Biggest nuclear threat to the US may be from the US.

by David Remer  -  June 3, 2003

According to the NY Times Article today, "G-8 Leaders Talk Tough on Spread of Nuclear Arms", the G-8 called nuclear proliferation "the pre-eminent threat to international security". While the black market sales of large multi-megaton nuclear bombs may be a threat, how much bigger will the threat be if the US, now researching low-yield localized use bunker busting nuclear weapons, actually puts them into production? These smaller low-yield nuclear weapons may well become the weapon of choice of terrorists in the future. Cheaper to make, easier to conceal, easier to transport and perhaps easier to detonate, these weapons being researched in the US, constitute the height of hypocrisy from an administration sitting at the G-8 talking about non-proliferation. Were it not for congress taking the reigns and telling the administration they could not produce such weapons without congressional approval, these weapons might be in production in the very near future.

There are few weapons that the US has developed that have not either been sold or given away to other nations, or reproduced by other nations, and ultimately ended up on the black market. With that kind of track record, why on earth is the US pursuing this kind of nuclear weapon development in stark opposition to the last decades emphasis on reducing nuclear weapons in the world? Are we trying to make the world safer from terrorists, or, are we creating a new profit market for large defense contractors?

An excellent article by Robert W. Nelson in The Journal of the Federation of American Scientists concludes that "Attempts to develop a new generation of low-yield nuclear weapons would only make nuclear war more likely, and they seem cynically designed to provide legitimacy to nuclear testing - steps that would return us to the dangers of Cold War nuclear competition, but with a larger number of nations participating." And I will add, another set of weapons to fall into the black market, to be purchased and used against us by terrorists of the future.

8:01:15 AM  Google It!  

by David Remer, June 3, 2003

Philadelphia’s New Declaration of Independence from the Patriot Act makes it the 115th municipality to pass such a resolution. Even three states have also passed statewide civil liberties legislation defending against the USA Patriot Act, Hawaii, Vermont, and the republican bastion state, Alaska.

The following quote is from an article on the ACLU web site: [Philadelphia’s measure comes on the heels of the adoption of a statewide resolution in Vermont on Wednesday and an exceptionally strong resolution pushed through the Alaska statehouse by Republicans just last week. Significantly, Alaska’s Congressman Don Young, a Republican, has been one of the strongest conservative opponents of the USA PATRIOT Act, deeming it "the worst piece of legislation we ever passed."

Chris Finan, President of  The American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression (ABFFE) writes, "It is especially crucial for a free society to remain vigilant against threats to its liberties during periods of national stress and crisis, when those liberties are most at risk."

Dean Schabner of ABC News.Com writes,  "Cities across the country have been quietly staging a revolt against the USA Patriot Act, saying it gives law enforcement too much power and threatens civil rights." 

Robert A. Levy, Senior Fellow in Constitutional Studies at the Cato Institute writes, "If you think the Bill of Rights is just so much scrap paper, and the separation of powers doctrine has outlived its usefulness, then the USA PATRIOT Act, passed overwhelmingly on Oct. 25, is the right recipe to deal with terrorists. On the other hand, if you are concerned about Fifth Amendment protection of due process, and Fourth Amendment safeguards against unreasonable searches and seizures, then you should be deeply troubled by the looming sacrifice of civil liberties at the altar of national security."

It is clear that there is a groundswell movement in the U.S. to oppose this curtailment of U.S. citizen rights and undoing of the protections under the Constitution of the United States. While congress passed the law at President Bush's insistence, its legality under the 4th and 5th Amendments of the Constitution is very much in doubt. There are good laws and there are bad laws. The law that allowed internment of Japanese American citizens and which deprived them of their entire properties and holdings was a very shameful moment in American history.

The USA Patriot Act was a bad law pushed through congress by an ignorant President and a frightened bunch of advisors who acted without thinking of the Constitution of U.S. which they were sworn to protect and uphold. National fear is a weapon to be used by tyrants against the freedoms of their people as did Stalin, and Hitler. Americans should pledge their allegiance, not to the flag or a politician, but, to their Constitution, for it is the Constitution of the United States which gives strength and power to the people, and protection of the American people's love of freedom.