From: "Russell D. Hoffman" <rhoffman@animatedsoftware.com>
Subject: Those who refuse to learn from others' mistakes are doomed...

From: Russell D. Hoffman, Concerned Citizen
Date: June 10th, 2002
Re: Letters from Asif Durrani, Tilal Ahmad Sana,  Afnan Ahmed, Azmat A Khan (JKLF USA)

To Whom It May Concern,

I have received some interesting letters (shown below), concerning my articles urging India and Pakistan to renounce nuclear weapons.  I would most like to address in particular, one writer's suggestion, that because of my own country's abysmal record on nuclear issues, I should not presume to tell citizens of other countries what to do.

The writer has a point.  In my name as an American, people all around the world are being killed with radioactive particles.  In my name, a trillion-dollar industry has been created which does nothing uniquely useful to society, because there are other, cheaper ways to produce electricity.  In my name, nuclear bombs are being designed, built, and tested, even though there are other, more effective ways to provide for the national defense than to threaten with weapons of mass destruction one (hopefully) will never use.

And in my name, "Depleted Uranium" bullets and shells ("depleted" being an absurd misnomer given by the military) have been shot by the millions at various people, reportedly starting in Kuwait, then again in Kosovo, and now, in Afghanistan.  These too are easily replaced with non-radioactive munitions which do not pollute the land -- assuming that the war they are used in is necessary in the first place.

All these nuclear options create vast quantities of poison known as radioactive waste.  This waste is so deadly that an invisibly small quantity can cause lung cancer in 100% of the people who inhale it (plutonium, for example).

A single day's output of used reactor cores from America's nuclear power plants is enough poison to wipe out HUNDREDS of U.S. cities by making "dirty bombs".  A used reactor core is at least a million times more deadly than a new, unused one, which is only slightly more deadly than so-called "depleted" uranium munitions.  Standing next to a used reactor core for just ten seconds would kill you.  The reactor cores stay highly radioactive for about a million years, after just three to five years of use.  In addition, nuclear power plants create additional "high-level" and "low-level" radioactive waste (which is just high-level waste with "filler" added).

Used reactor cores, nuclear "pits" from weapons, and all the rest of the nuclear waste is truly vile stuff.  It will have to be carefully shielded, both from natural disasters and from ever-more-sophisticated terrorist threats, for thousands of generations.

This is going to cost our descendents a fortune, unless some new, not-yet-uninvented or not-yet-discovered solution becomes available (and note that this writer has heard about ALL the attempts so far, and found ALL to be wanting, no matter how many times they (the ideas) are recycled before the public (vitrification, transmutation, reprocessing, rocketing it to the moon, seabed disposal, descending-plate tectonic placement etc. etc. etc.)).  And whenever anything releases radioactive waste into the environment, the result will be additional cancers, leukemias, and birth defects for generations to come.

All possible futures depend on what we do today. We can leave a poisoned planet, or we still have a chance -- a bit of a chance, anyway -- to choose not to.  Are we so greedy that we cannot shut down our nuclear reactors and switch that small percentage of our energy use (7%) from nuclear to renewables?  Are we so misguided about national defense that we cannot dry-dock our nuclear fleet, dismantle our nuclear weapons, demilitarize and denuclearize space, and demand that all other nuclear "super" powers do the same? Are we so cheap that we have to fire D.U. weapons just to save a few precious dollars (D.U. weapons are much cheaper than titanium, for example)?

Does Military and Corporate America hate humanity so much that it cannot right any of these wrongs?

Perhaps so.  Right now, my country acts like a spoiled brat with a "hot potato" it doesn't even have the good sense to want to get rid of!  Instead, it constantly manufactures more and more "hot potatoes", and tries to convince every other player around to want their own "hot potato" factories, too!  And in the process, the people of every nation get stepped on.  No one is immune to radiation's dangers.

Fortunately for me, I live in a country where I can complain fairly freely about these tragic circumstances.  But what use is this "freedom", if I am unable to change anything, and if the "powers that be" don't care what I say, or even if I live or die?

My Pakastani correspondent is correct that the United States must clean up its own behavior.  But even so, I continue to hope that others will learn from our mistakes and not embrace the nuclear "Demon Hot Atom", as my country has.  Perhaps all I can do is provide these testimonials about what I have spent so many years trying to learn about.

Sincerely,

Russell D. Hoffman
Concerned Citizen
Carlsbad, CA

Note I have made a few spelling corrections to the four items below for readability, but not one word has been deleted or added.

=======================================================

From: "Durrani, Asif" <pakistan47@yahoo.com>:

Hello,

After reading your 'Letter to the Resident of Pakistan and India' (at http://www.animatedsoftware.com/environm/no_nukes/tenw/nuke2002.htm) i decide to write this letter and share few words with you... Especially the last sentence in which wrote :
 Anyone with contacts in India or Pakistan -- please forward this letter to them...
Encourage me to write this letter!

As a responsible, educated and moderate Pakistan i have deep concern about the current situation
between India and Pakistan. (You know very well how the india and Pakistan are frequently talking
about the Nuclear War....)

You are right, that during the latter half of May 1998, there was much joyful dancing in the
streets of both India and Pakistan. Why? Because, in all probability, nine out of ten of the
people of both countries had no idea of the effects of a nuclear blast. They still do not know,
because the leaders of both countries, irresponsible and self-serving, have not bothered to tell
them. They do not know there is nothing to dance about in either the possession or the use of
nuclear weapons - they are not known as weapons of mass destruction without valid reason

As state by our President General Pervaiz Mussharf on number of occasions that the use of Nuclear Bomb is "Un-thinkable" and we are ready for 'un-conditoinal'  talk with India at any place at any
time..but yet good gesture from the Indian government...i thinks, its the responsibility of the
super power (America) to diffuse the tension between the India and Pakistan and bring both
countries back from the brink of nuclear war!

In short the purpose of this mail is to invite you to join me and bring the respect and dignity
of mankind to the world... I run a mailing list which contains over Three thousand recipients
from Pakistan (and some from India) the aim of this list (humanbeing@yahoogroups.com) is to
promote awareness of humanright, human dignity and tolerance in the society. As the founder and
owner of this list i invites you to join this list and share your views and word with more than
3000 people of the sub-continent.

Lets joins our hands together to bring peace, tolerance and equity of mankind in the world!

waiting for your positive reply
your sincerely

Durrani, Asif
BS(Computer Science)
Computer Engineer
Karachi
Pakistan

=======================================================

From: "Tilal Ahmad Sana" <tilal@bismillah.com.pk>
To: <technopakies@yahoogroups.com>
Cc: <rhoffman@animatedsoftware.com>,
        "Muhammad Mohsin" <mohsin@bismillah.com.pk>,
        <shahzad@bismillah.com.pk>, <husnain@bismillah.com.pk>

Subject: Re: [technopakies] To: ALL RESIDENTS OF INDIA AND PAKISTAN,
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2002 11:49:30 +0500


to:
supposed to be our sincerely
Russell D. Hoffman
Carlsbad, CA, USA
with
Pamela Blockey-O'Brien
Douglasville, GA, USA
Dear ,
I am from Pakistan thank u alert us about nuclear war. tell me one thing is there no harm in conventional war that we only avoid from nuclear war . as u  and whole world ,except Muslims, suppose that there is only one super power America in world .
what is roll of u(USA) and ur uno in solving this dispute in Pakistan and India,Kashmir,dispute created by UK while partitioning subcontinent.
any way u,USA, should leave ur twofold policies.on one side USA selling weapons to both countries and saying that
Kashmir is domestic problem of both countries and they should fix it themselves no third party will involve in it. and no pressure on India only on Pakistan in different ways one known way now a days terrorist blame.
If world ignoring the facts and current situation in which India not interested in talks and no third party specially USA
involve in it then there is no solution other than war,we prefer talks but then there in no other way then it does not matter nuclear or conventional war,and u people will be responsible for that ignoring uno resolutions about Kashmir,main dispute. and keep on saying that it is domestic problem of India.if there are resolutions on this dispute in uno, in which both country were involve then
how it is domestic problem.
and then ur president say why people hate USA what was policy in kosovo,east Timor and what is in Palestine and Kashmir.
sorry for any harsh feelings
 
Tilal Ahmad Sana

=======================================================

From: "Afnan Ahmed" <afnan_a@hotmail.com>
To: <rhoffman@animatedsoftware.com>
Subject: An honest reply
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2002 12:35:50 +0500

Mr Hoffman,
I do not know which part of the world you come from. But as you sewed together the Pakistanis and the Indians, let me sew the all the Uncle Sams and the Brits together as well. For that matter, even if you are a French or a German, its all the same to me. As Bangladeshis and Sri Lankans would be similar to us, Pakistanis or Indians.
 
Let us first see who made these nucleur weapons. Americans, I suppose. Who is the only bloody nation to have used it, certainly NOT us. Americans have. For a start, why do not the Americans dump their nuclear weapons, the French and the Britts get rid of their warheads and your newfound friends, the Russians also follow suit. What you guys do not understand is that when you point a finger at someone, a couple more are pointing towards yourself. YOU guys have developed it first. YOU guys have actually used it.
 
Now that we have it, it is a security threat.
 
For an advice, burn everything around your own neighbourhood and their adjacent neighbourhood for miles and miles around and then you might get a taste of what your bloody nation did to the Japs.
 
As far as our own belief is concerned down here in Pakistan, I will summarize it into a verse from the Holy Qur'an.
 
"Nothing will happen to us except what Allah has decreed for us; He is our protector and in Allah, let the Believers put their trust."
 
If Allah has decreed our death through a nuclear war, then be it. Just remember, I am sure that we will not be the first to use it and we do NOT want a war but if war is thrust upon us, let them come and we will teach them a lesson.
 
As far as the West is concerned, the time to honor you will soon be at an end.
 
And for once, do NOT confuse Terrorism with Islam.
 
Best Regards
 
Afnan Ahmed
Pakistan


=======================================================

At 05:18 AM 6/10/02 , "JKLF USA" <jklf.ny@usa.com> wrote:
To: "Russell D. Hoffman" <rhoffman@animatedsoftware.com>
Subject: Re: A modest suggestion


Kashmir peacemakers or arms salesmen

By Azmat A Khan

East-West diplomacy may well be able to pat itself on the back for a commendable effort to avert what has been seen as an 'inevitable war' between India and Pakistan but I fear as soon as the diplomats walk away tensions will rise again as no real effort is being made in providing relief to Kashmiri population caught between 'friend and foe'.

The UK foreign secretary, Jack Straw 's optimistic note at the end of his two-day trip to India and Pakistan, where he made no distinction between freedom-fighters and "terrorism masquerading as freedom fighting" to appease his Indian audience, was somewhat reassuring. His diplomatic skills may not have averted the war but it has certainly saved him embarrassing jibe of the kind felt by his predecessor, Robin Cook, when he bravely burnt his fingers over Kashmir some years ago in his attempts to put an 'ethical policy' dimension to the Kashmir saga.

Shortly before his departure to the sub-continent Jack Straw was hitting a different cord on national TV when he called the two sides of Kashmir 'occupied'. On his return, though, he had little to say about Kashmir itself, where thousands have been killed by India's frequently brutal counter-insurgency operations. It was one up for India, again. This is exactly why Kashmiri freedom fighters, backed by Pakistan, have sought to escalate the conflict. They fear the international community is playing along to bury the core issue rather than push for results oriented dialogue, which is not what New Delhi wants to see.

When waging war, recently, president Bush and prime minister Blair were tumid with 'moral leadership and purpose'. In waging peace in Kashmir, both display vapidity and no resolve. Secretaries are dispatched on half-hearted missions to push for negotiations. No one is proposing the measures necessary to resolve the issue for good. They worry that the conflict could escalate into most lethal exchange since the second world war but the moral imperatives invoked during the Kuwait invasion, the Kosovo crisis and the Kabul bombing turns out to be nothing more than old-fashioned self-centered geo-political interests. So much for peace missions.

Even if Britain could claim no prior involvement in this conflict, which is highly debatable, the moral and political obligation to help develop an effective international response to seek a resolution of the Kashmir issue would be commendable and not questionable. To turn away from it after the de-escalation of the current crisis would constitute the greatest dereliction of moral duty since leaving India with Kashmir hanging in the balance.

Two years ago, in a sitting with the then foreign office minister, Geoff Hoon now defense secretary, I questioned this attitude and asked how long can the world continue to ignore the plight of Kashmiris. His reply, "we were successful in seeking a withdrawal from Kargil and averting the war", was close to misconception then and it proves my point now. It is wrong to think that the shadows of war have cleared. Six months down the line the world could well witness the 'unthinkable' nuclear clash in the region. Jack straw knows that too well.

The ugly, nuclear-tipped rhetoric that the pair are now exchanging over what Jack Straw rightly calls occupied- Kashmir is nothing new. India thinks Pakistan is calling nuclear bluff and talks of "decisive victory". Pakistan's powerful General Pervez Musharraf's response to use "full might" without discounting the nuclear option if his country's survival is threatened is not so unthinkable. Indeed it is the timely, missile tests and the nuclear capability of Pakistan, which has thus far deterred India from launching an Israeli style raid on Pakistan and Kashmir under its control.

When Clinton administration intervened to end the Kargil conflict three years ago no real attempt was made to address the root cause of the crisis. It was largely left for the two nations to resolve the differences with some diplomatic nudging. Indian and Pakistani forces have kept troops in high-altitude frontline positions across ' the Line-of-Control' in northern Kashmir. They are both well equipped with the arms supplied by the very same counties which are today engaged in hectic diplomatic endeavors from Putin to Armitage.

Clearly, the key to reducing the armed conflict is to reach an international agreement on arms supplies in addition to trilateral table-talk. Unilateral action can help matters too. But without such an effort peacemakers with an arms exports record are seen down right suspect and rightly so.

The Guardian, London,on May 28, called for UK government to clarify if Jack Straw was an arms salesman or an honest broker for peace. The Daily Mirror described him as salesman of death a day earlier. Kashmiris think he is a jumble of the two. At a time of conflict arms sales are a serious and intensely emotive subject. Kashmir has given the South Asia neighbours the greediest and most depressing appetite for weapons - military expenditure in the region rose 23% in the years 1998-2000 alone. Pushing for diplomacy today, the East- West alliance (USA, Russia, China, Britain and France) is the major benefactor of arms consumption.

They have continued to ignore the clear case of arms embargo. The British government granted nearly 700 export licences for a range of military equipment to India in deals worth 64.5m in 2000. About 70 all-party MPs have signed an Early Day Motion backing the call for arms embargo. The contentious sale of the 1bn Hawk jets, believed to be beyond India's legitimate military needs, is equivalent of 10 years of bilateral aid. The Hawk is an advanced trainer, which can be used as a ground attack aircraft and to train pilots for nuclear delivery. One of the selling-points for Hawk is that it can be prepared for combat in a few hours - something India could do without in defusing the current crisis. Some 126 Jaguar bombers made by BAE Systems, are believed to be produced for India under licence. These aircraft can be adapted to carry the much dreaded nuclear weapons.

Only three months ago, I raised the issue of arms sales to India with deputy prime minister, John Prescott, during his visit to Bradford. Labour has a praiseworthy manifesto commitment to "control the activities of arms brokers" in areas of conflict. UK parliament passed an Export Control Bill in June 2001 to this effect. I pointed to the loopholes in the current bill which allows brokering to the "world's most dangerous" countries as long as business is conducted outside the UK. He claimed to adhere to manifesto commitment but British arms are ending up with Indian occupation forces, who are engaged in quelling the Kashmiri uprising with brut force. This cannot be right. As a consequence Kashmiri freedom fighters and none-Kashmiri volunteers are busy seeking vengeance. It is wrong too, but if Britain is to be an international "force for good" lecturing others for distinction between terrorism and freedom fight, the government must now reconsider its position regarding sale of Hawk and other military hardware accordingly. It could mean the difference between life and death for those on the receiving end. The war is on ! Ask any Kashmiri. They have lost 70,000 already. If it is wrong to supply weapons to Kashmiri side then surely it must be wrong to arm the forces of occupation whose presence has made the world's most tranquil scenic land into a nightmare for the 21st century.

The writer is former general secretary of the pro-independence JKLF_UK

email: azmat@jklf.zzn.com

www.jklf.com

Tel: 01132 8326077

Mobile: 07903 452087

Parkview, 108 Killinghall Road, Bradford, UK

==========================================================