Council for a Livable World

We’re almost there!  We have raised over $1 million dollars toward the Cut the Nuclear Threat Campaign! In the past year President Obama has made significant steps to promote his vision for a nuclear weapons free world.  But with the 2010 elections approaching, the conservative fringe are doubling their efforts to cut this progress short.

Time is running out.  Help us achieve our goal to raise $2 million dollars by the end of the 2010 elections.  Click here to make a generous gift today!

For the first time in decades we have the chance to truly change national security policies and reduce nuclear weapons stockpiles.  The New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty will soon come before the Senate.  Council for a Livable World is advocating for its ratification as well as other policies to secure vulnerable nuclear materials.

Unfortunately, the political realities of the 2010 election mean that the window of opportunity for progress on arms control issues is closing.

Donate today to help us reach $2 million dollars. Make sure progressive voices like ours and the pro-arms control candidates we support are heard in Congress.

With less than four months until the election, our goal is high, but our hopes are higher that we can rely on you for your generous support.  The thermometer reads $1.3 Million today and you can make it read $2 Million by November.

For nearly 50 years, Council for a Livable World has fought to end to the proliferation of nuclear weapons.  With the support of a progressive President and Congress, now is the time to make true progress toward that goal.  But the 2010 elections are almost here, please help Cut the Nuclear Threat today!

Make a contribution to Council for a Livable World and help us move closer to our shared vision for a world free of nuclear weapons!

I will miss Dave Obey when he retires at the end of this Congress. Obey is a Hell Raiser for Justice the title of his memoir. Most recently Obey fought for a legislative end to the Iraq War, called for a surtax on the rich to finance the Afghanistan Wa…

The right wing is launching wild charges and vicious attacks in order to produce a conservative sweep of the November elections.

In Pennsylvania, the neoconservatives have joined with the Christian right to attack Senate candidate, and former Admiral, Joseph Sestak (D) for being “soft” on Israel. That’s a falsehood.

They have launched a series of malicious television ads to torpedo Sestak’s campaign.

The main figures behind the ads are Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol and  Christian crusader Gary Bauer. The real aim is to elect right wingers like conservative Republican Pat Toomey, running against Sestak.

In April, Sestak toppled long time incumbent Sen. Arlen Specter 54% – 46% to win the Democratic nomination.

Council for a Livable World endorsed Sestak early in the campaign for his strong record on the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, New START and a range of national security issues.

Let’s help Sestak turn back these right wing attacks.

In Colorado, Tea Party favorite Dan Buck called the progressive liberal movement “the largest threat” to America, more than al Qaeda or Iran.

Greater than al Qaeda and Iran? What are these guys smoking?

Buck is the favorite for the Republican nomination and is running against Council-endorsed Senator Michael Bennet (D).  Bennet was appointed to replace Senator Ken Salazar.

Bennet supports ratification of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty and the Kissinger-Schultz-Nunn-Perry vision of moving toward a world free of nuclear weapons. He will vote for New START and oppose efforts to derail the treaty.

Click here to contribute to Senator Bennet to keep Dan Buck out of Congress!

The latest Pennsylvania polls show Sestak and Toomey tied 43% – 43%.

The latest Colorado polls show Buck with a narrow lead over Bennet.

Sestak and Bennet can both win, but they need substantial resources to turn back the right wing attacks.

Please consider a contribution to both Sestak and Bennet.

Gen. Chilton: Russians unconstrained, lose insight into Russian nuclear arsenal

“If we don’t get the treaty, [the Russians] are not constrained in their development of force structure and…we have no insight into what they’re doing. So its the worst of both possible worlds.”

[General Kevin Chilton, STRATCOM Commander, 6/16/10]

Brent Scowcroft: Nuclear negotiations thrown into chaos

“The principal result of non-ratification would be to throw the whole nuclear negotiating situation into a state of chaos.”

[General Brent Scowcroft (Ret.), President George H.W. Bush’s National Security Advisor, 6/10/10]

James Schlesinger: U.S. non-proliferation efforts undermined

Failure to ratify this treaty “would have a detrimental effect on our ability to influence others with regard to, particularly, the nonproliferation issue.”

[Secretary of Defense for Presidents Nixon and Ford and the Secretary of Energy for President Carter, 4/29/10]

William Perry: U.S. leadership on non-proliferation forfeited

“If we fail to ratify this treaty, the U.S. forfeits any right to leadership on nonproliferation policies.”

[Former Defense Secretary William Perry, 4/29/10]

Henry Kissinger: Adversaries and allies unsettled

 “This START treaty is an evolution of treaties that have been negotiated in previous administrations of both parties. And its principal provisions are an elaboration or a continuation of existing agreements.  Therefore, a rejection of them would indicate that a new period of American policy had started that might rely largely on the unilateral reliance of its nuclear weapons, and would therefore create an element of uncertainty in the calculations of both adversaries and allies. And therefore, I think it would have an unsettling impact on the international environment.”

[Henry Kissinger, National Security Advisor to President Nixon and Secretary of State to Presidents Nixon and Ford, 5/25/10]

Los Alamos director: Less information about Russians

Without data from new START, would that create more uncertainty for us about Russia? Certainly the country would not get as much information that the monitoring program would provide through new START.

[Michael Anastasio, Director of The Los Alamos National Laboratory, 7/15/10]

Lawrence Livermore director: Less certainty

I think that it is certainly true that the START treaty that is under your consideration does offer the ability to understand, provide more data on what’s going on in Russia with their systems. As a technical person, data is always valuable and so it will certainly reduce our uncertainties.

[George Miller, Director of The Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, 7/15/10]

Lt. General Dirk Jameson (USAF, retired): Less information about Russians
“Without it [New START] we’d be poorly equipped to monitor Russia’s arsenal.”
[Lt. General Dirk Jameson, former Deputy Commander in Chief and Chief of Staff of U.S. Strategic Command, 7/19/2010]