|
Tuesday, May 27, 2003 |
|
Subject: Do as I say, not as I do Dear Friends: Do as I say, not as I do. This could be the password for the Bush administration. Even while they are ordering other nations to disarm, or else, the administration appears eager to take additional strides towards expanding America's own nuclear stockpile. The administration's new drive for nuclear arms is the latest example of its campaign to further scuttle our own arms control commitments, even as we urge Iran and North Korea to foreswear the nuclear club. Instead of leading the nations of the world towards peace, our arrogance and bullying is pushing them towards arming themselves in protection--against the belligerent US. ______________ Hearst Newspapers U.S. Rearms While Telling Others To Disarm by Helen Thomas WASHINGTON -- While the United States tells other nations to disarm, the Bush administration appears eager to take steps toward expanding our nuclear arsenal. At the behest of the administration, the Senate has agreed to lift a 10-year-old ban on research on a new generation of low-yield nuclear weapons. Senate Democrats won a concession that congressional approval would be needed before full-scale development. A comparable bill for a study of low-yield "mini nukes" was passed in the House. A conference committee is expected to work out a compromise between the two bills. The Senate also agreed to continue research on the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator, which could explode targets protected by rock or hardened surfaces. Republican proponents of beefing up the U.S. nuclear arsenal claim that they are essential in modern warfare to dismantle hidden chemical and biological weapons. Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., the ranking Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said the proposed Penetrator could explode with as much as 70 times the force of the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima, Japan, toward the end of World War II. The administration's new drive for nuclear arms is the latest example of its campaign to further scuttle our own arms control commitments, even as we urge Iran and North Korea to drop plans to join the nuclear club. The scrapping of the anti-ballistic missile treaty was one of the forerunners of the Bush rearmament process and the dream of the hawks who are pushing for a Star Wars defense. Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., expressed his worry that such nuclear weapons would eventually be used. If we build them, "we'll use" them, he warned. Those who pushed for an end to the ban on the low-yield weapons said they could target enemies more precisely. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said it is "illogical" to "stop research and development on a potential weapon that could destroy a terrorist group or prevent a rogue nation from creating a chemical-biological capacity deep underground." Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld told reporters the Pentagon only wanted to consider such weapons, "nothing more, nothing less." "It's not 'pursuing.' And it's not 'developing.' It is not 'building.' It is not 'manufacturing.' And it's not 'deploying.' And it is not 'using,"' Rumsfeld added. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., scoffed at Rumsfeld's protestations. "Just a study? Baloney," Feinstein declared. "Does anyone really believe that?" To repeal the ban "opens the door for Americans to develop nuclear weapons again," she said. Feinstein and Kennedy both believe the development of such weapons could lead other nations to follow suit and pave the way for a nuclear war. After years of diligent negotiations for global arms control and reduction agreements with the former Soviet Union and other nations, how can we justify reviving a nuclear arms race? There is no way the lifting of bans on nuclear weapons -- small or large -- will make this a safer world. Why wouldn't other nations seek to follow suit? American officials have been freely doling out advice to other nations on the proper way to disarm. They should take their own advice. The nuclear research programs are included in the Pentagon's $400.5 billion military budget. It would be great if a few billions of that bloated budget could be used for educating poor children and helping the homeless, instead of blowing it on a new generation of nuclear arms. Mohamed ElBaradei, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said eight nations possess nuclear weapons and other countries are suspected of working to acquire them. He said that although the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty was passed 30 years ago, its objectives have not been achieved and thousands of nuclear weapons are still around. The United States should set the example by continuing to rollback its own nuclear stockpile, instead of seeking new and more powerful weapons. Then we could lead the way for the world to be a less dangerous place. May 24, 2003 Copyright 2002 by Hearst Newspapers _______________________________ In peace, Otoño ________________________________ Read all about it and get the news that matters by receiving the War and Peace Watch. To subscribe, send an e-mail to: Reikiworks@compuserve.com Thank you for your support, The War and Peace Watch publisher. contact: Otoño Johnston =========================================================== (In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment for research and educational purposes only.) 4:19:45 PM 
|
|
Folks, because of our common interests in working together to save the world from radical republicanism, I have joined forces with Otoño Johnston to publish her War and Peace Watch email newsletter in this blog. You can read it regularly by clicking on the War & Peace Watch category under the Navigation bar.
4:16:35 PM
|
|
Subject: an obituary for Freedom Dear Friends: On May 6, we covered Nicholas Kristof's "Missing in Action: Truth," and reported how Truth had become a victim of friendly fire. It saddens us to report that its sibling, Freedom, has passed as well. Freedom's burial will be held at the convenience of the Bush Administration. Arrangements are being made under the direction of Attorney General John Ashcroft. In lieu of flowers, please send a letter to your congressman. ___________________________ May 26, 2003A sad obituary for a dearly departed friend: Freedom By Beth Quinn Times Herald-Record bquinn@th-record.com Today we mourn the passing of a cherished friend. His name was Freedom. Freedom has been dying a slow death since Oct. 26, 2001, when Congress passed the USA PATRIOT Act without debate or discussion, thereby administering a lethal dose of poison to Freedom. Weakened and in pain, Freedom lost the will to live. His health further deteriorated as he came to understand that Americans were indifferent to the threat to his life. Born July 4, 1776, with the signing of the Declaration of Independence, Freedom was a motherless child at the start of his life. But he was, by all accounts, the most favored child of his many dads - the Founding Fathers. He was nurtured throughout his childhood by Americans who valued his existence and relied on his fundamental fairness and protective nature. Freedom had a major growth spurt on Dec. 15, 1791, when Congress ratified the Bill of Rights - the first 10 amendments to the Constitution, which guaranteed that Freedom could be counted on by all Americans. Over the years, Freedom was cared for and strengthened by the passage of additional constitutional amendments, court decisions and laws. Every American knew that Freedom could be called upon if their right to speak, their right to privacy or their right to protection from the government was threatened. Sadly, the USA PATRIOT Act, in one clean sweep, took away Freedom's power to protect those rights. Without a warrant and without probable cause, the government shoved Freedom into a dusty corner. With Freedom out of the way, the government said it could now access Americans' most private medical records, library records, student records and computer activities. With Freedom in its crippled state, the government also said it could now hold us in solitary confinement without charging us with a crime, without letting us have a lawyer and without allowing us contact with our families. Freedom languished, helpless to defend us. Freedom was predeceased by his older brother, Common Sense. His death occurred 45 days after the birth of his archenemies, Fear and Hatred, born Sept. 11, 2001, at the Twin Towers in New York City. It was Americans themselves who administered the final death blow to Freedom. It is likely that Freedom's precarious condition was weakened by a broken heart in the realization that many Americans were either unaware that he was in jeopardy or did not care. Some said it didn't matter if Freedom died because it was the price they were willing to pay for protection against Terrorism, the Stepfather of Fear and Hatred. Americans forgot what Freedom's Founding Fathers so fervently believed: Without Freedom, there can never be safety. A small service was held for Freedom Thursday night at the Goshen Library, officiated by civil rights lawyer Michael Sussman and Robert Hubsher, director of the Ramapo Catskill Library System. It was attended by only a handful of mourners. In his eulogy, Hubsher urged Americans to start acting like Americans again. In the name of Freedom, he said, "It is not disloyal or treasonous to resist a law that encroaches on our rights. Indeed, the opposite is true." There is a small chance that Freedom can be resurrected. But it will only be accomplished if Americans demand that their elected representatives in Washington come back to life themselves. If Congress were to repeal the most noxious and poisonous portions of the PATRIOT Act, then and only then will Freedom begin to stir in his grave and rise up again. But no such thing will happen unless Americans demand it. Meanwhile, on this Memorial Day, we mourn the passing of Freedom just as we mourn our history's courageous soldiers who fought so passionately to protect Freedom. It is tragic that they died in vain. Freedom's burial will be held at the convenience of the Bush Administration. Arrangements are being made under the direction of Attorney General John Ashcroft. In lieu of flowers, please send a letter to your congressman. --Beth Quinn's column appears Monday. Talk to her at 346-3181 or at bquinn@th-record.com. Record Online is proudly brought to you by the Times Herald-Record, serving New York's Hudson Valley and the Catskills. 40 Mulberry Street * PO Box 2046 * Middletown, NY 10940 Telephone 845-341-1100 or 800-295-2181 outside the Middletown, N.Y., area. Copyright Orange County Publications. All rights reserved. ________________________________ In peace, Otoño ________________________________ Read all about it and get the news that matters by receiving the War and Peace Watch. Thank you for your support, The War and Peace publisher. mail to: Reikiworks@compuserve.com contact: Otoño Johnston =========================================================== **Note: I hope you are enjoying the e-newsletter. To remove your email from the War and Peace Watch mailing list, reply to this email with "unsubscribe" written in the subject box. (In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment for research and educational purposes only.) 12:49:57 PM
|
|
Dear Friends: The recent Texas power grab is part of a trend. Republicans, who now control all three branches of the federal government, are not just pushing through their political agenda. They are increasingly ignoring the rules of government to do it. __________________________ The New York Times May 27, 2003 For Partisan Gain, Republicans Decide Rules Were Meant to Be Broken By Asad Cohen There was a lot not to like about the new Congressional district lines Republicans tried to push through in Texas this month, the ones that made Democratic legislators flee to Oklahoma to prevent a vote. Democratic Austin was sliced into four parts and parceled out to nearby Republican districts. A community on the Mexican border and one 300 miles away were painstakingly joined together and declared to be a single Congressional district. But the real problem was that Republicans were redrawing lines that had just been adopted in 2001, defying the rule that redistricting occurs only once a decade, after the census. The Texas power grab is part of a trend. Republicans, who now control all three branches of the federal government, are not just pushing through their political agenda. They are increasingly ignoring the rules of government to do it. While the Texas redistricting effort failed, Republicans succeeded in enacting an equally partisan redistricting plan in Colorado. And Republicans in the Senate--notably those involved in the highly charged issue of judicial confirmations--have been just as quick to throw out the rulebook. These partisan attacks on the rules of government may be more harmful, and more destabilizing, than bad policies, like the $320 billion tax cut. Modern states, the German sociologist Max Weber wrote, derive their legitimacy from "rational authority," a system in which rules apply in equal and predictable ways, and even those who lead are reined in by limits on their power. When the rules of government are stripped away, people can begin to regard their government as illegitimate. The Texas redistricting effort was part of a national Republican effort to shore up the party's 229-to-205 House majority going into the 2004 elections. The House majority leader, Tom DeLay, who traveled to Austin to supervise the effort personally, was blunt about his motives: "I'm the majority leader, and I want more seats." Texas Republicans seized control of the Legislature last year, and they thought they could add five or more Republican Congressional seats. When the Democrats took off for Oklahoma, the Department of Homeland Security helped hunt down a plane filled with escaping legislators. Sixteen members of Congress from Texas wrote to Attorney General John Ashcroft asking him whether there had been "attempts to divert federal law enforcement resources for private political gain." In Colorado, Republicans succeeded this month in redrawing the state's Congressional lines, which had been duly redrawn after the 2000 census. Republican state legislators, under the guidance of the presidential adviser Karl Rove, added thousands of Republicans to a district that Bob Beauprez, a Republican, won last year by just 121 votes, and excluded the Democrat who nearly beat him from the district. Democrats have gone to court, charging that Republicans violated Colorado's Open Meetings Law and legislative rules when they sneaked the plan through. In the judicial battles in the Senate, Republican leaders, frustrated that Democrats have rejected a handful of Bush nominees, have declared war on longstanding Senate rules. Orrin Hatch, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, has dispensed with procedures that allow senators to exercise their constitutional "advice and consent" function, in one case holding a single hearing for three controversial nominees, and he has stifled legitimate inquiry. When Senator Charles Schumer tried to ask one nominee about his legal beliefs, Senator Hatch snapped that he was asking "stupid questions." The Senate majority leader, Bill First, has declared that filibusters, which allow senators to block action with just 41 votes, should not be used to reject judicial nominations, despite a history of using them to do just that. Abe Fortas was prevented from becoming chief justice in 1968 by a Republican-backed filibuster. While Senator First pushes "filibuster reform," Senate Republicans are also talking about a "nuclear option," in which Vice President Dick Cheney would preside over the Senate and hand down a ruling that Rule 22, which permits filibusters, does not apply to judicial nominations. The Republicans' attack on the rules come at a time when they could easily afford to take a higher road. They have, by virtue of their control of the White House and Congress, extraordinary power to enact laws and shape the national agenda. And this administration is already getting far more of its judges confirmed, and more quickly, than the Clinton administration did. Weber, in writing about rules, was concerned about what factors kept governments in power. That is not a concern in the United States--there is no uprising in the offing. But when Americans see their government flouting the rules, as they did during Watergate, they respond with cynicism. In these hard times--with threats from abroad and a sour economy at home--our leaders should be bringing the nation together not by demonizing foreign countries, but by instilling greater faith in our own. They should be showing greater reverence for the rules of government, and looking for other ways--like tougher campaign finance laws--to assure Americans that their government operates evenhandedly. How likely is that? The word in Texas is that Republicans may try their redistricting plan again. Senate Democrats are bracing for Senator First's "filibuster reform," or the "nuclear option." And Mr. DeLay recently revealed how he felt about rules of general applicability. When he tried smoking a cigar in a restaurant on federal property, the manager told him it violated federal law. His response, according to The Washington Post, was, "I am the federal government." Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company ________________________________ In peace, Otoño ________________________________ Read all about it and get the news that matters by receiving the War and Peace Watch. Thank you for your support, The War and Peace publisher. mail to: Reikiworks@compuserve.com contact: Otoño Johnston =========================================================== **Note: I hope you are enjoying the e-newsletter. To remove your email from the War and Peace Watch mailing list, reply to this email with "unsubscribe" written in the subject box. (In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment for research and educational purposes only.) 12:49:53 PM
|
Last update: 6/3/2005; 8:12:09 PM .
