuclear fuel, a shift in federal funding for nuclear waste disposal studies, and the research and use of alternative renewable energy sources. =93The majority of the people of Las Vegas are against radioactive waste being shipped through the city,=94 said Susi Snyder, =93a Nuclear-Free L= as Vegas is a great step towards a Nuclear-Free Great Basin.=93 =20 The resolution passed this morning was proposed at a meeting between May= or Goodman, the Shundahai Network, Citizens Nuclear Information Committee an= d Citizen Alert in July. =20 =93We hope that all other counties and cities within Nevada will be insp= ired to pass their own nuclear free zone resolutions, =93 said Reinard Knutsen= , =93This will send a strong signal to Washington that Nevada is not the dumping ground for the nuclear industry.=94 Reno, Sparks and Henderson h= ave also declared themselves to be Nuclear-Free Zones. The passage of this resolution is in great timing for Nevada Is Not A Wasteland Day, September 30th, (12-8pm, Morrell Park in Henderson), and t= he Nuclear Free Great Basin Gathering, October 6-9th, at Peace Camp, Newe Sogobia (Mercury exit, US 95). - -30- RESOLUTION TO DESIGNATE LAS VEGAS A NUCLEAR-FREE ZONE Adopted Unanimously by Las Vegas City Council Sept 6th, 2000 WHEREAS, Congress has designated Yucca Mountain, Nevada, the only site t= o be studied for a High-level nuclear waste repository; and=20 WHEREAS, the proposed Yucca Mountain site should be disqualified from consideration due to scientifically proven geologic and technical factors= ; and=20 WHEREAS, billions of taxpayer dollars have already been spent on the Yuc= ca Mountain Project; and WHEREAS, The government of the State of Nevada and the City of Las Vegas are opposed to Yucca Mountain; and WHEREAS, the State of Nevada has already made countless sacrifices for t= he nation's nuclear programs; and WHEREAS, the Nevada Test Site is currently used by the Department of Energy as a site for the final disposal of low level radioactive waste fr= om the cleanup of the Department of Energy's weapons complex; and WHEREAS, high level nuclear waste as well as some low level nuclear wast= e is extremely dangerous, containing long-lived radioactive isotopes; and=20 WHEREAS, this high level nuclear waste would consist of irradiated nucle= ar fuel rods and other radioactive waste; and WHEREAS, legislation is introduced each year and is currently being debated which, if adopted by Congress and signed into law by the Presiden= t of the United States, will allow for the transport of radioactive waste through the City of Las Vegas and other towns in Nevada; and=20 WHEREAS, this legislation would create an above ground interim storage facility for high level nuclear waste at the Nevada Test Site; and=20 WHEREAS, this legislation would begin the largest nuclear waste transportation campaign in history, possibly endangering residents in 43 states, thousands of towns and cities; and WHEREAS, the Department of Energy predicts that there will be nuclear waste accidents occurring during this transportation campaign; and WHEREAS, lives, health, and properties of Las Vegas residents, living an= d working along transportation routes will be unnecessarily endangered by accidents or incidents; and WHEREAS, the City of Las Vegas will have limited funding for training of emergency response personnel and for purchase of necessary equipment to cope with a radiological emergency; and WHEREAS, the City of Las Vegas does not have the independent resources required to effectively cope with a radiological disaster that could occu= r as a result of radioactive waste transported through Las Vegas; and=20 WHEREAS, tourism has long been the life-blood of Nevada's economy, with over half of the estate's economic activity resulting directly or indirectly from tourism related expenditures; and=20 WHEREAS, the transportation of nuclear waste through Las Vegas would diminish the safe and attractive image the city now conveys, poses a possible health risk to potential visitors and would damage the city and state's economy; and WHEREAS, the production of both high- and low- level waste continues, transportation to either an interim or permanent repository does nothing = to solve the nuclear waste problem in our country; and=20 WHEREAS, the city of Las Vegas supports basing nuclear waste disposal decisions that will impact future generations on sound science, long term safety considerations and a thorough evaluation of all possible options; = and=20 WHEREAS, at or near reactor above-ground monitored retrievable dry cask storage technology can be used to safely and economically store high-leve= l radioactive wastes on site for at least 100 years;=20 NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Mayor and Council of the City Of Las Vegas as follows: SECTION 1: That the Mayor and City Council of Las Vegas oppose all legislation that would require or allow transportation of all radioactive waste near or through the City of Las Vegas; SECTION 2: That the Mayor and City Council of Las Vegas support at reacto= r, on-site storage of high-level nuclear waste and a shift in funding to fin= d a scientifically defensible and publicly acceptable method of disposal; SECTION 3: That the Mayor and City Council of Las Vegas support the research and use of alternative renewable energy sources; SECTION 4: That radioactive waste and nuclear waste, as referred to in this Resolution, is principally intended to include fuel materials utiliz= ed in nuclear power production. This Resolution does not relate to radioactive materials used, in the City of Las Vegas, for medical applications, industrial radiography and personal purposes such as time pieces or smoke detectors;=20 SECTION 5: That in opposition to legislation that would allow the transportation, storage or production of spent nuclear fuel, high-level nuclear waste, and low-level radioactive waste within the City of Las Vegas, the mayor and City Council of Las Vegas designate the City of Las Vegas as a Nuclear Free Zone. - - 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 #374 *********************************** - 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.