The Lessons to Learn from Divine Strake Termination
By Stewart N. Thorpe
February 22, 2007

DIVINE STRAKE IS TERMINATED!

Not delayed. Not postponed. Not alternate locations being considered again. Not yet another environmental assessment. The madness of Divine Strake is over. The madness that started in December 2005 finally concludes in termination. The activist actions built up enough momentum and awareness through a frustrating battle of more than a year has succeeded.

We have won.

We won.

Some 10,000 Utahn and Nevadans expressed opposition against Divine Strake. The public input for Divine Strake’s environmental assessment by the Pentagon was higher than any environmental assessment in history conducted by the Pentagon. Three counties in Utah made resolutions against Divine Strake. The Utah legislature would finally follow in the last minutes of the struggle to pass a resolution against Divine Strake.

And as with almost every activist effort in history, the government has followed with the old tried explanation that the activism had nothing to do to change their minds!

“I have become convinced that it’s time to look at alternative methods that obviate the need for this type of large-scale test,” Defense Threat Reduction Agency Director Dr. James A. Tegnelia.

The agency said it was not a result of any information that the test might hurt workers or the public, but that seemingly, after trying for more than a year to conduct Divine Strake, meeting public resistance that turned into public outrage in the second round, that 10,000 responses in opposition, suddenly they decide that the test was useless and alternatives existed that were better (as was suggested by some citizens many times before). The Pentagon wants to take away the feeling of complete victory from Divine Strake’s opponents.

Let us look back at the timeline of events to see if their explanation for termination makes any sense whatsoever:

The timeline and nature of the Pentagon trying to rush Divine Strake through, not keeping to the mid-December promise of public hearings, refusing public input, breaking more promises by turning the public hearings into public information sessions instead, denying alternate locations for reasons such as taking more time in preparation, and refusing a 60 day notice promise after Feb. 1 which is before the public input deadline on Feb. 7.

The Pentagon was trying very hard to push Divine Strake through as fast as possible.

And the second environmental assessment didn’t take into account particles smaller than 10 microns, so, of course, with fixed data like that, Divine Strake would seem to be less dangerous than your smoke detector. This fact was not as widely known and discussed. I personally made a point to inform people and the media about it. Even without it though, the first and second environmental assessment contradict each other so completely that it logically brings the professionalism or credibility of both environmental assessments into question. This was quite obvious to many people.

With all this in mind, we are expected to believe that on Feb. 22, they, previously doing everything to rush Divine Strake pass the public, suddenly had a change of mind if Divine Strake was actually a useful test. And that Divine Strake was terminated for reasons independent of the public outcry and input.

The Pentagon wanted to execute Divine Strake. Their actions were especially designed in the second round to bypass the public input as much as possible. They broke promises doing so. They had even a public input deadline, Feb. 7, that was after the date, Feb. 1, which is when a government lawyer said she couldn’t give the public 60 day notice when Divine Strake was to be executed. All of their actions testify of the determination, solid determination that the Pentagon had for Divine Strake.

No, the Pentagon ran into more public resistance, skepticism, and outcry than they ever expected.

Enough that the Pentagon, the most powerful military entity in the world, backed down.

Divine Strake was not safe. So many objected to their environmental assessment’s credibility and the wisdom of Divine Strake’s nuclear purpose. The media was aroused and got on track. In fact, Channel 4 in Utah became so convinced by people like us objecting to Divine Strake that they would take an unabashed stand as a news station against Divine Strake’s safety.

continued at myspace.com

For Background Information, see www.renopeace.org/nonewnukes.htm