Nukewatch

Working for a nuclear-free future since 1979

  • Issues
    • Direct Action
    • Environmental Justice
    • Nuclear Power
      • Chernobyl
      • Fukushima
    • Nuclear Weapons
    • On The Bright Side
    • Radiation Exposure
    • Radioactive Waste
    • Renewable Energy
    • Uranium Mining
    • US Bombs Out of Germany
  • Quarterly Newsletter
    • Quarterly Newsletter
    • Newsletter Archives
  • Resources
    • Nuclear Heartland Book
    • Fact Sheets
    • Reports, Studies & Publications
      • The New Nuclear Weapons: $1.74 Trillion for H-bomb Profiteers and Fake Cleanups
      • Nuclear Power: Dead In the Water It Poisoned
      • Thorium Fuel’s Advantages as Mythical as Thor
      • Greenpeace on Fukushima 2016
      • Drinking Water at Risk: Toxic Military Wastes Haunt Lake Superior
    • Nukewatch in the News
    • Links
    • Videos
  • About
    • About Nukewatch
    • Contact Us
  • Get Involved
    • Action Alerts!
    • Calendar
  • Donate

December 28, 2017 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Mining Industry Repealing Wisconsin Anti-Pollution Laws

By Kelly Lundeen

On November 8, Wisconsin lawmakers repealed the state’s “Prove-It-First” sulfide mining statute and sent it to Gov. Scott Walker for his signature. The law allowed for a mine to be licensed if its proponents could demonstrate that a similar mine had operated for 10 years and been closed for 10 years without causing acid mine drainage or polluting water. Since the requirement was never met, the statute has protected Wisconsin waters from sulfide mines since 1998. But beginning in 2013, Gov. Walker and Koch brothers-funded mining industry backers made repeal of the moratorium a top priority. Meanwhile, Republican Rep’s Jesse Kremer of Kewaskum, Rep. Cody Horlacher of Mukwonago, and Sen. Duey Stroebel of Saukville introduced bills to repeal state laws limiting air and water pollution not regulated under federal law.

A coalition of indigenous, environmental, and sports organizations mobilized to protect “Prove it first.” Over 20 years ago, many of the same groups had united around opposition to the metallic sulfide mining at Flambeau and Crandon, and saw the successful passage of the moratorium.

Back in the late ‘90s, both current Nukewatch staffers, John LaForge and I, were independently active in the anti-pollution struggle. For me, collecting postcards to support the Mining Moratorium and protesting the Crandon Mine was an early introduction to environmentalism as a geology student at University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire; and for John it meant organizing nonviolent action with Flambeau mine opponents from across the state.

Exxon’s Crandon mine proposal was stopped and the mine site sold to the Mole Lake Ojibway and the Forest County Potawatomi. The Flambeau Mine came and went, and the closed mine site has never been fully reclaimed after 20 years even though tailings were shipped off site. The Flambeau copper/gold operation was one of the major tools used by both sides of the moratorium repeal debate. Mining advocates claimed falsely that the site had been cleaned up, while opponents referred to the company’s own records to prove the site is polluting Stream 3, which feeds the Flambeau River. Flambeau mine site owners have never secured a mine reclamation “Certificate of Completion” due to the pollution—proven by 45 violations of water quality standards documented in a report by the Flambeau Mining Co. itself (a subsidiary of Rio Tinto). Unfortunately, industry-manufactured lies that “the Flambeau River remains fully protected” have dominated public discussion of the repeal.

At the state’s legislative hearings to repeal the moratorium, Nukewatch members and supporters joined dozens of others to testify. We gathered with our local network and used presentations, letters to the editor, and protest to educate the public and Assembly representatives.

“After hearing this,” said State Representative Romaine Quinn who attended a Nukewatch-organized presentation by Dr. Laura Gauger, “no, I don’t find myself supporting the mining bill.” However, Quinn voted for repeal.

Prior to the repeal bill’s passage, the author, Sen. “Toxic” Tom Tiffany, R-Hazelhurst, said, “exploratory companies tell me they are back in play (in Wisconsin) if we change the law.” Tiffany predicted that the bill could prompt companies to start early exploration work for copper, zinc, gold and silver as early as 2018.

—Dr. Robert E. Moran, “Summary: Flambeau Mine: Water Contamination and Selective ‘Alternative Facts,’” April 2017; Ecowatch, Jan. 4, 2013

Filed Under: Environment, Newsletter Archives, Office News, Quarterly Newsletter, Sulfide Mining

December 28, 2017 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Colin Kaepernick and the Myth of the “Good” Protest

By Glenda Elizabeth Gilmore

The Dallas Cowboys all took a knee Sept. 25, including team owner Jerry Jones, during the national anthem to protest racial injustice and police killings of unarmed African Americans. AP photo.

The editors of GQ named the quarterback Colin Kaepernick its Citizen of the Year for his work protesting racial injustice. Mr. Kaepernick has been heavily criticized by people like President Trump, who claims that an NFL player who kneels during the playing of the national anthem “disrespects our flag” and should be fired. Others argue that he is out of bounds as an activist who mixes sports with politics.

The problem is that Mr. Kaepernick’s critics, and most of America, don’t really understand how protests work. Our textbooks and national mythology celebrate moments when single acts of civil disobedience, untainted by political organizations, seemed to change the course of history. But the ideal of the “good” protest—one that materialized from an individual’s epiphany—is a fantasy. More often, effective protest is like Mr. Kaepernick’s: it’s collective, and contingent, and all about long and difficult struggles.

Rosa Parks, whose refusal to give up her seat touched off the Montgomery bus boycott in 1956, being fingerprinted by in Montgomery, Alabama, when she was among several others charged with violating segregation laws. Photo by Gene Herrick/AP

Consider what most Americans would agree were two “good” protests: Rosa Parks’s refusal to move to the back of a bus in Montgomery, Alabama, and the student sit-ins at a Woolworth lunch counter in Greensboro, North Carolina. Parks, the story goes, was exhausted from a day’s work and took a seat in the “whites only” section. To the astonishment of onlookers, she refused to give up her seat when asked. In Greensboro, black college students decided to eat at the local five-and-dime and initiated the first sit-in at a segregated Southern restaurant. They were idealistic and perhaps naïve.

These stories follow a set narrative. They are “firsts”: the first time a black woman refused to give up her seat; or the first time students staged a sit-in. They seemed to arise spontaneously when someone fed up with unfair treatment couldn’t take it anymore. “Good” protesters act as individual citizens, untainted by associations with suspect political organizations.

The trouble is that these stories are historically inaccurate and obscure just how protest in the 20th century forged a more democratic country. A narrative with greater accuracy would allow us to better evaluate protests against racial discrimination. Earlier protests, similar to the one that Mr. Kaepernick started, sprang from protesters’ associations with activist organizations, were deeply political rather than individual, and played out in unfamiliar venues in new forms.
Protests that change history have their own long histories. They are almost never the first of their kind. Successful protesters plan campaigns, rather than respond to oppression in a single, spontaneous act. Protesters often belong to organizations that lend theoretical, moral and logistical support. Protests don’t reveal previously hidden wrongs to an unaware public. Instead, they cast those wrongs in a new light. They fail, time and time again. When they succeed, they win only partial victories.

Rosa Parks, for example, was a trained civil rights activist. She built on efforts that started in the 19th century to desegregate transportation and gained speed in the 1930s. In 1940, for example, Pauli Murray, a black woman, refused to give up her seat on a bus in Petersburg, Virginia.

Though most Americans today look back on the desegregation of public transportation with pride, most white Southerners opposed it vehemently, and many did so violently. During World War II, white passengers and bus drivers beat uniformed black soldiers who tried to integrate buses.

A. Philip Randolph knew that the emergency of war meant that these instances of discrimination ran counter to the nation’s interests. Randolph drew on his long experience as a labor leader to found the March on Washington Movement in 1941. The movement threatened to bring millions of African-Americans to Washington to protest. When President Franklin Roosevelt promised reforms, Randolph called off the march.

Throughout the war, the movement continued to train people who became civil rights protesters in the 1950s, including Pauli Murray. This pressure influenced the Supreme Court in 1946, which ordered desegregation on interstate buses in Morgan v. Virginia. That case set a precedent that Parks strategically worked to extend to local and state laws in Montgomery.

Just as Parks had done, the students sitting-in at the Woolworth counter in Greensboro, NC drew from a long history of struggle. African-Americans had been “stool sitting” since the early 1940s. Howard University students in Washington, DC staged some of the first sit-ins, which involved movement-trained protesters led by Murray. Those sit-ins aimed at national chain stores that operated outside the South, just as the Greensboro sit-ins purposefully did later. The Greensboro students knew all of this, because they were advised by the legendary organizer Ella Baker.

White Americans’ deep investment in the myth that the civil rights movement quickly succeeded based on individual protests has left the impression that organizations such as Black Lives Matter are counterproductive, even sinister. The same things were said of the NAACP.

Just as football players kneeling during the national anthem today must repeatedly insist that they are not protesting the flag, Parks and the Greensboro students had to fight against efforts to play down the stakes of their protests. Parks’s action was not about a seat in the front of the bus. It was about Jim Crow, a legal and social system of degradation. And as Baker argued in her speech “Bigger Than a Hamburger,” the Greensboro sit-ins marked the beginning of a fight for education, voting rights, and economic opportunity.

Rosa Parks was a hero. So were the students who sat in at the Woolworth lunch counters. But they knew that their heroism was possible only because of decades of what Baker called “spade work.” They knew that organizations to which they belonged and that gave them strength were the most recent manifestations of decades of struggle.

—Dr. Glenda Gilmore is a professor of history at Yale and a co-author most recently of These United States: A Nation in the Making, 1890 to the Present. She wrote this commentary for the New York Times.

Filed Under: Direct Action, Newsletter Archives, Quarterly Newsletter

December 28, 2017 by Nukewatch 1 Comment

Japan Could Dump 1 Million Tons of Radioactive Water into the Sea from Fukushima

Winter Quarterly 2017-18

By John LaForge

The new Chairman of Tepco Holding, Inc., Takashi Kawamura, caused a public uproar in the coastal fish­ing community last April when he reportedly declared that almost 1 million tons of contaminated waste water stored in tanks onshore would be dumped into the ocean.

“The decision has already been made,” Takashi Kawamura, said in a recent interview with the foreign media, Japan Times. Newsweek also reported July 14 that, Kawamura told the media that “nearly 777,000 tons of wa­ter tainted with tritium …will be dumped into the Pacific Ocean.”

But the company faced an im­mediate backlash, especially among fishers whose livelihoods have been devastated since the March 11, 2011 catastrophe, and quickly reversed itself. The company now says it has “no plans for an immediate release” and can keep storing water through 2020 or 2023.

British newspapers reported Nov. 27, that “there are 900 tanks that could spill if there is another earthquake or tsunami.”The New York Times said last March there were “1,000 gray, blue and white tanks on the grounds… [that] already hold 962,000 tons of contaminated water, and Tokyo Electric is installing more tanks.”

In May 2015, the International Atomic Energy Agency urged Japan to dump the waste water in the ocean, and in Sept. 2016, Dale Klein, a former chair of the US Nuclear Regula­tory Commission, recommended ocean dumping too, telling Bloomberg News that ocean dumping “will not be a safety issue, but it will be an emo­tional issue.” Klein added, “I get nervous about just storing all that water when you have about a thou­sand tanks. You have all the piping, all the valves, everything that can break.”

Scientists have declared the three-reactor disaster the worst radioactive contamination of the ocean in recorded history.

About 300 tons of ground water rushes into three reac­tor basements through earthquake-destroyed foundations, mixes with the melted uranium fuel rods and becomes tainted with radiation. The waste water is then pumped out and filtered through an experimental process called Advanced Liquid Processing System. ALPS separates most of the dangerous isotopes but can’t remove tritium, the radioactive form of hy­drogen. It is this “tritiated” water that is stored in the large tanks.

Japan’s government and Tepco argue that since nuclear reactors routinely release tritium to the air and water, the ocean dumping of 1 million tons of tritiated water to the sea would not be harmful.

Tritium is Dangerous, Long-Lived Cancer Agent

Tritium concentrates in aquatic organisms including algae, seaweed, crustaceans and fish. With a radioactive half-life of 12.3 years (half its radioactivity will decay in 12.3 years) it persists in the environment for 120 years.

Christina Mills, a staff scientist with the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER) notes, that “tritium can cross the placenta, become incor­porated into the embryo/fetus, and irradiate rapidly dividing cells, thereby raising the risk of malforma­tions and early failed pregnancies. Given that all of a woman’s ova get made while she is still in her mother’s womb, the risks can be multi-generational.”

IEER President Dr. Arjun Makhijani, reports that “Tritium is a highly radioactive isotope of hydro­gen…. Since tritium has the same chemical proper­ties as hydrogen, it can combine with oxygen to form water. Such tritiated water is radioactive, and has become one of the problem pollutants at many nuclear facilities. In some places it has contaminated groundwater and surface water and continues to do so. … Commercial nuclear power plants also dis­charge tritium into public water bodies.

“Since tritiated water is processed by plants, animals and humans like ordinary water, the tritium in it can become transformed into other chemicals, such as proteins needed by the body. It can become part of the DNA. It can affect developing fetuses.”

Makhijani reminds readers further that “The estab­lished science is, and has been for some time, that there is no threshold for cancer risk of radiation and therefore no level of exposure is ‘safe.’ While it is true that we all are exposed to natural background radiation, this does not mean that natural back­ground radiation is ‘safe.’”

—The London Independent, & the Metro online, Nov. 27, 2017; Japan Times, & Newsweek, July 14, 2017; New York Times, March 11, 2017; Bloomberg, Sept. 5, 2016; IEER Press Conference, Red Wing, MN, Feb. 8, 2012; IEER, “Statement on Tritium,” Feb. 6, 2006

Some of the 1,000 hastily-built tanks holding over 900,000 tons of highly contaminated cooling water at the Fukushima-Daiichi complex.

US Sailors Continue $1 Billion Class Action Against Tepco, General Electric

Dozens of Navy personnel who were aboard the aircraft carriers USS Ronald Reagan and USS Essex when they went to Fukushima in March 2011 to render aid to survivors, have since suffered unusual health problems including fatigue, weight loss, swollen limbs, joint pain, stomach ailments and diminished eyesight.

Stonewalled by the Navy, 420 sailors have joined a $1 billion class action lawsuit in federal court in San Diego against Fukushima’s owners, Tokyo Electric Power Co. (Tepco), and against General Electric which built the three destroyed reactors. Tepco and the Navy contend the sailors did not receive enough radiation exposure to have caused the illnesses. How­ever, Japan, South Korea, and Guam later declared the USS Reagan too radioactive to enter their ports.

The court case is moving slowly—it was filed in 2012. According to Courthouse News, eight of the sailor-plaintiffs have already died—most from can­cer—since the first case was filed. The sailors are represented by some high-profile attorneys, includ­ing, among others, former US Sen. John Edwards and his daughter Cate Edwards.

Cate Edwards told Courthouse News there are 23 plaintiffs living with cancer, many of whom served in Fukushima in their early 20s and some as young as 18. Beyond the group suffering cancer, many of the sailors have degenerative diseases, some have lost mobility, use of their arms and legs, some have back problems and eyesight loss.

A 26-month-old toddler born to a sailor-father who served in Fukushima died from brain and spine cancer. One female sailor opted to end a pregnancy after finding out the fetus had severe birth defects, Edwards reported. Another sailor, who was pregnant during the mission and her “Baby A.G.,” who was born in October 2011 with multiple genetic muta­tions, are also plaintiffs.

“Why are all these young, healthy, fit people getting cancer? Experiencing thyroid issues? It’s too strange to be a coincidence,” Edwards told Courthouse News. “That just doesn’t happen absent some exter­nal cause. All of these people experienced the same thing and were exposed to radiation at Fukushima. A lot of this is just common sense.”

No trial date has been set, but attorneys will argue a government “motion to dismiss” at a hearing Jan. 4. —Bianca Bruno, Courthouse News online, Nov. 29, 2017; Harvey Wasserman, EcoWatch/Nuclear, Feb. 26, 2014

Steel Maker Fraud Also Hit Reactors

For over 10 years, the Japanese manufacturing giant Kobe Steel falsified test data on certain substandard products to avoid the cost of massive do-overs. The scandal, in which the company faked data on the quality of aluminum, copper, wire and steel to cover-up unmet engineering standards, like strength. The fraud has impacted at least 500 industrial customers around the world where exacting safety requirements are vital, including builders of cars, bullet trains, aircraft and nuclear reactors. The country’s nearly collapsed nuclear power industry was also hit by the fraud. The Fukushima-Daini, on Japan’s northeast coast near the destroyed Fuku­shima-Daiichi complex, purchased some of Kobe Steel’s falsely certified copper piping. Tokyo Elec­tric Power Co. claims that the substandard piping was never installed but was in storage.—New York Times, Oct. 14, Oct. 20, and Nov. 11, 2017

Tepco Starts Installing Device to Remove Wrecked Fuel from Reactor 3 Cooling Pool

Six and a half years since the three-reactor disaster began, Tepco just began installing equipment to be used for removing waste fuel rods from the heavily damaged storage pool for reactor 3. The equipment, weighing 72 tons, was lifted by two large cranes.

The storage pool, located in the reactor building on a floor 36 meters [ten stories] above ground level, holds 566 used and unused uranium fuel assem­blies. Tepco plans to begin removing the fuel from the pool by the middle of next year. —The Japan Times, Nov. 12, 2017

Six Years Into Fukushima, Robots Finally Find Reactors’ Melted Uranium Fuel

The Great Northeast Japan Earthquake and tsunami in 2011 caused a total loss of cooling at Fukushima-Daiichi. Over-heating of the fuel went out-of-control at three reactors and melted uranium fuel burned hot enough to torch through steel containment structures “and even penetrate the concrete floors below,” Martin Fackler reported. Engineers laboring to find it repeatedly failed in attempts to photograph the wreckage with radiation-proof robots. This sum­mer, new models, redesigned after multiple failures, finally found the fuel in all three reactors. “I’ve been a robotic engineer for 30 years, and we’ve never faced anything as hard as this,” said Shinji Kawat­suma, a director at the Naraha Remote Technology Development Center. “Until now, we didn’t know exactly where the fuel was, or what it looked like,” said Takahiro Kimoto, a general manager for Tepco. Tepco executives said early on that no manual any­where explained how to confront three simultaneous meltdowns. —New York Times, Nov. 19, 2017

Filed Under: Environment, Fukushima, Newsletter Archives, Quarterly Newsletter

October 23, 2017 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Fall 2017 Quarterly Newsletter

Click the links below to access articles from our Fall 2017 Quarterly Newsletter. Individual articles are also tagged by issue category.

Cover and Back Page

US Nuclear Weapons in Germany Slammed by Protesters, Politicians
Haul No! Tour Report: Building Momentum in Resistance to Grand Canyon Uranium Mining & Transport

Page 1

The United States Once Carpet-Bombed North Korea
“We burned down every town in North Korea”

Page 2

Democracy Breaks Out at the UN as 122 Nations Vote to Ban the Bomb
New Nuclear Weapons Tests and Contracts
Japan’s Environment Ministry Wants Roads Built with Fukushima Radioactive Waste

Page 3

Moving Nuclear Industry Trash: Yucca Mountain and Parking Lot Dumps Eyed by Congress
Trump’s Nuclear Lying Goes Ballistic
Lawsuit Challenges Planned US Nuclear Bomb Factory

Page 4

US Nuclear Weapons in Germany Slammed by Protesters, Politicians (continued from Cover)

Page 5

Did Nonviolent Actions Propel Issue into Germany’s National Elections? A partial timeline

Page 6

Through the Prism of Nonviolence: On the Trail of Death

Page 7

Renewable Generation Overtakes Nuclear Years Earlier Than Expected
Hurricane Winds & Reactor Risks
South Korea will abandon nuclear power
Spectacular Costs Force More Reactor Construction Halts
Additional Resources
Nukewatch Information

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, Quarterly Newsletter

October 23, 2017 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

US Nuclear Weapons in Germany Slammed by Protesters, Politicians

Fall Quarterly 2017
By John LaForge


Photos by Zara Brown, Marion Küpker and John LaForge.

In July, a Nukewatch-organized delegation of US peace activists joined ongoing protests against the deployment of US nuclear weapons in southwest Germany at the Büchel Air Base.
The group joined hundreds of activists from northern Europe that were part of dozens of nonviolent actions that took place between March and August. The efforts forced a reluctant media to take note of US nukes in Germany. News of the protests was widespread and ultimately prodded top politicians and even the current Foreign Minister to call for removal of the US bombs, all in the midst of a national election campaign.
Notable among the 11-person US delegation were seven war resisters who have served a combined total of 36 years in US jails and prisons for protests against nuclear weapons and the war system. After one particularly audacious action by four of the delegates and a German colleague, the German press took up our group’s humorous self-appointed moniker: the “prison gang.”

Sister Carol Gilbert (L) and Susan Crane war resistance has added up to over 13 years in prison.

The delegation, representing seven states and the District of Columbia, also helped put a spotlight on US and NATO plans to replace the current arsenal of B61 H-bombs deployed across Europe with an expensive new version. The new bomb is being touted as the first ever “smart” or precision nuclear weapon and aimed with a new tailfin attachment, making it unprecedented. New nuclear weapons are unlawful under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty which the US and Germany have both ratified.
Ralph Hutchison, coordinator of the Oak Ridge Environmental Peace Alliance in Tennessee—where the thermonuclear core for the new “B61-12” might be manufactured—said about joining the group, “It is important that we show this is a global movement. The resistance to nuclear weapons is not limited to one country.” The new B61-12 program will cost over $12 billion if production is authorized sometime after 2020. “Büchel is scheduled to get new H-bombs. Nothing could be stupider when 90% of Germans want them out and the when the world wants to abolish nuclear weapons,” Hutchison said.
In fact, a March 2016 public opinion poll conducted by International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW), found that 93% of Germans want nuclear weapons banned; 85% agree that US nuclear weapons should be withdrawn from Germany; and 88% said they oppose US plans to replace the current weapons with the new B61-12.
Dubbed “International Week” by Campaign Council organizers in Germany, July 12-18 had over 60 people—from Russia, China, Mexico, Germany, Britain, the US, The Netherlands, France, Belgium and Germany—participate in vigils, trainings, networking, blockades, “go-in” actions, marches, media work, and simply enjoying peace camp. The effort was part of the five-month-long effort—“20 Weeks for 20 Bombs”—launched on March 26, 2017 in conjunction with the start of the final negotiations at the United Nations for the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons.

US delegation achieved a string of “firsts”

While the US delegation was itself a “first” in Germany’s anti-nuclear campaign, the group chalked up a string of additional firsts during its week of nonviolent actions.

On July 15, Susan Crane, of the Redwood City, California Catholic Worker and I walked through the base’s main gate and talked for 30 minutes with military guards and local police about whether their orders to protect nuclear war planning are lawful. While we were repeatedly ordered to leave, and Susan, a participant in five Plowshares disarmament actions, eventually sat down and had to be carried out, we were neither arrested or charged. “They don’t want to arrest internationals and draw attention to the nuclear weapons,” said long-time disarmament activist and Büchel peace camp organizer Marion Küpker.

After finding a security fence accidentally unlocked, dozens of war resisters streamed into the base’s main entrance and placed “bread, not bombs” around the displays of Air Force warplanes.

On July 16, about 35 activists streamed through the base’s flimsy outer gate and then through a heavy steel inside fence which was mistakenly left unlocked. While two people symbolically brought down the US flag, at least 30 others eagerly traipsed through the open fence, squeezed through another vehicle gate, and then fanned out across the broad entryway to inspect the exclusive surroundings and their gaudy display of retired war planes on pedestals. The Dutch activists, most of them from the Amsterdam Catholic Worker, were as shocked as anyone to be able to place a few dozen loaves of “bread, not bombs” on and around the memorialized “gods of metal.” All the while, Dominican Sisters Carol Gilbert and Ardeth Platte of Baltimore, Maryland, read aloud the text of the new international Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, and called for the base commander to come and accept a copy of the treaty.
The next day, July 17, during an early-morning blockade of the base by 30 protesters, the sudden appearance of the commander, “Oberstleutnant” Gregor Schlemmer who arrived on foot, thoroughly shocked the group which had locked arms and stretched banners across the road to his base. It is positively unheard of in the United States for high-ranking Air Force officers to meet openly with anti-war activists. Commander Schlemmer looked at ease and appeared to listen intently as Sister Ardeth explained the newly-minted nuclear weapons ban treaty, and then he calmly accepted her copy before leaving.

“Prison Gang” Go-in Action Occupied Bunker

Later on July 17, after nightfall, a group of five, me included, got deep inside the base, and for the first time in 21 years of protests against the US bombs, we occupied the top of one of the large bunkers potentially used for storing nuclear weapons. (Experts later reported that they are probably kept elsewhere on the base.)
After hiking along shadowy farm roads, shushing through dark rows of corn, clipping through the base’s outer fence, crossing a brightly lit air base road, and tramping noisily through a few wooded brambles, our small group cut through a second chain-link fence. We bumbled past a giant hanger and under the wing of a jet fighter parked in the open, and reached a set of double chain-link fences surrounding four tall, earth-bermed bunkers. After cutting the two non-electrified, unlit fences without tripping a single alarm or even having the lights snap on, the five of us scurried up to the top of the wide-topped, sod-covered concrete Quonset hut. No motion detector or alarm, no Klieg light or guard had noted our intrusion at all. We spent over an hour chatting, star gazing, checking our radiation monitor, and enjoying being flabbergasted that our implausible plan had worked. This was supposedly a severely controlled H-bomb storage depot, but we’ll never know. We didn’t try breaking into it.

Steve Baggarly of the Norfolk, Virginia Catholic Worker, was one of five to occupy a nuclear missile bunker.

Steve Baggarly, 52, of the Norfolk, Virginia Catholic Worker, suggested we label the bunker’s giant metal doors, so he and I scratched “Disarm Now” into the paint and this finally alerted some guards. We hustled back up to the top and we were all soon surrounded by vehicles, moving spot lights, and heavily armed soldiers searching on foot with flashlights. Still unnoticed because of the darkness and our elevation, we decided to announce our presence by singing “Vine & Fig Tree.” This prompted the patrol for the first time to look up. We were detained, and after an hour of being searched, photographed and lectured, Commander Schlemmer, summoned from bed at 2:30 a.m., gathered us for a short lecture. He said what we’d done was “dangerous” and that sneaking onto a military base “isn’t supposed to be fun.” Of course he was unaware that the five people before him had served a combined total of 19 years incarcerated for such actions. All of us—Baggarly, Susan Crane, Bonnie Urfer, Gerd Buentzly, of Herford, Germany, and myself—were released without charges.
News of aging peace activists occupying a nuclear weapons base unnoticed was widely reported in the press. The news moved Green Party Bundestag Deputy Tabea Rössner on Aug. 7 to lambast the “theme park” level of base security. Thanks to Rössner’s high-profile criticism, the head of the Social Democratic Party Martin Schulz unexpectedly called for the ouster of the US weapons, smack in the middle of his national campaign for the Chancellorship. A week later, Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel, during a press briefing in Washington, DC, with Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, endorsed Schulz’s call for removing the US nukes. Of course nuclear weapons are the last thing anyone wants to contemplate, so it takes focused inventiveness and a level of personal risk to get the public and the lawmakers to face the Bomb. Sometimes it works.

Zara Brown, delegataion phtographer.
Zara Brown, delegataion phtographer.

This summer’s “Twenty Weeks for Twenty Bombs,” made regular headline news thanks to the efforts of the nation-wide Campaign Council “Büchel is Everywhere: Nuclear Weapons-Free Now!” and its international coordinator Marion Küpker of Hamburg. After years of outreach and solidarity work, the five-month peace camp near the gates of Büchel Air Force Base, and its well-known use of nonviolent direct action, was endorsed by all 50 peace groups and organizations in the the Campaign Council which now includes mainstream bodies like International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, the Fellowship of Reconciliation, International Association of Lawyers against Nuclear Arms, and the DFG-VK, Germany’s oldest anti-war organization.
*The US delegates were Steve Baggarly, Kathy Boylan, Zara Brown, Carmella Cole, Susan Crane, Sr. Carol Gilbert, OP, Ralph Hutchison, John LaForge, Leona Morgan, Sr. Ardeth Platte, OP, and Bonnie Urfer.

See our photo gallery of the US delegation here.

Filed Under: B61 Bombs in Europe, Direct Action, Newsletter Archives, Quarterly Newsletter, US Bombs Out of Germany

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 149
  • 150
  • 151
  • 152
  • 153
  • …
  • 222
  • Next Page »

Stay Connected

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Subscribe

Donate

Categories

  • B61 Bombs in Europe
  • Chernobyl
  • Counterfeit Reactor Parts
  • Depleted Uranium
  • Direct Action
  • Environment
  • Environmental Justice
  • Fukushima
  • Lake Superior Barrels
  • Military Spending
  • Newsletter Archives
  • North Korea
  • Nuclear Power
  • Nuclear Weapons
  • Office News
  • On The Bright Side
  • Photo Gallery
  • Protect the Water Close Xcel's Monticello Reactor
  • Quarterly Newsletter
  • Radiation Exposure
  • Radioactive Waste
  • Renewable Energy
  • Social Issues
  • Sulfide Mining
  • Through the Prism of Nonviolence
  • Uncategorized
  • Uranium Mining
  • US Bombs Out of Germany
  • War
  • Weekly Column

Contact Us

(715) 472-4185
nukewatch1@lakeland.ws

Address:
740A Round Lake Road
Luck, Wisconsin 54853
USA

Donate To Nukewatch

News & Information on Nuclear Weapons,
Power, Waste & Nonviolent Resistance

Stay Connected

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

© 2026 · Nukewatch