From: owner-abolition-usa-digest@lists.xmission.com (abolition-usa-digest) To: abolition-usa-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: abolition-usa-digest V1 #473 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 27 2001 Volume 01 : Number 473 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2001 15:01:27 -0700 From: "David Crockett Williams" Subject: (abolition-usa) Post-traumatic stress reordering, Linus Pauling, Nichidatsu Fujii, "freedom" and "God" bcc: Dan Smith's "Post-traumatic stress reordering" thread cc list Thanks, Steven, for the important message you sent below, "signed[by]: Albert Einstein, Bertrand Russell, Percy Bridgman, Herman Muller, Cecil Powell, Joseph Rotblat, Frederic Joliot-Curie, Leopold Infeld, Hideki Yukawa, Max Born, Linus Pauling." See below reference/links to speeches/message by the man Gandhi called his spiritual teacher, or "Guruji", the late most venerable Nichidatsu Fujii on whose 60th birthday the atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima and who was a key religious leader whose efforts helped convene the first and second special sessions on disarmament at the United Nations, 1978 and 1982. Yes, I think it must be Linus Pauling because as a chemist I know his name as a famous chemist and peace activist and at least we can check further and see if anyone knows (if so tell me now) for sure if Pauling delivered a somewhat famous speech on July 15, 1956, (~11th anniversary of first atomic bomb test at Los Alamos) which is the American scientist's speech date referenced in Nichidatsu's August 6, 1956, speech now being translated. I'm also quite sure that the below Russell-Einstein Manifesto is one of the messages from famous scientists to which Nichidatsu refers in that speech, especially since he prominently mentions several times therein Hideki Yukawa whose name until now I was not aware of. The confusion may have originated in the difference between Japanese and English namings where the family name is usually listed first in Japanese and last in English names, so a Japanese reference to Linus Pauling could easily have been referenced as (Dr.) Linus instead of (Dr.) Pauling, and given the variations in phonetics I can see where "Linus" could be heard/rendered as "Lindu" in the original Japanese transcription of this speech which so far, on reviewing initial translation drafts, has sent shivers up my spine because of its timely relevance to what is going on right now since 9-11. When, hopefully soon, the translation is finalized I will post it to the nuclear abolition and other lists, meanwhile readers may want to review the amazing speech of July 1978 by the most venerable Nichidatsu Fujii at the end of the Longest Walk at the US Capitol, archived with four others at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/global-peace-walk/message/554 and more info on him and his relationship with Mahatma Gandhi and the native American people is at http://www.indiano.org/pagoda/fujii.htm I especially like the Longest Walk speech because I was there to hear it and was witness to the rolling thunder all around the Capitol while he spoke as though punctuating his remarks which include the only time I have seen/heard/read of a Buddhist Monk discussing the nature of God. His message is especially timely now that we are embarking on an modern day "American Judeo-Christian Crusade" targeting "Islamic terrorists" and for its insightful description of the Machiavellianism connected to what in an earlier translation was called the "myth of the sovereign power of the state" as compared to the "religioius civilization" at the core of "the spiritual civilization" which will inevitably manifest to save humanity from otherwise certain destruction. An elder American Indian in the 1800's, I forget his name, after reflecting on the destruction of his people and the mentality of the American government towards the Indians and the land, etc., responding late in his lifetime to his younger generation wondering why the Great Spirit had allowed such atrocities, he wisely offered the succinct observation that the answer to that question was in understanding what the White Men really mean by "freedom" and "God". In his Longest Walk speech Nichidatsu eloquently addresses the nature of God and in the one now being translated he ever so eloquently addresses the American notion of "freedom". Next spiritual walk across America carrying Guruji's message and prayer practice starts January 15, 2002, the Hiroshima Flame Walk 2002 http://www.dharmawalk.org focusing on "Stop Star Wars", and since 9-11 I'm sure, "Stop WWIII". Please alert folks to help with outreach and support especially those on the route shown at that site. An updates/messages and coordination list has been set up with public archives at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/star-wars-dharma-walk Much appreciate your timely response. David David Crockett Williams an American Peace Movement member http://groups.yahoo.com/group/an-american-peace-movement Science and Technology in Society and Public Policy http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dcwilliams - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steven Starr" To: "David Crockett Williams" Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 10:36 AM Subject: Re: [abolition-caucus] Einstein, Russell, & (Lindu?) > Dear David, > > This probably won't be of any help, but here is the text of the > Russell-Einstein Manifesto, followed by the signatories. It was broadcast > at the very end of 1954, so possibly it is the 1955 statement being referred > to. I tried to see if I could match any of the names of the Nobel Prize > winners who signed this document, but it didn't seem obvious to me that any > of them were the person who you are looking for (Linus Pauling?). > > Steven Starr > The following is a statement written by Bertrand Russell, and signed by Albert Einstein and nine other Nobel Prize winners (it was the last public statement made by Einstein, who died shortly after its broadcast on the BBC on December 23, 1954). It is incredibly profound, considering it was written only a few years after the United States exploded the first thermonuclear weapon, vaporizing a small island in the South Pacific. Here is the text: "In the tragic situation which confronts humanity, we feel that scientists should assemble in conference to appraise the perils that have arisen as a result of the development of weapons of mass destruction, and to discuss a resolution in the spirit of the appended draft. We are speaking on this occasion, not as members of this or that nation, continent or creed, but as human beings, members of the species man, whose continued existence is in doubt. The world is full of conflicts; and, overshadowing all minor conflicts, the titanic struggle between Communism and anti-Communism. Almost everybody who is politically conscious has strong feelings about one or more of these issues; but we want you, if you can, to set aside such feelings and consider yourselves only as members of a biological species which has had a remarkable history, and whose disappearance none of us can desire. We shall try to say no singe word which should appeal to one group rather than to another. All, equally, are in peril, and, if the peril is understood, there is hope that they may collectively avert it. We have to learn to think in a new way. We have to learn to ask ourselves, not what steps can be taken to give military victory to whatever group we prefer, for there no longer are such steps; the question we have to ask ourselves is: What steps can be taken to prevent a military contest of which the issue must be disastrous to all parties? The general public, and even many men in positions of authority, have not realized what would be involved in a war with nuclear bombs. The general public still thinks in terms of the obliteration of cities. It is understood that the new bombs are more powerful than the old, and that, while one A-bomb could obliterate Hiroshima, one H-bomb could obliterate the largest cities, such as London, New York and Moscow. No doubt in an H-bomb war great cities would be obliterated. But this is one of the minor disasters that would have to be faced. If everybody in London, New York and Moscow were exterminated, the world might, in the course of a few centuries, recover from the blow. But we now know, especially since the Bikini test, that nuclear bombs can gradually spread destruction over a very much wider area than had been supposed. It is stated on very good authority that a bomb can now be manufactured which will be 2,500 times as powerful as that which destroyed Hiroshima. Such a bomb, if exploded near the ground or under water, sends radioactive particles into the upper air. They sink gradually and reach the surface of the earth in the form of a deadly dust or rain. It was this dust which infected the Japanese fishermen and their catch of fish. No one knows how widely such lethal radioactive particles might be diffused, but the best authorities are unanimous in saying that a war with H-bombs might quite possibly put an end to the human race. It is feared that if many H-bombs are used there will be universal death--sudden only for a minority, but for the majority a slow torture of disease and disintegration. Many warnings have been uttered by eminent men of science and by authorities in military strategy. None of them will say that the worst results are certain. What they do say is that these results are possible, and no one can be sure that they will not be realized. We have not yet found that the views of experts depend in any degree upon their politics or prejudices. They depend only, so far as our researches have revealed, upon the extent of the particular expert's knowledge. We have found that the men who know most are the most gloomy. Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war? People will not face this alternative because it is so difficult to abolish war. The abolition of war will demand distasteful limitations of national sovereignty. But what perhaps impedes understanding of the situation more than anything else is that the term "mankind" feels vague and abstract. People scarcely realize in imagination that the danger is to themselves and their children and their grandchildren, and not only to a dimly apprehended humanity. They can scarcely bring themselves to grasp that they, individually, and those whom they love are in imminent danger of perishing agonizingly. And so they hope that perhaps war may be allowed to continue provided modern weapons are prohibited. This hope is illusory. Whatever agreements not to use the H-bombs had been reached in time of peace, they would no longer be considered binding in time of war, and both sides would set to work to manufacture H-bombs as soon as war broke out, for, if one side manufactured the bombs and the other did not, the side that manufactured them would inevitably be victorious. Although an agreement to renounce nuclear weapons as part of a general reduction of armaments would not afford an ultimate solution, it would serve certain important purposes. First: Any agreement between East and West is to the good in so far as it tends to diminish tension. Second: The abolition of thermonuclear weapons, if each side believed that the other had carried it out sincerely, would lessen the fear of a sudden attack in the style of Pearl Harbor, which at present keeps both sides in a state of nervous apprehension. We should, therefore, welcome such an agreement, though only as a first step. Most of us are not neutral in feeling, but, as human beings, we have to remember that, if the issues between East and West are to be decided in any manner that can give any possible satisfaction to anybody, whether Communist or anti-Communist, whether Asian or European or American, whether white or black, then these issues must not be decided by war. We should wish this to be understood, both in the East and in the West. There lies before us, if we choose, continual progress in happiness, knowledge and wisdom. Shall we, instead, choose death, because we cannot forget our quarrels? We appeal, as human beings, to human beings: Remember your humanity and forget the rest. If you can do so, the way lies open to a new paradise; if you cannot, there lies before you the risk of universal death. Resolution: In view of the fact that in any future world war nuclear weapons will certainly be employed, and that such weapons threaten the continued existence of mankind, we urge the governments of the world to realize, and to acknowledge publicly, that their purposes cannot be furthered by a world war, and we urge them, consequently, to find peaceful means for the settlement of all matters of dispute between them." signed: Albert Einstein, Bertrand Russell, Percy Bridgman, Herman Muller, Cecil Powell, Joseph Rotblat, Frederic Joliot-Curie, Leopold Infeld, Hideki Yukawa, Max Born, Linus Pauling. Here is a quote from a book entitled, "Breakthrough", written by a group of Soviet and Western scholars in 1989, published by Walker & Co., NY,NY. Here are the first few paragraphs: "War is the issue. War, and the root causes of war. War, which at any time could escalate to total holocaust, end billions of years of development of our life-support system, end all children, all culture, all love, and all life. War is the challenge to the modern mind as the collapse of slavery and serfdom were the challenges for Americans and Russians a century ago. Today, the failure of war calls us to change our view of the world even more profoundly than the discovery that the Earth is round five centuries ago. War is the issue for this generation. War, indiscriminate and brutal, which destroys the fragile civil processes it is designed to protect, wastes and ravages everything in its path, and twice in our century has decimated a generation of young men. War, which after a long evolution of its own, has come to its last chapter in human history. War has been made obsolete by the total, suicidal, destructive power of nuclear weapons. It has been made obsolete by the gradually increasing consciousness that cannons cannot produce social justice; only justice can produce justice; only compassion can produce compassion; only brotherhood can produce brotherhood. War is the issue for this generation, and global thinking is the challenge. Compelled by the threat of a nuclear Armageddon, humans must now raise themselves to a new dimension, a new level of consciousness beyond war. They must move to a new and sunlit plain of human maturity. That is the challenge to change. It is a challenge to every human being to make a shift of evolutionary proportions. The evidence is overwhelming that if we do not do this, the species will have a short tenure on this planet. . . . " on 09/25/2001 12:02 AM, David Crockett Williams at gear2000@lightspeed.net wrote: > I am trying to help the Japanese-English translator of Nichidatsu Fujii's > important speech delivered August 6, 1956, and we are at a loss as to who > this person named therein really is. Phonetically, the name might be > spelled "Lindu", or "Rindu" or something close. Anyone out there old or > wise enough to know or remember who this person is from context of paragraph > below? Might it be one of the American scientists involved in the a-bomb > project? We need correct spelling of his name. > > > "Those who showed the greatest surprise, the greatest fright, the greatest > regret and the greatest emaciation, in light of the appalling disaster > caused by nuclear weapons that could lead to total annihilation, were the > members of the scientific circle that discovered and manufactured the very > nuclear weapons. This is evidenced firstly in Albert Einstein's reflection > in his last years, and more recently in the statements issued by Bertrand > Russell on July 9th of last year, and Lindu (?) on July 15th the same year." > > > please respond/advise to gear2000@lightspeed.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: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 09:41:22 -0400 From: John Burroughs Subject: (abolition-usa) Response to September 11: Law, Justice, and the ICC Below is an LCNP press statement plus a Washington Times article concerning current discussions concerning the International Criminal Court and its implications for terrorism. Press statement of Lawyers' Committee on Nuclear Policy September 25, 2001 NGO Coalition for the International Criminal Court press briefing New York Any military action to prevent further terrorist attacks and bring to= justice the perpetrators and planners of the September 11 attacks should be done= under the authority of the Security Council to maintain international peace and security. The Security Council already, in its September 12 resolution, found the attacks to be a "threat to international peace and security". But it did not= authorize or require any use of force - it only "expressed its readiness to take all necessary steps". Thus it clearly was not an action resolution. A robust multilateralism, centered on the United Nations, is the only way to give legitimacy to the response to September 11 and therefore to make it effective in addressing the threat of terrorism. No matter under what authority it is carried out, any military action must meet legal requirements including necessity, proportionality, and discrimination or not be done at all. Necessity requires that the least violent course of= action be taken to prevent further attacks and to bring planners and perpetrators= to justice. Proportionality requires that military action must not be excessive in relation to the initial attacks and to the action's objectives.= Discrimination requires that civilians not be attacked and that they not be disproportionately injured or killed by attacks on legitimate military targets. Military action must also not inflict unnecessary suffering, harm neutral nations, or cause widespread and severe damage to the environment. These requirements are imposed by international treaty and custom, set forth in US military manuals on the law of war, and recognized by the United States and the United Nations as= binding law governing their conduct of military operations. Of special importance is that, according to relief workers, millions of Afghanis already face starvation. Attacks that exacerbated this situation= and caused mass starvation could not meet the requirements of proportionality= and discrimination. Also important is that, as Pentagon sources confirm, desperately impoverished Afghanistan has hardly any targets of military significance. To meet the requirement of necessity, attacks must be= reasonably aimed at achieving a concrete military advantage; they may not be carried= out for the sake of revenge or a demonstration effect or any other non-military reason. If there=92s nothing to attack, don=92t attack. If persons suspected of planning and perpetrating the September 11 attacks= are extradited or apprehended, an option worth considering is the establishment= of an ad hoc tribunal, by the Security Council or interested states. The United States certainly would have jurisdiction to try suspects, but it may prove much easier for countries in the Middle East to surrender suspects to an international tribunal than to the United States. The ICC itself cannot be used for this purpose, because the Statute has not yet come into force, and when it does in the next year or two will only apply to crimes committed thereafter. But an ad hoc tribunal statute could be written to include crimes as humanity as defined in the Rome Statute. Under the Rome Statute, murder and other inhumane acts intentionally causing great= suffering or serious injury, when committed as part of a widespread or systematic= attack against any civilian population in furtherance of a state or organizational policy, constitute crimes against humanity. Thus acts committed by members= of terrorist groups or networks found to have sufficient longevity and= coherence to qualify as an organization could come under the definition. - ----------------------------------------------------------- U.N. SAYS ATTACKS SHOW NEED FOR GLOBAL COURT Betsy Pisik=20 THE WASHINGTON TIMES September 26, 2001 - ----------------------------------------------------------- NEW YORK =97 Legal experts converging on the United Nations=20 this week to hammer out details of a global criminal court=20 said yesterday that the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks=20 demonstrate the need for a tribunal to prosecute the worst=20 humanitarian crimes. "We emerge more convinced than ever of the need to=20 strengthen the international legal order and the fight=20 against universal crimes," said Dutch Foreign Minister=20 Jozias van Aartsen, referring to the destruction of the=20 World Trade Center's twin towers. "Where better to begin our renewed effort than in that,=20 the same city of New York?" he said. Legal experts attending a long-scheduled meeting about=20 the proposed International Criminal Court (ICC), which would=20 hear charges of atrocities committed around the world, said=20 the attacks on New York and Washington would fit the=20 definition of "crimes against humanity."=20 The proposed ICC would not be created until at least=20 2002, and its jurisdiction will not be retroactive.=20 Nonetheless, Mr. van Aartsen said, "Universal crimes deserve=20 a universal answer."=20 On Monday, the participants in the preparatory=20 commission meeting stood for a moment of silence, and=20 individual speakers offered their condolences from the=20 podium. The United States opposes the court, fearing it would=20 be used to target American soldiers who participate in=20 international peacekeeping missions and other operations. Prospects of U.S. military strikes in the war on=20 terrorism, sparked by the attacks on New York and the=20 Pentagon, appear likely to stiffen U.S. opposition to the=20 court. Nevertheless, lawyers at yesterday's conference spoke=20 enthusiastically of the court as a potential weapon against=20 the spread of global terrorism. "The bombing, and subsequent calls for a global=20 alliance against terrorism, has shaken Washington off its=20 anti-multilateral course," said David Donalcattin, a lawyer=20 with Parliamentarians for Global Action. "The great news for us [is] that American isolationism=20 is finished," Mr. Donalcattin said. "This attack has shown,=20 and the White House seems to hear, that no nation can do it=20 alone."=20 President Bush has rejected the treaty, and proposals=20 in Congress would prevent the United States from cooperating=20 with it. Various U.N. bodies are grappling with terrorism this=20 week, with the Security Council beginning to discuss a=20 separate U.S. anti-terror initiative, and the General=20 Assembly preparing for a public debate on terrorism Monday.=20 In addition, the secretariat is weighing the value of=20 helping states draft an umbrella anti-terrorism treaty=20 combining elements of the 12 existing conventions and=20 treaties.=20 Legal experts say there is a widespread recognition=20 that whoever planned and executed the Sept. 11 attack has=20 committed a crime against humanity, as defined under the=20 Rome Statute creating the ICC. More than 139 nations have=20 accepted that definition, which includes in part:=20 "Murder and other inhumane acts intentionally causing=20 great suffering or serious injury, when committed as part of=20 a widespread or systematic attack against any civilian=20 population in furtherance of a state or organizational=20 policy." Copyright (c) 2001 News World Communications, Inc. All=20 rights reserved. John Burroughs, Executive Director=20 Lawyers' Committee on Nuclear Policy=20 211 E. 43d St., Suite 1204=20 New York, New York 10017 USA=20 tel: +1 212 818 1861 fax: 818 1857=20 e-mail: johnburroughs@lcnp.org website: www.lcnp.org=20 Part of the Abolition 2000 Global=20 Network to Eliminate Nuclear Weapons=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: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 09:57:00 -0400 From: ASlater Subject: (abolition-usa) San Francisco Labor Council statement >Here is a resolution by the San Francisco Labor Council opposing the drive to war. Also find a statement by the former head of the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) (The ILWU also issued a strong resolution). You will note that the SF Labor Council endorsed the September nationwide actions against war and racism--one of which will take place in San Francisco Saturday. > >>Karen Talbot, International Center for Peace and Justice (ICPJ) >>------------------ >> >>1) San Francisco Labor Council Statement on the Tragic Events of >>September 11, 2001 (adopted on Monday, Sept. 24, 2001) >> >>2) San Francisco Labor Council Endorses September 29 Antiwar Rallies >>(resolution adopted on Monday, Sept. 24, 2001) >> >>3) Former ILWU President Brian McWilliams' Remarks on the Tragic >>Events of September 11, 2001 (presented to the ILWU Pacific Coast >>Pensioners Association Convention in Seattle, Wash., on September 18, >>2001) >> >>******************** >> >>(1) S.F. LABOR COUNCIL STATEMENT ON THE TRAGIC EVENTS OF SEPTEMBER 11, 2001 >> >>[Note: The following statement was adopted by the S.F. Labor Council >>at its delegates meeting on Monday, September 24, 2001. The statement >>was submitted to the Labor Council by the Executive Board of OPEIU >>Local 3. It was adopted following one friendly amendment from the >>floor.] >> >>The San Francisco Labor Council (AFL-CIO) joins the nation and the >>world in mourning the devastating loss of life resulting from the >>vicious attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, as well >>as the crashed plane in Pennsylvania. We condemn the criminality of >>those attacks and those responsible. >> >>Many of those killed were union members and other workers killed on >>the job. Our hearts go out to our sisters and brothers and their >>loved ones. We particularly honor the rescue workers who continue to >>risk their lives to save others. >> >>No one, in this country or any other, should suffer the fate of the >>victims in these attacks. We demand that the perpetrators of these >>crimes be brought to justice. The United States has a responsibility >>to establish with irrefutable facts the identity of those who were >>behind these attacks. The tragic attacks of September 11 should be >>treated as a heinous crime rather than an act of war. >> >>As we mourn this tremendous loss of life, we declare our resistance >>to efforts to use this tragedy to engage in military actions that can >>lead only to more carnage and senseless loss of life. We reject the >>idea that entire nations should be punished for the actions of a few. >>Bombing raids and military strikes will only fuel an endless cycle of >>revenge that can only bring the deaths of more innocent civilians, >>both here and around the world. >> >>In the face of such sorrow, we urge all people, particularly members >>of the labor family, to stand united against prejudice, hatred and >>intolerance wherever it arises. Within our own borders, we call upon >>all in our communities to join us in immediately confronting any >>anti-Arab, anti-Muslim, anti-Sikh or other anti-immigrant hate speech >>or acts of violence, whether in our neighborhoods, our workplaces, or >>in the media. We strongly oppose efforts to curtail the rights of >>immigrants and refugees, including expulsion of suspect foreign >>nationals without due process. >> >>We also declare our resistance to efforts to use this tragedy to >>curtail our civil liberties. Militarization of our society inevitably >>leads to erosion of civil liberties and workers' rights. We must >>remain vigilant in the defense of our democratic principles, >>including the protection of our civil liberties. Already proposals >>have been put forward to allow increased federal surveillance of >>private activities, and there is a strong push for greater use of >>racial profiling. In the past, national security has often been used >>to justify interference with our rights to freedom of association, to >>organize, to strike and to picket. We must redouble our efforts to >>fight for justice, and must not allow those who oppose our goals to >>use a national crisis as an excuse to assault our civil and economic >>rights. >> >>We encourage open discussion as to the origins of this crisis and the >>most appropriate response to the atrocities that have taken place - >>particularly about the need for a foreign policy that is based on >>economic and political justice. >> >>A century ago, Samuel Gompers, first President of the AFL, said that >>labor wants more justice and less revenge. Our greatest memorial to >>our fallen sisters and brothers will be a world of peace, justice, >>tolerance and understanding, underscored by the solidarity of working >>people. >> >>******************** >> - - 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, 27 Sep 2001 07:54:19 -0400 From: David Culp Subject: (abolition-usa) No more funds for nuclear weapons programs NO MORE FUNDS FOR NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAMS A few senators are proposing to add more than $300 million to the nuclear weapons budget. A floor vote in the Senate could occur next week (week of Oct. 1). Sens. Domenici (NM), Reid (NV) and Bingaman (NM) have filed an amendment, Senate Amendment 1671, to increase the nuclear weapons budget of the Energy Department by $339 million. They could offer the amendment as a floor amendment to the defense authorization, as soon as Monday, October 1. ACTION Please call the Washington offices of your two Senators. Ask them to oppose Senate Amendment 1671 by Sen. Domenici, which would increase the nuclear weapons budget in the defense authorization bill. The U.S. should not be spending more money on nuclear weapons development and testing. This is the wrong message to send to the world following the tragedy of September 11. Instead, the Senate should increase funding for non-proliferation programs-such as the "Nunn-Lugar" threat reduction initiative--to safely and securely dismantle and dispose of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons in the U.S., Russia, and elsewhere, and fund initiatives to de-alert nuclear weapons within the next year. To find your Senators' Washington telephone numbers, either call the Capitol Switchboard at 202-224-3121 or use the Legislative Action Center on FCNL's web site. Just click on the link below, select your state and click on , then select your member and click on . Here is the link: http://capwiz.com/fconl/dbq/officials/ BACKGROUND The Bush administration requested $5.30 billion for the nuclear weapons activities budget at the Energy Department for fiscal year 2002, which begins October 1. The budget funds the work of the Los Alamos (NM), Sandia (NM), and Lawrence Livermore (CA) nuclear weapons labs. It also funds a half dozen nuclear weapons production sites scattered across the country and the Nevada Test Site. These facilities are used to maintain the U.S. nuclear arsenal. None of these funds are for non-proliferation programs. Earlier this year, the Senate Armed Services Committee recommended spending $5.45 billion for the nuclear weapons account, higher than the Bush administration's request. Sens. Domenici, Reid and Bingaman are now seeking to boost that by $339 million. Some Senators have been suggesting that the U.S. should develop new nuclear weapons, especially a "mini-nuke." While this amendment does not specifically authorize development of a new nuclear weapon, it is a significant increase for the nuclear weapons budget. David Culp, Legislative Representative Friends Committee on National Legislation (Quakers) 245 Second Street, N.E. Washington, D.C. 20002-5795 Tel: (202) 547-6000, ext. 146 Toll free: (800) 630-1330, ext. 146 Fax: (202) 547-6019 E-mail: david@fcnl.org Web site: www.fcnl.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: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 13:20:12 -0500 From: Lisa Ledwidge / IEER Subject: (abolition-usa) A Call for Gatherings on Oct. 2, Gandhi's Birthday - --=====================_20220123==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed To: Supporters of non-violent responses to September 11 tragedies From: Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER) Re: A Call for Gatherings on October 2, Mahatma Gandhi's Birthday, to Reflect on Non-Violent Responses to the September 11 Tragedy The September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks cry out for a global response to help make the world as secure as we can from the threats of war, terrorism and mass destruction. We must find a peaceful, non-violent way to respond to the attacks, and to ultimately reduce the inequity and violence in our world which breed such terrorism. Mahatma Gandhi launched India's nonviolent independent movement, inspired in part by U.S. history in the acts of Henry David Thoreau in the mid-nineteenth century to resist an unjust war and slavery. In turn, the civil rights struggle led by Martin Luther King, Jr. was partly inspired by Gandhi's example. October 2 is Gandhi's birthday. We are sending this message to ask that you on this day gather in your community to reflect on the lessons of nonviolent struggles led by Mahatma Gandhi (and others) against violence, militarism, and injustice. In doing so, you will join other groups and people around the world in promoting global democracy, justice, equity, and friendship. The links below provide resources for such gatherings, including a selection of Gandhi's quotes, sample letters to the editor, and a sample press release. We at IEER would be happy to help if you have any questions on this material, and we welcome your feedback. Also, we would like to learn of your event so we can post it on our web site, and to hear how you used these materials. Please contact project coordinator Gordon Clark at or 1-301-270-5500 with this information. At the crossroads in history created by the dreadful, tearful ashes of September 11, we must begin to establish a tradition of nonviolence and justice as the normal one for the world of the twenty-first century. Resources and contact information: * A Call for Gatherings on October 2 - http://www.ieer.org/latest/oct2call.html * Events - http://www.ieer.org/latest/oct2evts.html (will be updated as we learn of events) * Quotes of Gandhi - http://www.ieer.org/latest/oct2quot.html * Sample letters to the editor - http://www.ieer.org/latest/oct2ltrs.html * Sample press release for local meeting - http://www.ieer.org/latest/oct2prel.html * Holding an event? Questions? Feedback? Please contact: Gordon Clark at or call 1-301-270-5500 Apologies for multiple postings. - --=====================_20220123==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" To: Supporters of non-violent responses to September 11 tragedies
From: Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER)
Re: A Call for Gatherings on October 2, Mahatma Gandhi's Birthday, to Reflect on Non-Violent Responses to the September 11 Tragedy

The September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks cry out for a global response to help make the world as secure as we can from the threats of war, terrorism and mass destruction.  We must find a peaceful, non-violent way to respond to the attacks, and to ultimately reduce the inequity and violence in our world which breed such terrorism.

Mahatma Gandhi launched India's nonviolent independent movement, inspired in part by U.S. history in the acts of Henry David Thoreau in the mid-nineteenth century to resist an unjust war and slavery.  In turn, the civil rights struggle led by Martin Luther King, Jr. was partly inspired by Gandhi's example.

October 2 is Gandhi's birthday.  We are sending this message to ask that you on this day gather in your community to reflect on the lessons of nonviolent struggles led by Mahatma Gandhi (and others) against violence, militarism, and injustice.   In doing so, you will join other groups and people around the world in promoting global democracy, justice, equity, and friendship.

The links below provide resources for such gatherings, including a selection of Gandhi's quotes, sample letters to the editor, and a sample press release.  We at IEER would be happy to help if you have any questions on this material, and we welcome your feedback.  Also, we would like to learn of your event so we can post it on our web site, and to hear how you used these materials.  Please contact project coordinator Gordon Clark at <coordinator@ieer.org> or 1-301-270-5500 with this information.

At the crossroads in history created by the dreadful, tearful ashes of September 11, we must begin to establish a tradition of nonviolence and justice as the normal one for the world of the twenty-first century.

Resources and contact information: Apologies for multiple postings. - --=====================_20220123==_.ALT-- - - 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 #473 *********************************** - 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.