From: owner-abolition-usa-digest@lists.xmission.com (abolition-usa-digest) To: abolition-usa-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: abolition-usa-digest V1 #17 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 Wednesday, September 16 1998 Volume 01 : Number 017 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 09:26:18 +0100 (BST) From: Janet Bloomfield Subject: (abolition-usa) FAX ALERT FASLANE PEACE CAMP (fwd) - ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 18:07:36 +0200 From: Pol D'Huyvetter To: abolition-caucus@igc.apc.org, fme@motherearth.org, a-days@motherearth.org, induran@motherearth.org, tp2000.lst.grp@gn.apc.org Cc: janejim@gn.apc.org Subject: FAX ALERT FASLANE PEACE CAMP Cc: =09Faslane Peace Camp =09=09=09*** URGENT ALERT *** =09=09=09MODEL LETTER ENCLOSED =09=09 PLEASE NETWORK THIS ALERT Gent, 13 September 1998 Dear friends on the networks, One more time Internet might help us win a struggle !!! Today we sollicit your help as the Faslane Peace Camp in Helensburgh, Scotland, is threatened with eviction. Faslane Peace Camp, with its 16 year history, is the oldest non-violent peace camp opposing nuclear weaponry in the world (more information about the Peace Camp is included). It is located near the British Trident nuclear submarine base. The Trident first strike Strategic Nuclear Weapon System has the destructive potential of 1074 times Hiroshima. Today you can help by faxing a letter (model letter enclosed) to -------------------------------------------------------------- =20 - -> Argyll & Bute District Council=09=09=09+44-1546 604349 =20 Please fax copy to : -------------------- - -> For Mother Earth=09=09=09 =09=09+32-9-233 73 02 - -> Press Association, Attn. Joe Quinn=09=09+44-141-221 0283 - -> Helensburgh Advertiser, Att. Kristina Kran=09+44-1436 671 241 =20 The Peace Camp is in urgent need of your support. Councillors have finally agreed to meet a delegation of the Peace Camp on 21 September 1998 at the Victoria Halls in Helensburgh. But we cannot expect anything other than that they will continue in their endeavour to evict the Peace Camp whilst leaving Trident untouched in the heart of their constituency. We are however confident that they will take a different attitude if they receive requests from around the world to support the non-violent resistence movement at the Faslane Camp. The Peace Camp needs as much national and international support as we can muster. We urge you to register your support for the Camp. Yours Sincerely, Helen Markham=09=09=09=09Pol D'Huyvetter Faslane Peace Camp=09=09=09For Mother Earth International Office Shandon,=09=09=09=09Lange Steenstraat 16/d near Helensburgh=09=09=099000 Gent Dumbartonshire=09=09=09Belgium GB8 8HT=09=09=09=09Phone +32-9-2338439 Scotland=09=09=09=09Fax +32-9-2337302 Phone +44-1436-820901=09=09E-mail: international@motherearth.org E-mail: janejim@gn.apc.org=09=09WWW: http://www.motherearth.org/ *********************************************************************** TRIDENT & FASLANE PEACE CAMP FACT-SHEET *********************************************************************** =09=09 Britain's Nuclear Weapons System The UK nuclear weapons system is based on Trident missiles bought from the USA and ready to be fired from three submarines (four from September) based at Faslane Naval Base on the Gareloch near Glasgow and stored and loaded onto the subs at Coulport on Loch Long a few miles further west. Each submarine can carry up to 96 one hundred kiloton nuclear warheads. One Trident warhead is 8 times more powerful than the Hiroshima bomb. The Trident system is a massive escalation in Britain's nuclear capacity.=20 Trident was finally outlawed by the UN International Court of Justice, when on July 8, 1996 the UN International Court of Justice (ICJ) gave its Advisory Opinion to the UN General Assembly on the illegality of nuclear weapons, stating that "methods and means of warfare which would preclude any distinction between civilians and military targets, or which would result in unnecessary suffering to combatants, are prohibited. In view of the unique characteristics of nuclear weapons, =85 the use of such weapons = is scarcely reconcilable with such requirements".=20 The Court stated clearly that "not only the use but also the treat to use nuclear weapons is generally contrary to the rules of international humanitarian law." Finally the Court also concluded unanimously that there exists a legal obligation (NPT Art. VI) to conclude a Treaty Banning all Nuclear Weapons. Though Britain, France, Russia and the USA are reluctant to participate in such multilateral negotiations, we know that the mounting pressure from NGO's and most national and local governments will soon move the the Nuclear Weapons States world to conclude such a Treaty within the framework of the United Nations. =09=09=09 Faslane Peace Camp Faslane Peace Camp is a very visible sign of hope in the struggle to abolish nuclear weapons, situated right opposite Faslane Naval Base-home of Britain=92s three nuclear-armed and nuclear-powered Trident submarines. For sixteen years now the camp has been a base for non-violent protest against the naval base. Protesters have cut through fences, negociated razor wire and swum the Gareloch to get their message accross-that the Trident system is illegal and immoral, violating international and humanitarian law (cfr. UN International Court of Justice July 8 1996). During the first two weeks of August 1998 the camp was involved in the highly successful =93Trident Ploughshares 2000=94 campaign, mounting daily actions against the base which made headlines in the UK and around the world. Seven non-violent campaigners are in Scottish prisons at this time following these protests. The Peace Camp now faces imminent eviction by Argyll and Bute District Council. The camp has planning permission and until last July had a lease for the site. And there exists a petition with 8000 signatures expressing support for the Peace Camp. But the Council has never discussed any of the problems it has with the Camp with the campers themselves or with the rest of the Argyll and Bute electorate. Neither has it explained where it intends to find the hundreds of thousands of pounds necessary to evict. The Ministry of Defence is attempting to sell woodlands adjacent to the camp at the moment-but the Peace Camp is=20 situated directly at the front of 9,5 acres of this land which has been designated for residential development. =09=09 Evict Trident, not the Peace Camp !!! end *********************************************************************** =09 =09=09MODEL LETTER FOR NGO's=20 FOR THE ATTN. OF THE ARGYLL & BUTE DISTRICT COUNCIL *********************************************************************** Place, Date For Argyll & Bute District Council Attn. John Wilson, Convenor, Argyll & Bute Council, Kilmory, Lochgilphead, PA31 8RT, Scotland Fax +44-1546 604349 Dear Mr. John Wilson, I am writing to you to express my concern about the stated intention of Argyll and Bute District Council to evict the sixteen-year-old Faslane Peace Camp. The protestors' continued peaceful protest is motivated by conscience and vindicated by international, moral and humanitarian law, as well as economic concern for billions of pounds being wasted on the military industrial complex, while millions live in destitution. I would urge the Argyll & Bute District Council to reconsider its decision, and not to stifle the voice of conscientious objection but to support the non-violent campaigners in their struggle for the abolition of these weapons of mass-destruction which are so inextricably bound up with global human misery. Together we can free the next generations from the threat of nuclear horror= =2E We look forward to your response. Yours Sincerely end=20 October 1 1998 International Day of Non-Violent Action =09 Citizens Inspect nuclear 'sites of crime' =09=09 Org: Nuclear Weapons Abolition Days =09 a working group of Abolition 2000 October 10 1998 BENEFIT FOR MOTHER EARTH - Vooruit - Gent =09=09 including: =09=09=09 =09=09 Information on disarmament actions in Faslane =09=09 (Scotland) and Kleine Brogel (Belgium) =09=09 Proclamation Winner Treasure Hunt Kleine Brogel *************************************************************** * For Mother Earth International office * *************************************************************** * Lange Steenstraat 16/D, 9000 Gent, Belgium * * Phone/fax +32-9-233 84 39 * * Mobile +32-95-28 02 59 * * Fax +32-9-233 73 02 *=20 * E-mail: international@motherearth.org *=20 *************************************************************** * WWW:http://www.motherearth.org/ * *************************************************************** * Postal account : 000-1618561-19 * ***************************************************************=20 * For Mother Earth is member of Abolition 2000 - the global * *network to eliminate nuclear weapons, the International Peace* * Bureau (IPB), World Information Service on Energy (WISE), *=20 * International Netwerk on Sustainable Energy and Eurosolar * *************************************************************** * For Mother Earth has offices in Belgium, Bulgaria, *=20 * Romania, Slovakia, Sri Lanka and USA, aswell as * * contacts/groups in Belarus, Czech Republic, France, * * Finland, Germany, Netherlands and United Kingdom * *************************************************************** WHEN SPIDERS UNITE, THEY CAN TIE DOWN A LION -Ethiopian Proverb=09=09 = =09=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: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 06:21:58 -0400 From: Carole Gallagher Subject: (abolition-usa) Re: Keep this listserve professional Peace Action - National Office wrote: > > This is the abolition caucus! A friendly reminder to keep to the topic > even as loosely defined as it is, at hand - abolition! There are > plenty of internet chat rooms and web pages to discuss the Starr report > and its legal aspects. > > - > Thank you for setting some limits. I've just opened a David McReynolds missive and don't think this listserve should be a forum for therapy and angst, just the facts related to abolition. Something in a professional league, y'know? And no pompous chest thumping by pseudo-Alpha males who use their "peace movement" work as a reason to live without guilt for their real-time activities. Awfully tiresome. No verbal pollution, please! Carole Gallagher American Ground Zero clgallagher@igc.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: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 07:01:07 -0700 (PDT) From: Joseph Gerson Subject: (abolition-usa) Discussing Clinton's Resignation is appropriate in this conference 9/14 The following is a personal, not organizational, statement : Friends, whether or not you completely agree with David, he is certainly right that discussing the fate of the American Caeser, the Commander in Chief of U.S. military forces - including nuclear - is right. How long ago was it that people across the globe were wondering whether or not the U.S. had attacked Afghanistan and Sudan with missiles had more to do with Monicagate than U.S. elite readings of U.S. national interests? Well before the U.S. constitutional crisis, our collective hopes of achieving negotiation of a treaty by the year 2000 to eliminate nuclear weapons were more than dim (something we're going to have to face in our name, slogan and means) because we have yet to build the popular movement needed to force politicians to inaugurate a non-nuclear order. This includes the US AND other nuclear powers. There ain't no way we're going to get a treaty with a "No-Nothing" dominated Congress, more sophisticated imperialists in Congress and elsewhere in Washington's seats of power, and with this president (wounded or otherwise.) Impeachment of Clinton is unlikely because it is not year clear that the committed "high crimes and misdemeanors" described in the U.S. constitution, and because most Congressional Republicans would prefer to have an even weaker Democratic president (which is not to say that Clinton hasn't been a Republican attempting to pass as a Democrat - whatever that is these days). Republicans certainly do not wish to give Gore the advantages of incumbency as we approach the year 2000 - even if the possibility of later impeaching him for fund raising irregularities could lead to a Gingrich presidency (Constituinally, the Speaker of the House is next in line.) Unfortunately, it is not clear that anyone has or will have the the leverage to force Clinton out of the White House (especially as there is increasing talk of censoring Clinton rather than impeaching him.) While the cigar may have come as a shocking surprise to most people in the U.S., for the most part they have read Clinton clearly since his sexual exploits became a subject of political debate during the 1992 election. Tragically, Clinton's values, foibles, and commitment to yuppie-dom economics are more American than many of us would wish, or at least that's what the initial polling in the wake of Starr's atrocity seem to indicate. Should Clinton be forced to resign, we should not expect Gore (the prime advocate of the MX missile - remember?) to be any better than Clinton in terms of moving the U.S. from a doctrine in which preparations for nuclear war remain "a cornerstone of our policy", more accurately understood as nuclear terrorism. I recall a conversation with Daniel Ellsberg a couple of years ago in which he described Gore as "the most dangerous man in Washington." At his DNC speech last Thursday he emphasized his commitment to "continuity" to the policies of these past six years. Joseph Gerson At 06:42 PM 9/13/98 EDT, DavidMcR@aol.com wrote: >In a message dated 9/13/98 6:39:36 PM Eastern Daylight Time, >panukes@igc.apc.org writes: > ><< Subj: Re: (abolition-usa) Fwd: Response to Counsel's Rebuttal > Date: 9/13/98 6:39:36 PM Eastern Daylight Time > From: panukes@igc.apc.org (Peace Action - National Office) > Sender: owner-abolition-usa@lists.xmission.com > Reply-to: abolition-usa@lists.xmission.com > To: abolition-usa@lists.xmission.com > > This is the abolition caucus! A friendly reminder to keep to the topic > even as loosely defined as it is, at hand - abolition! There are > plenty of internet chat rooms and web pages to discuss the Starr report > and its legal aspects. > > >> > Sorry but the point is not well taken. Whether we like it or not, (and I am >very distressed about it), the issue of foreign policy, Bill Clinton, and the >Starr report are news and are linked in ways we can't dodge. Abolition 2000 >doesn't live in a gilded cage - it is part of a real world in which events are >occuring which do touch on things such as the Starr report. > >Sincerely, >David McReynolds > >- > 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. > > - - 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: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 11:29:44 -0400 From: Carole Gallagher Subject: Re: (abolition-usa) Discussing Clinton's Resignation is appropriate in this conference Regarding a potential resignation, I agree tactical agendas must be discussed. Anyone who wishes to come to grips with cigar issues might do so in private or in chat rooms. Let's not stain this listserve - that's all I meant to say. Carole Gallagher American Ground Zero - - 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: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 09:28:30 -0700 (PDT) From: Peace Action - National Office Subject: Re: (abolition-usa) Fwd: Response to Counsel's Rebuttal No offense, but this is a predictable response. I even considered asking in advance not to receive responses outlining how the Star Report and various legal aspects of it relate to the President's ability to execute his office/foreign policy/and therefore abolition. Bruce > In a message dated 9/13/98 6:39:36 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > panukes@igc.apc.org writes: > > << Subj: Re: (abolition-usa) Fwd: Response to Counsel's Rebuttal > Date: 9/13/98 6:39:36 PM Eastern Daylight Time > From: panukes@igc.apc.org (Peace Action - National Office) > Sender: owner-abolition-usa@lists.xmission.com > Reply-to: abolition-usa@lists.xmission.com > To: abolition-usa@lists.xmission.com > > This is the abolition caucus! A friendly reminder to keep to the topic > even as loosely defined as it is, at hand - abolition! There are > plenty of internet chat rooms and web pages to discuss the Starr report > and its legal aspects. > > >> > Sorry but the point is not well taken. Whether we like it or not, (and I am > very distressed about it), the issue of foreign policy, Bill Clinton, and the > Starr report are news and are linked in ways we can't dodge. Abolition 2000 > doesn't live in a gilded cage - it is part of a real world in which events are > occuring which do touch on things such as the Starr report. > > Sincerely, > David McReynolds > > - > 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. - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - 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: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 20:15:33 -0400 From: Peace through Reason Subject: Re: (abolition-usa) Re: Impeaching Clinton for the Stockpile Stewardship Program Starr SHOULD be indicted for trying to derail the Constitution. David McReynolds was right about that. et in dc _______________________________________________________________________ * Peace Through Reason - http://prop1.org - Convert the War Machines! * _______________________________________________________________________ - - 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: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 21:21:28 -0400 (EDT) From: act@web.net (ACT for Disarmament) Subject: Re: (abolition-usa) Discussing Clinton's Resignation is appropriate in this conference Carole wrote: > Regarding a potential resignation, I agree tactical agendas must be > discussed. Anyone who wishes to come to grips with cigar issues might do > so in private or in chat rooms. In principle I agree with you. On the other hand, I think David's earlier remarks regarding Clinton respond to the rather sorry state of political culture. I won't say it is any healthier outside the U.S. It isn't. Ultimately, it is within this political culture that we must work to abolish nuclear weapons. I would have liked to see David's thoughts somehow linked to the abolition cause. How can we relate these so-called sexual diversions to the folly of nuclear weapons, and of war itself? How can the peace movement tie in to issues that, for whatever reason, are pre-occupying the American -- indeed the global -- mind? I sincerely believe the peace movement needs to be able to respond to seemingly unrelated front-page issues. I think if abolitionists could make the link to Zipper-gate, or whatever, in a *** concrete, mature *** fashion, we could manipulate our issues onto the front pages. In short, David is onto something. Let's build on this. Carole further wrote: > Let's not stain this listserve - that's all I meant to say. Okay, Carole, you win the "Bad Pun of the Month Award". But this is the kind of creativity that needs to happen if we are to move our issue. Saul Chernos ACT for Disarmament (and freelance journalist) Toronto Canada act@web.net - - 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: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 16:48:30 -1000 From: Richard Salvador Subject: Re: (abolition-usa) Discussing Clinton's Resignation is appropriate in this conference Aloha from Hawai'i, I can't remember where I heard it and which reporter was making the analysis but a comparison of Clinton to Richard Nixon's weakened moral authority during the latter's troubles before his resignation allegedly had led to a crescendoing of the environmental lobby's influence on Nixon in spite of strong Conservative opposition--which led to the passage of important environmental regulations and related regulatory agencies. Supposedly the act creating the EPA was passed during Nixon's troubles. Which leads me to believe that political strategy, specifically re very well-thought out anti-nuclear or disarmament issues at this crucial moment of the presidential power vacuum is crucial. This is not say that we take advantage of Clinton's weakness at this time. But the convergence of several forces that creates political space for exerting a powerful civil society stand on influencing official disarmament policy may be at hand. One issue, e.g. subcritical testings, etc, etc, rather than a plethora of demands may be an option. Just some thoughts, from a political science student! Mahalo (thanks) and greetings from Hawai'i. Richard Salvador Univ of Hawai'i-Manoa Honolulu, HI On Mon, 14 Sep 1998, ACT for Disarmament wrote: > Carole wrote: > > > Regarding a potential resignation, I agree tactical agendas must be > > discussed. Anyone who wishes to come to grips with cigar issues might do > > so in private or in chat rooms. > > In principle I agree with you. On the other hand, I think David's earlier > remarks regarding Clinton respond to the rather sorry state of political > culture. I won't say it is any healthier outside the U.S. It isn't. > Ultimately, it is within this political culture that we must work to > abolish nuclear weapons. I would have liked to see David's thoughts > somehow linked to the abolition cause. How can we relate these so-called > sexual diversions to the folly of nuclear weapons, and of war itself? How > can the peace movement tie in to issues that, for whatever reason, are > pre-occupying the American -- indeed the global -- mind? I sincerely > believe the peace movement needs to be able to respond to seemingly > unrelated front-page issues. I think if abolitionists could make the > link to Zipper-gate, or whatever, in a *** concrete, mature *** fashion, we > could manipulate our issues onto the front pages. > > In short, David is onto something. Let's build on this. > > Carole further wrote: > > > Let's not stain this listserve - that's all I meant to say. > > Okay, Carole, you win the "Bad Pun of the Month Award". But this is the > kind of creativity that needs to happen if we are to move our issue. > > Saul Chernos > ACT for Disarmament > (and freelance journalist) > Toronto Canada > act@web.net - - 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: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 23:38:07 EDT From: DavidMcR@aol.com Subject: (abolition-usa) The inevitability of discussing "the issue" I had posted a longish letter on the Clinton affair to the Abolition-usa list (if any of you on the international list want it, let me know). There was concern expressed that the Abolition Caucus list really needed to stick to that topic, that Clinton's problems were not germane. Unhappily, they are germane and one reason for expanding this discussion to the wider list is that I think those in other countries need some sense from "here" of what is happening. I don't mean the sordid details (and they are sordid - the release of the Starr report suddenly made the U.S. Congress the largest publisher of pornography in the US), but the political implications. If my reading is correct several things need to be noted. One is that Clinton, while he might risk another bombing of Afghanistan (not, I think, Sudan, since he obviously had the wrong target there), will not take the risks of peace. This is a President who has not looked for ways to involve the US in war - but he is also notably a President who risks almost nothing, who governs by polls, and I do not believe our forces are strong enough to persuade him, given his weakened position, to take any courageous risks for peace. Clinton is many things - none of them involve courage. So I think our collective, international strategy, in dealing with the world's sole superpower, has to be some calculation of where to put pressure. And right now, I think the White House is a waste of time. If, as I suspect, Clinton will have to resign (other men would have blown their brains out after the release of the Starr report - it did the one thing a man finds it almost impossible to accept - it made Clinton look foolish), we get Gore. I have no enthusiasm for Gore and would be afraid that he might find it "wise" to take an aggressive military position early in his administration to calm the right wing. That is easy for a "great" power to do - - bomb Iraq, or Afghanistan. Who is going to stop the US? I think very little can come from the Presidential office in the months ahead. I think folks in other countries have a right to that information or, at least, to my take on it. I was wrong before. Seven months ago when this first broke I thought Clinton would be forced from office. I was dead wrong. There is, in the US, an interesting "break" between what is called the "Washington world" and the rest of the US. The Washington world, and all the media experts located there, were quite baffled when the American public as a whole rode out the first revelations. That may happen again, but the details are so sordid, so humiliating, that I think it is one thing to suspect Clinton had a "relationship" with Monica Lewinsky, and very different to have our noses rubbed in the details. (There is something else running - the people as a whole are, I think, weary of this scandal and want it to go away. In a sense, the Starr report told the American public things it really didn't want to know. And, because all of us are also - I hope - sexual animals, the Starr report was very dangerous because it was a move toward treating sex itself as a criminal act.) For the American movement, I don't think we can live in a vacuum and avoid discussing the one issue which, at the moment, everyone else is discussing. My advice there is that whatever we feel about resignation, impeachment is a very different matter. We should take a long view, one that grasps the nature of American democracy with all its flaws. Impeachment is a profound act. It involves overturning an election. Unlike Great Britain, the President does not govern at the whim of the Parliament. He is elected independently. The division of powers, while sometimes designed to block any movement, is still how the country is run - there is a sharp line between the Congress and the Administration which cannot be lightly crossed. Nothing Clinton has done justifies, in my view, the overturning of an election. Nothing Clinton did with Monica should have been a surprise to the voters who elected him and re- elected him. So OUR OWN FORCES need to be careful not to be involved with any moves toward impeachment, nor to invent our own reasons for it. Sex is not a high crime. Clinton's other actions, from Welfare through NATO through the nuclear testing issue through the land mines issue are emphatically not impeachable events. They are good political issues for us to raise in an election. I'm sorry that some are nervous about having this discussion - but I not only think we can't avoid having it, but in another sense we are a small family of one or two hundred people. We care about the floods in Bangladesh and want to know about them. We exchange bits of gossip, we exchange greetings of support. If the Abolition 2000 movement is alive - and I hope we can survive even if we fail to reach our goal by 2000 - it will be because we are a kind of "set of friends and co-workers, comrades in a long march" and it is quite impossible not to discuss the events in Russia (which pose enormous dangers to us), or in this case the US. I appreciate our having a range of sub-sets of lists and their value. There will come times when issues or events leap over the lines we had drawn. Peace, David McReynolds - - 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: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 15:16:17 -0700 (PDT) From: Sue Broidy Subject: (abolition-usa) Update from Santa Barbara Abolition 2000 - Update from Santa Barbara Grassroots News for September This has already gone out to some of you on the abolition-usa list. If this is the second time, I apologize! I have added a brief report on the meeting I attended last weekend in Livermore. Santa Barbara is hot and humid - but it is good to be home again after my trip to England and Austria. I was very pleased to meet Frances Connolly of Abolition 2000 UK and to spend some time talking to her about strategy and ideas. It is really helpful to meet colleagues face to face and I look forward to meeting more of you in the future. I am now back at my desk, full of renewed enthusiasm to keep in touch more often and with shorter messages. It is good to be receiving positive feedback so far on the big August mailing and I hope that as a result, our 1100 organizations are feeling more like partners and less isolated. Please keep in touch with ideas and strategies for us all to build on. Indian Admiral Visits Santa Barbara Admiral Ramdas, India's former Chief of the Naval Staff, visited the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation recently to talk of his decision to commit himself to the campaign for a ban on all nuclear weapons. This happened he said "after a colossal debate within myself" after almost 45 years in naval uniform. The testing in India and Pakistan convinced him of the need for him to become a peace advocate and before traveling to Hiroshima on August 6th, he led a Peace Rally in New Delhi with the Booker Prize-winning author, Arundathi Roy. Admiral Ramdas is planning a Peace Symposium in India early next year. The IFUW Conference in Graz Austria. The International Federation of University Women passed a resolution on August 25th calling for action from all associated branches and organizations, to urge their national governments to take immediate steps to put in place a process for the abolition of nuclear weapons before the end of the year 2000. The resolution was passed almost unanimously and delegates received three hundred A2000 campaign action kits from Sue Broidy, the A2000 coordinator who attended the conference. Petition Signatures The Western Pennsylvania Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons has collected close to 3000 signatures to date. This is an ongoing project of the coalition of 30 organizations with a goal of 5000. Japan has sent us 1048 more signatures, and Australia 47 signatures recently by Internet - thank you Irene Gale. Judy Stetson from Falmouth wrote recently with 46 signatures. She said, "Here are petitions signed during a one hour (12-1pm) stint in front of the main Post Office in Falmouth MA. A reporter from our local paper The Enterprise ran a piece about us ( and Abolition 2000) ahead of time and took pictures of us..." Thank you Judy, Amelie and Olive. And news reached us September 1st from New Zealand that 50,000 signatures have been obtained by Soka Gakkai International volunteers for the Abolition 2000 petition - a wonderful achievement!. Letter from Helsinki In Helsinki, Finland, about 500 people gathered to commemorate Hiroshima in the evening of the 6th of August in a park in center of the down. Two speakers, MEP Heidi Hautala and chair Kalevi Suomela, told about the dangers that nuclear weapons based security creates and promoted the Abolition 2000 campaign. We lighted about 400 lanterns on the water. We collected signatures to the international Abolition 2000 appeal. Participants and passers-by signed. We got 702 signatures. It maybe doesn't sound as a big figure but in Helsinki in two hours it is a lot. There were smaller events in other locations in Finland, too. I'm sure the Abolition 2000 campaign is more familiar for the Finnish people than it was before yesterday. We continue in collecting signatures and in inviting other Finnish NGOs to join the campaign. New Organizations in the A2000 Network Organizations joined recently in the US include the South Asian Peace and Non-violence Association (SAPNA) in Somerville, MA, the Center for Economic Conversion in Mountain View CA, the Union City Church of the Brethren and the Institute for Peace and Justice in St. Louis, MO. Also signed up recently are the Communications Coordination Committee for the United Nations in New York, the Copper Country Peace Alliance in Houghton, Michigan , the Youth for Environmental Sanity (YES!). and the Albuquerque Monthly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends in New Mexico. New international partners include The Peace Movement of Esbjerg from Denmark and the Pakistan India Peoples Forum for Peace and Democracy. We also welcome Young Student Pugwash in Argentina and the Center for Sustainable Development Initiatives (CENSUDI) in Bolgantanga, Ghana. New Haven - a Peace Messenger City We are very pleased to receive official word that the New Haven Board of Aldermen adopted the Abolition 2000 Resolution on July 6 1998. This is the first municipality in the US to sign the Resolution for a long time - hopefully the beginning of a new awareness and a significant step in the Nuclear Free New England movement. Northern California Abolition 2000 - Meeting in Livermore September 12th It was very inspiring to meet colleagues in Livermore CA who up till now have been names on the Internet. Marylia Kelley of Tri-Valley CAREs was a wonderful welcoming host and the tour she gave us of the Livermore site was very sobering - even chilling. In spite of public opinion, the government carries on spending enormous sums of public money on developing nuclear weapons technology. The skeleton of the NIF building dominates the site, a grim reminder of how we all in Abolition 2000 must work harder to get the public to convey their concerns to their elected representatives. Letters, postcards, emails and FAXes to candidates for office as well as ongoing Representatives must be a priority from now until the election - and beyond. The Livermore meeting was also a chance to hear from Jackie Cabasso about her recent visit to Japan, John Burroughs about the ICC negotiations in Rome and Pamela Meidell on India. Marylia Kelley spoke about subcritical tests, reported on her meeting with the new Energy Secretary Bill Richardson and gave an update on the lawsuits against the Department of Energy. The meeting decided to look for a higher visibility in Universities and Colleges and a sub committee will be formed to promote this. Ideas were discussed for referral to the Abolition 2000 USA meeting in Chicago on October 9th and 10th and finally it was noted that there should be a Southern Californian Coalition of Abolition 2000 and this would be looked into immediately! Thank you Marylia and all the wonderful hard-working people in Northern California. Sincerely, Susan Broidy, Coordinator ************************************************************* Abolition 2000- A Global Network to Eliminate Nuclear Weapons c/o Nuclear Age Peace Foundation 1187 Coast Village Road, Box 123 Santa Barbara, CA 93108 phone: +1(805) 965-3443; fax: +1(805) 568-0466 e-mail: a2000@silcom.com URL: http://www.napf.org/abolition2000/ Join the abolition-usa listserve for keeping in touch with national Abolition 2000 news. To subscribe or unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "subscribe or unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. - - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "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: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 08:48:41 -0400 From: Peace through Reason Subject: (abolition-usa) Re: Henry Hyde: The Constitution and the Rule of Law Is this what you wanted, Ross? Ellen Thomas prop1@prop1.org leftAt 11:25 AM 9/11/98 -0400, Ross Wilcock < wrote: >What a wonderful, inspiring statement by Henry Hyde, Chairman of the House Judiciary this morning - about the rule of law, and the Constitution. >Please post a link to this historic statement when it becomes available http://www.house.gov/judiciary/091198f.htm x September 11, 1998 Hyde Floor Statement on Referral Resolution (WASHINGTON) - Floor remarks of U.S. Rep. Henry J. Hyde (R-IL), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, on pending resolution regarding referral of report from the Office of the Independent Counsel: One hundred sixty-six years ago, when our country was in its robust childhood, the great historian, Thomas Macauley, wrote that "laws exist in vain for those who do not have the courage and the means to defend them." We are here because circumstances and our constitution have thrust upon us an onerous duty-- one that requires us to summon the courage and the means to defend the rule of law. Please don't forget, when all the distractions and definitions have been pronounced, at the end of it all, we are about one mighty task-- to vindicate the rule of law. We are also met to defend the sacred bond contained in our oath of office: the bond that links the Members of Congress, the officials of the Executive Branch, and our federal judges to the people of the United States, to those who have given their lives for this country, and to the American people of the future. In taking a solemn oath to defend the Constitution, we have pledged a trust that imposes a heavy responsibility. We have pledged a trust to those patriots who sleep across the river in Arlington Cemetery and in American military cemeteries around the world: we have pledged that their defense of freedom and the rule of law will not have been in vain. Mr. Speaker and Members of the House, may I remind us all of the oath we swore when we became Members of Congress. We raised our right arms and said: "I, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God." Traditionally, an oath means a solemn calling on God to witness to the truth of what you are saying. We all know the story of Sir Thomas More, who was beheaded in the Tower of London for refusing to take the oath of Supremacy that acknowledged Henry VIII as head of the church in England. In the great drama of his life, " A Man for All Seasons," Sir Thomas tells his daughter: "When you take an oath, you hold your soul in your hands, and if you break that oath, you open up your fingers and your soul runs through them and is lost." I believe with all my heart that each of us took that oath of office seriously, and that we will so conduct ourselves that when this ordeal is over, we will have vindicated the rule of law and brought credit to this institution in which we are privileged to serve. We have also pledged a trust to the Americans of the 21st century: We have pledged to hand over to them, intact and unsullied, the rule of law in a constitutionally-ordered democracy. And we have pledged a trust to our fellow-Americans with whom we share this moment in our history: our neighbors, who have sent us to this Congress to serve the common good through the rule of law. Ninety-four years ago, in a message to the Congress, President Theodore Roosevelt defined the principle that must guide our deliberations in the days ahead: "No man is above the law and no man is below it, nor do we ask any man's permission when we require him to obey it." That principle defines the solemnity of this moment. We are, sometimes, too cavalier in our attitude toward the rule of law. It is something we take for granted. Yet we live in a century which, in blood and tears, in pain and sorrow, has vindicated the contention of the Founders of this Republic and the Framers of its Constitution, that the rule of law is the only alternative to tyranny, or to the anarchy that eventually leads to tyranny. The long, hard march of humanity toward the promised land of freedom has been marked by the constant struggle to vindicate the rule of law against the tyranny of power. Whether our reference point is the Ten Commandments or the Code of Hammurabi, Justinian's Code or Magna Carta, the Constitutional Convention of 1787 or the United Nations Charter of 1945, in each case humanity has made progress on its journey through history when the rule of law has triumphed over privilege or power as the arbiter of human affairs and the method to resolve conflict. The fact that the gradual expansion of the rule of law has invariably resulted in human progress is not an accident of history; it is a reflection of human nature. For the rule of law is an expression of the spiritual nature of the human person: created with intelligence and free will, a moral agent, capable of freedom, and capable of ordering freedom to the pursuit of goodness, decency, and justice. Every Member of our committee, indeed every Member of the Congress, is a servant of the rule of law: which, in this instance, means that we are servants of the Constitution of the United States of America. To paraphrase Theodore Roosevelt: None of us is above the Constitution, none of us is below the Constitution, and none of us is required to ask permission when we require ourselves -- and all those who have also sworn a solemn oath of fidelity to the Constitution -- to obey it. Because we are servants of the Constitution, because we too are subject to the rule of law it enshrines, no partisanship in the matters before us will be worthy of us. Americans pride themselves on living under the oldest written constitution in the world, continually in force. That historic accomplishment did not simply happen. In defense of the Constitution, American men and women have sacrificed their lives in every corner of the globe. In defense of the Constitution, the American people have made enormous sacrifices in time and treasure. In defense of the Constitution, Americans have forgotten that they were black, brown, yellow, or white; that they were Catholic, Jewish Muslim, Orthodox, or Protestant; that they were Democrats or Republicans -- and they have remembered that they are Americans, inheritors of a precious tradition of the rule of law, and trustees of that tradition before the eyes of the future. The Constitution remains viable not only because the document itself is venerable and its provisions wise. The Constitution remains viable because the American people continue to affirm and defend the principle of the rule of law which animated the document and gives it its moral ballast and its moral compass. We, the servants of the people -- their elected representatives -- can do no less. Thus we, too, are under judgement in these hearings: the judgement of the people; the judgement of history; the judgement of the moral law. Let us conduct ourselves and this inquiry in such a way as to vindicate the rule of law. Let us conduct ourselves and this inquiry in such a way as to vindicate the Constitution. Let us conduct ourselves and this inquiry in such a way as to vindicate the sacrifices of blood and treasure that have been made across the centuries to create and defend this last best hope of humanity on earth, the United States of America. ##30## You might also want this: http://www.house.gov/judiciary/091098.htm September 10, 1998 Hyde Statement to House Rules Committee (WASHINGTON) - Statement of U.S. Rep. Henry J. Hyde (R-IL) to the House Rules Committee regarding pending resolution to handle referral of information from the Office of the Independent Counsel: Mr. Chairman, as we all well know, this meeting begins a process of immense consequence - a process which our Constitution thrusts on the House of Representatives. The solemn duty that confronts us requires that we attain a heroic level of bipartisanship and that we conduct our deliberations in a full, fair, and impartial manner. This may prove to be a lofty challenge, but I believe the gravity of our responsibilities will overwhelm the petty partisanship that lingers in us all. Because of that requirement, let me say first that I intend to continue to work closely with my Democratic colleagues on the Committee, and in particular, the Ranking Member of the Committee, John Conyers. I want to commend all involved for pursuing this matter in such a professional and nonpartisan manner. The American people deserve a competent, independent, and bipartisan review of the independent counsel's referral. They must have confidence in this process. Politics must be checked at the door, party affiliation must become secondary, and America's future must become our only concern. I will not condone, nor participate in, a political witch hunt. If the evidence does not justify a full impeachment investigation, I will not recommend one to the House. However, if the evidence does justify an inquiry, I will fulfill my oath of office and recommend a fuller inquiry. In exercising our responsibility, the Judiciary Committee will not take at face value the assertions or conclusions of any particular party. We will undertake a fair, full, and independent review of the evidence on our own, and we will arrive at our own conclusions. In any impeachment proceeding, the House does not determine guilt or innocence. Instead, it functions much like a grand jury. We determine whether there is sufficient evidence to charge an executive branch officer with high crimes and misdemeanors. Then, the Senate must try that official on those charges. Of course, we have not reached that point, and no one should jump to conclusions nor assume the worst. At this stage, we do not know what information the Independent Counsel has sent to the House. What I do know is that we will make every effort to exercise our independent judgment in this matter. Given the gravity of the situation, we must act now, and the Rules Committee must lead. I appreciate the seriousness of the task you are about to undertake and your willingness to address it expeditiously. I ask that this Committee favorably report to the House a resolution authorizing the Judiciary Committee to take custody of the referral from the Independent Counsel. I ask that the resolution direct the Committee to review the material and report its findings and recommendations to the full House for possible further action--in particular, whether the Committee should conduct a fuller inquiry. Our first challenge is to ensure that the American people are given what is rightly theirs -- information that may constitute grounds for impeachment of their duly elected President -- while ensuring that the House's constitutional duty to conduct a fair, full and independent review is not jeopardized. Mr. Chairman, I agree with the considered judgment of Speaker Gingrich and Minority Leader Gephardt that the full House should authorize the release to the public of narrative portions of the Independent Counsel's referral and should take this action now. This initial release would not include raw evidentiary material that might contain information about individuals unrelated to this investigation. The resolution should grant to the Committee on the Judiciary the authority to release such material, if release is warranted, after the Committee has had the chance to review this material. Because of the importance of the material, the resolution should contain a presumption of release. This referral belongs to the American people, and they have a right to know its contents. The American people have patiently waited as rumors and speculation have substituted for facts and information. It is time that we move this process ahead, and the public release of the referral will help us embark on that process. Mr. Chairman, we are not yet beginning a full impeachment inquiry, but I want to take a moment to address the issue of impeachment. Constitutional scholars and reasonable people disagree as to what is an impeachable offense, but there are a few principles we should keep in mind. At this time, I am reminded of the difficult times in 1973, when Chairman Peter Rodino presided over the impeachment inquiry proceedings against President Nixon, and directed his staff to report on the constitutional grounds for impeachment. I have submitted a copy of that report as an appendix to my written statement. Let me share with you part of the report's conclusion: "While it may be argued that some articles of impeachment have charged conduct that constituted crime and thus that criminality is an essential ingredient, or that some have charged conduct that was not criminal and thus that criminality is not essential, the fact remains that in the English practice and in several of the American impeachments the criminality issue was not raised at all. The emphasis has been on the significant effects of the conduct-- undermining the integrity of the office, disregard of constitutional duties and oath of office, arrogation of power, abuse of the governmental process, [and] adverse impact on the system of government. Clearly, these effects can be brought about in ways not anticipated by the criminal law. Criminal standards and criminal courts were established to control individual conduct. Impeachment was evolved by Parliament to cope with both the inadequacy of criminal standards and the impotence of courts to deal with the conduct of great public figures. It would be anomalous if the framers, having barred criminal sanctions from the impeachment remedy and limited it to removal and possible disqualification from office, intended to restrict the grounds for impeachment to conduct that was criminal." When considering the question of impeachment, the report concluded: "It is useful to note three major presidential duties of broad scope that are explicitly recited in the Constitution: "to take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed," to "faithfully execute the Office of the President of the United States" and to "preserve, protect, and defend, the Constitution of the United States" to the best of his ability. The first is directly imposed by the Constitution; the second and third are included in the constitutionally prescribed oath that the President is required to take before he enters upon the execution of his office and are, therefore, also expressly imposed by the Constitution." Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee: a word about the significance of the oath each of us swore to uphold when we became Members of Congress. We raised our right arms and said: "I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God." Traditionally, an oath means a solemn calling on God to witness to the truth of what you are saying. We all know the story of Sir Thomas More, who was beheaded in the Tower of London for refusing to take the oath of Supremacy that acknowledged Henry VIII as head of the church in England. In the drama of his life, "A Man for All Seasons," Sir Thomas tells his daughter: "When you take an oath, you hold your soul in your hands, and if you break that oath, you open up your fingers and your soul runs through them and is lost." I believe with all my heart that each of us took that oath of office seriously, and that we will so conduct ourselves that when this ordeal is over, we will have vindicated the rule of law and brought credit to this institution in which we are privileged to serve. ## 30 ## _______________________________________________________________________ * Peace Through Reason - http://prop1.org - Convert the War Machines! * _______________________________________________________________________ - - 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 #17 ********************************** - 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.