----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2010 9:56 AM
Subject: Fw: Disarm Now Plowshares: Motions to Dismiss DENIED! Trial set for Dec. 7........

> This is directly about our mission, nuclear peace.
> Jerry
>
> Disarm Now Plowshares: Motions to Dismiss DENIED!
> http://disarmnowplowshares.wordpress.com/2010/11/22/denying-motions-de
> nying-justice/
>
> Friends,
>
> The Disarm Now Plowshares were in court again; this time for the
> pre-trial conference in which a most important issue – the motions to
> dismiss their case – was argued.
>
> All five Disarm Now Plowshares co-defendants - Bill “Bix” Bichsel, SJ,
> Susan Crane, Lynne Greenwald, Steve Kelly, SJ, and Anne Montgomery,
> RSCJ – were present for the proceedings in Judge Benjamin Settle’s
> courtroom at the U.S. District Court, Tacoma, Washington on November
> 22, 2010.
>
> Susan Crane began the defendant’s testimony; the following are some of
> her key points.
>
> “Our action on Nov. 2, the testimony of Ramsey Clark, the motions we
> filed, make clear that we are concerned about the trident nuclear
> warheads…”
>
> “The trident nuclear weapons system is illegal and immoral. It’s a
> system preparing for the mass murder of innocent civilians that will
> affect generations to come.”
>
> “As loving human beings, we have a responsibility, right and duty to
> use nonviolent actions to prevent the trident nuclear weapons system
> from operating.”
>
> Crane went on to invoke the heart of the Plowshares vision and its
> vital importance in addressing Trident (and nuclear weapons) that
> constitute the taproot of violence in our nation (and the world).
>
> “On Nov. 2, 2009, we remembered the words of the prophet Isaiah, who
> had a vision of beating swords into plowshares”…convert weapons of war
> into something useful for human life. It is our firm understanding
> that these Trident nuclear weapons are illegal under national and
> international law, as well as the teachings of our faith, and general
> humanitarian law and conscience.”
>
> Crane worked to build the defense case for applying the necessity
> defense; that “the indisputable facts of Trident are hard to face, but
> we can’t deny that it is in preparation for the use of nuclear
> weapons.” Understanding that there is “imminent harm” from the
> manufacture, deployment and preparation for the use of Trident, the
> Disarm Now Plowshares acted out of conscience, and moral and legal
> duty. “The harm we created (cut fence) is minor in comparison with the
> harm of a nuclear explosion.”
>
> Anne Montgomery spoke to former Attorney General Ramsey Clark’s
> previous testimony in this case before she moved on to discussing her
> first Plowshares action, King of Prussia in 1980. She remembered
> thinking at that time that, “If someone had a gun in his or her hand,
> I would have to knock it out of that hand.” She stated that they cut
> the fences because there was no other way in; no criminal intent.
> Montgomery also stressed that they have tried all other means to bring
> light to these weapons, and had to do this Plowshares action because
> the public is ignorant of the existence of the weapons. “We were
> willing to give our own blood to avoid shedding the blood of others.”
>
> In reference to the justification defense, Montgomery quoted Judge
> Spaeth from a concurrent opinion in the Superior Court in Pennsylvania
> in a 1983 appeal of the Plowshares Eight trial.
>
> “Accordingly, whenever a defendant pleads justification, the court
> should ask, ‘What higher value than the value of literal compliance
> with the law is defendant asserting?’ The trial court failed to ask
> this question. Apparently in its eyes no higher value is implicated in
> this case. And for the dissent, this case is to be decided as we would
> decide a case involving ‘the theft and destruction of guns or
> explosives by altruistic and well-meaning citizens who sincerely
> believe that guns or explosives possess the potential to kill at
> sometime in the future.’ But appellants are not pleading the danger
> arising from ‘guns or explosives;’ they are pleading the danger
> arising from nuclear missiles. One who does not understand that danger
> does not understand appellants’ plea.”
>
> “Appellants do not assert that their action would avoid nuclear war
> (what a grandiose and unlikely idea!). Instead, at least so far as I
> can tell from the record, their belief was that their action, in
> combination with the actions of others, might accelerate a political
> process ultimately leading to the abandonment of nuclear missiles.
> And that belief, I submit, should not be dismissed as ‘unreasonable as
> a matter of law.’ A jury might – or might not – find it unreasonable
> as a matter of fact. But that is for a jury to say, not for a court.”
>
> Although not referred to in today’s proceedings, the following text
> from the closing argument for the Plowshares Eight appeal (referenced
> above) is most powerful, and sums up the reality of the peril of
> nuclear weapons.
>
> “The people in the Pentagon offices and their counterparts in the
> Kremlin where the questions of coping with war injuries are dealt with
> must be having a hard time these days, looking ahead as they must to
> the possibility of thermonuclear war. Any sensible analyst in such an
> office would be tempted to scratch off all the expense items related
> to surgical care of the irradiated, burned, and blasted, the men,
> women, and children with empty bone marrows and vaporized skin. What
> conceivable benefit can come from sinking money in hospitals subject
> to instant combustion, only capable of salvaging, at their intact
> best, a few hundred victims who will be lying out there in the
> hundreds of thousands? There exists no medical technology that can
> cope with the certain outcome of just one small, neat, so-called
> tactical bomb exploded over a battlefield. As for the problem raised
> by a single large bomb dropped on New York City or Moscow, with the
> dead and dying in the millions, what would medical technology be good
> for? As the saying goes, forget it. Think of something else. Get a
> computer running somewhere in a cave, to estimate the likely numbers
> of the lucky dead. L. Thomas, On Medicine and the Bomb, reprinted in
> L. Thomas, Late Night Thoughts on Listening to Mahler’s Ninth
> Symphony. Nor is the peril confined to those who will be ‘irradiate,
> burned, and blasted.’ It extends much farther, to our survival as a
> species. If only a small fraction of the nuclear missiles now able to
> be fired, either by us or by the Soviet Union, are fired, a ‘dark
> nuclear winter’ will occur: a cloud of debris will block off our
> sunlight; temperatures will plunge; and our death by freezing of
> starvation will follow. Scientists have identified a 100 megaton
> explosion as the ‘nuclear war threshold’ that once crossed will lead
> to such a global catastrophe. See ‘After Atomic War: Doom in the
> Dark,’ Phil. Enquirer, November 1, 1983. It is in the light of this
> peril that the reasonableness of appellants’ belief must be judged.”
>
> Steve Kelly then summed up the legal case. He stated that U.S.
> voluntary participation in international law is well established, and
> that Ramsey Clark clearly established this fact in his earlier
> testimony. Kelly also cited the International Court of Justice (ICJ)
> decision on the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear weapons.
>
> Constitutionally, the laws are clear that the threat of use of nuclear
> weapons is unlawful, and the presence of Trident (which targets
> civilian populations) is grossly unlawful. He further stated that the
> conditions of necessity have been met; the defendants were not trying
> to change the law, but were “trying to block any intended threat or
> use of those weapons,” and they did in fact successfully do so; the
> base was locked down and no work was done on the warheads for up to 11
> hours that day.
>
> Earlier in the proceedings Crane stated (in justifying the Plowshares
> action) that over many years people have tried many, many other
> avenues, including fasting, vigils, war tax resistance and
> demonstrations, to bring the government’s attention to this issue, but
> they have still been ignored. The prosecution later declared that the
> Disarm Now Plowshares co-defendants had taken the lazy path; “Going to
> Bangor is easy,” stated the prosecutor. He further stated that the
> hard thing is engaging in the democratic process, using speech, etc.
>
> William Bichsel responded to the prosecution’s statement, saying that
> they engaged in nonviolent action to turn these weapons (symbolically)
> into plowshares, and inform the public about the presence of these
> weapons so that the democratic process could be fulfilled. After 40
> years of using every method conceivable, any reasonable person would
> consider these actions reasonable and necessary. Bichsel also spoke to
> the traditions that have been so important and effective over a long
> period of time; that the defendants are standing in the tradition of
> people like Harriet Tubman and Rosa Parks, and are schooled in the
> nonviolence of Martin Luther King, Jr.
>
> Following the testimony, Judge Settle denied both motions to dismiss,
> and stated that although he understands that the defendants “are
> acting out of conscience,” that does not apply here since the court is
> supposed to uphold the Constitution. It must therefore follow, by
> precedent, that the Nuremburg Principles and necessity defense are not
> applicable in this case.
>
> When Crane responded that all five co-defendants “feel we are entitled
> to a full defense,” Judge Settle replied that court is bound by
> precedent, and that the defendants can appeal should there be a
> conviction. Case closed???
>
> The Disarm Now Plowshares five trial begins at 9:00 AM on December 7,
> 2010. Although the government has essentially denied the defendants
> any reasonable defense, the five are prepared to forge ahead with
> joyful hearts. Let all who believe in extinguishing the violent fire
> of nuclear weapons before it erupts support these courageous
> individuals who are fully prepared to give up their freedoms for this
> just cause.
>
> There are many opportunities to support Disarm Now Plowshares. In
> addition to coming to the court to witness the trial and join in
> vigils outside the courthouse, there will be evening programs in
> Tacoma beginning on Monday (December 6) and continuing each evening of
> the trial. These will be opportunities to meet the members of Disarm
> Now, hear speakers, and enjoy music, food and fellowship.
>
> On Monday evening, December 6, Angie Zelter will be the main speaker.
> Zelter, a peace, human rights and environmental campaigner, has
> written several books, including "Trident on Trial - the case for
> people's disarmament."
>
> On Tuesday evening, December 7, Colonel Ann Wright, is the main
> speaker. Wright, who served in the U.S. Army and Foreign Service,
> resigned on the eve of the U.S. invasion of Iraq, stating that without
> the authorization of the UN Security Council, the invasion and
> occupation of a Muslim, Arab, oil-rich country would be a violation of
> international law. Most recently, she was on the May, 2010 Gaza
> Freedom Flotilla that was attacked by the Israeli military.
>
> There are other speakers not yet confirmed, and all the event
> information will be posted on the Disarm Now Plowshares “Events” page
> at http://disarmnowplowshares.wordpress.com/events/ as they are
> confirmed.
>
> Read the Disarm Now Plowshares Blog at
> http://disarmnowplowshares.wordpress.com/ for ongoing reflections
> leading up to trial and daily reports during the trial.
>
> Finally, please spread the word about Disarm Now Plowshares and their
> courageous act of resistance so that everyone may learn of these
> immoral and illegal weapons of mass destruction (Trident) and their
> duty, as citizens, to speak out against them.
>
> Peace to All,
> Leonard Eiger,
> 425-445-2190,
> subversivepeacemaking@comcast.net
>
> Ground Zero Center for Nonviolent Action
> 16159 Clear Creek Road NW Poulsbo, WA 98370
>
> Further information (and updates on events) on Disarm Now Plowshares
> is available at http://disarmnowplowshares.wordpress.com/.