[FirstClassSkeptic]

From: The Honorable Edward J. Markey
Date: 9/22/2011

Dear Colleague,

The Super Committee should target nuclear weapons. Our country plans to spend over $700 billion during the next decade on these archaic weapons of the past. We must cut funding for these weapons, and we must protect our children, our seniors, and our most vulnerable. The letter below advises the Super Committee to propose substantial cuts to the U.S. nuclear arsenal. I urge you to sign on to this letter. Please have a member of your staff contact Joseph Wender of my staff at x52836 or at Joseph.Wender@mail.house.gov if you would like to sign on or if you have any questions.

Sincerely,
U.S. Rep. Edward J. Markey (D=-MA)

Freeze the Nukes, Fund the Future

Dear Members of the Super Committee:

The Berlin Wall fell. The Soviet Union crumbled. The Cold War ended. Yet 20 years later, we continue to spend over $50 billion a year on the U.S. nuclear arsenal. This makes no sense. These funds are a drain on our budget and a disservice to the next generation of Americans. We are robbing the future to pay for the unneeded weapons of the past. Now is the time to stop fighting last century’s war. Now is the time to reset our priorities. Now is the time to invest in the people and the programs to get America back on track.

The Super Committee is best positioned to cut this outdated radioactive relic. The Soviets are long gone, yet the stockpiles remain. The bombs collect dust, yet the bills are with us to this day. We call on the Super Committee to cut $20 billion a year, or $200 billion over the next ten years, from the U.S. nuclear weapons budget. This cut will enable us to stay safe without further straining our budget. This cut will improve our security. This cut will allow us to continue funding the national defense programs that matter most.

Consider how this savings compares to vital programs on which Americans rely. We spend approximately $20 billion per year on Pell Grants to help students pay for college. We spend $5 billion to ensure that Americans do not freeze in their homes during the winter. We need to freeze our nuclear weapons, and fuel our stalled economy.

The Ploughshares Fund estimates that the U.S. will spend over $700 billion on nuclear weapons and related programs over the next ten years. Nuclear weapons and missile defense alone will consume over $500 billion. We can no longer justify spending at these levels. We can save hundreds of billions of dollars by restructuring the U.S. nuclear program for the 21st century.

Our current arsenal totals approximately 5,000 nuclear warheads. This enormous stockpile will allow us to annihilate our enemies countless times. At any one time there are up to 12 Trident submarines cruising the world’s seas. Each submarine carries an estimated 96 nuclear warheads. Each submarine is capable of destroying all of Russia’s and China’s major cities. Why then do we need all of these weapons? There is no good reason. America no longer needs, and cannot afford, this massive firepower.

The Super Committee should not reduce funding to vital programs relied upon by millions of Americans. Cut Minuteman missiles. Do not cut Medicare and Medicaid. Cut nuclear-armed B-52 and B-2 bombers. Do not cut Social Security. Invest in the future, don’t waste money on the past.

We do not need to maintain our current level of nuclear weapons to secure our country. The President agrees. The Senate agrees. The New START treaty will reduce our level of deployed strategic warheads to 1,550. This is a 25 percent cut from today’s levels. Fewer nuclear weapons should equal less funding.

We should not cut entitlement programs first. We should not target our seniors, our children, and our sick first. Instead we should target outdated and unnecessary nuclear weapons. Let’s freeze the nukes so we can fund the future.

Sincerely,

(co-signers as of September 30)
Capps (D- CA)
Capuano (D-MA)
Conyers (D-NY)
Filner (D-CA)
Frank (D-MA)
Grijalva (D-AZ)
Holt (D-NJ)
Jackson (D-IL)
Kucinich (D-OH)
Lee (D-CA)
Lewis (D-GA)
Markey (D-MA)
Maloney (D-NY)
Norton (D-DC)
Olver (D-MA)
Schakowsky (D-IL)
Slaughter (D- NY)
Stark (D-CA)

https://beforeitsnews.com/story/1173/471 ... arkey.html

I wonder how many of these signers know there are no nukes?

[NUKELIES]

Is it just me guys or do you feel more and more liberated from "mainstream" indoctrination as each day passes? I just can't believe the stuff that gullible people say anymore. But I no longer feel like I'm the strange one. When someone tells me they're on this or that prescription drug, I don't even feel like telling them that they are ruining their health with Glaxo/Pfizer poison any more, whereas in the past I would have tried to inform them of the reality of pharma-industrial practice.

I see that there are obviously millions of aware people sharing information on the internet, which I greatly appreciate, but why is it that people you know or talk to in real life don't ever seem to have a clue what's really going on in the world, or, worse, are deniers of the truth? Just about the only people I've come across in real life were some David Icke followers in Glastonbury talking about Nephilim and Planet X and all that.

When I saw my parents a couple of years ago we were watching TV at my Grandfather's house and a documentary happened to come on about how the moon landing was fake, and my Dad had a violent reaction to it - as if he had the deepest vested interest in the "moon landing" being real. And then when I told him that nuclear bombs were fake, he couldn't even fathom the possibility.

[rerevisionist]

Jess - yes, I know the feeling. In fact, both feelings.

I *guess* there's a working rule-of-thumb, that if the 'aware' percent is below 2, or 3, or 5, or something, it's too small to count. (I got this impression from a Penguin 'special' - British mass market paperback outfit, which did serious books - on the Vietnam War, which gave a table of %s of people's replies to questions on that war. The very last item was an American atrocities - I think about 3% were aware of them. - Possibly because of Russell's work. The rest were like your dad).

(NB this is not meant to be anti-American - Americans weren't told what went on, any more than Britons. I think the Dutch had a better idea. And quite a few people in the third world - south-east Asia particularly - were aware of the high bullshit percent. In fact I sometimes hope the third world might pull ahead in some fields because of this relative immunity).

They may even like the idea of a few percent opposition. At least it means everyone isn't a fool.

[NUKELIES]

2, 3, or 5 percent makes sense. I have to admit that this #OCCUPYWALLSTREET thing going on downtown is quite satisfying - as provocateured as it may be and probably is - because it shows that we internet "conspiracy theorists" aren't he only ones who are tired of the LIES.

[FirstClassSkeptic]

The Cold War ended. Yet 20 years later, we continue to spend over $50 billion a year on the U.S. nuclear arsenal. This makes no sense.

I think that fifty billion dollars a year is a good reason to be faking nuclear weapons. Don't you?

3.6 billion for the Manhattan Project in the forties would be roughly 36 billion today, counting inflation of the US dollar. So it's about the same order of magnitude being spent yearly as was spent in the original project, which took several years.

The Apollo moon landing fake cost 16 billion. And that was over several years time, and it's over now. The nuclear fake keeps giving good returns, year after year.

This should be pointed out to people who believe the moon landing was faked, but still believe in the existence of nukes.