PDA

View Full Version : 5 peace activists Arrested Breaking Into Navy Base where nukes are stored



bobdina
11-05-2009, 04:01 AM
5 Arrested for Breaking Into Navy Base
November 04, 2009 peace activists
Knight Ridder/Tribune

BANGOR, Wash. -- Five protestors associated with an international peace movement were arrested Monday after cutting through three security fences to reach an area where nuclear missiles are stored at Naval Base Kitsap-Bangor.

Cited on suspicion of trespassing and destruction of government property were Bill Bischel, 81, a Catholic priest from Tacoma; Anne Montgomery, 83, a nun from New York; Susan Crane, 65, of Baltimore; Lynne Greenwald, 60, of Bremerton; and Steve Kelly, 60, of Oakland, Calif.

The nuclear weapons opponents were "apprehended in accordance with standing security procedures for incidents of this nature," according to a Navy press release. They were turned over to the Naval Criminal Investigative Service, cited and released at about 4 p.m.

"At no time was the safety of Navy personnel, property, or the public threatened in any way," according to a Navy press release.

The protestors said Tuesday that they used bolt cutters to infiltrate the perimeter fence at around 2 a.m. Monday and slipped onto the base under a full moon. They walked along the ridge above Delta Pier and the weapons-handling wharf, then followed a road east to their destination -- the weapons storage bunkers.

"We were hidden in plain sight the whole time," Greenwald said.

Another pair of fences stood between the group and Strategic Weapons Facility-Pacific, where nuclear missiles for the base's Trident submarines are stored. The protestors cut through them, setting off an alarm at around 6:30 a.m. They were quickly swarmed by Marines.

The protestors held up a banner that read "Disarm Now Plowshares: Trident: Illegal + Immoral." They put their arms out, gave peace signs and tried to look as non-threatening as possible to keep from being shot, Greenwald said.

Plowshares is an international anti-nuclear weapons movement that gets its name based on scriptures in the Bible that encourage beating "swords into plowshares."

The protestors complained about being handcuffed, hooded and kept on the ground for four hours.

"We had some intruders in a very strict-security place, and for them to be treated like criminals probably was the right thing for our security forces to do for awhile until they understood who they were, what they were doing there and what we needed to do to maintain our security," said Navy Region Northwest spokesman Chris Haley.

Deadly force is authorized in SWFPAC, Haley said.

There have been dozens of protests at the base's gates, and people have been arrested for walking a short distance onto federal property. But nobody has tried to cut through the fence before. Security measures worked, Haley said.

"We had a breach, we found the breach, we responded and everybody walked away healthy," he said. "I don't think we have any more concerns today than we had before."

Security forces didn't know how many people were involved or whether intruders might have driven onto the base, so the identification of everybody leaving the base was checked after the incident. That backed up traffic, but there was not a lockdown on Monday, Haley said.

The protestors said they wanted to bring to light the number of nuclear weapons in the community. The protestors say they believe the weapons are instruments of death that prevent peace in the world and waste money that could be put to better uses.

Greenwald and Bischel have participated in protests at the base organized by Ground Zero Center for Nonviolent Action, but this action was on their own, acting in the Plowshares tradition, they said. Plowshares has staged about 100 nuclear resistance actions worldwide since 1980.

The group wasn't trying to make a point that base security could be broken but wanted to get as close as possible to weapons they despise, they said.

"Our intent in talking to any media is not to emphasize how we broke through security or were treated but the real terror of the Trident nuclear weapons system," Greenwald said.

Both trespassing and destruction of government property are misdemeanors, said Emily Langlie, spokeswoman for the U.S. Attorney's Office in Seattle. The maximum penalty for trespassing is six months in jail and a $5,000 fine. It's a year in jail and a $100,000 fine for destroying property. The tickets will be processed in San Antonio, which takes about 40 days. Letters will then be sent to the protestors to appear before a judge in Tacoma, Langlie said.

GTFPDQ
11-05-2009, 10:12 AM
What they are peace activists? So they tried to steal some nukes for their own use.

I think Im starting to lose it a wee bit.

ghost
11-05-2009, 11:54 AM
Why weren't these fucks shot?

Although, it does look like they need a little more security on this base. If these guys that broke in were trained men, it may have turned out differently....

nastyleg
11-05-2009, 11:58 AM
Looks like we found the answer to the debate of lethal force regarding to the sensative site security question.

ghost
11-05-2009, 12:04 PM
Looks like we found the answer to the debate of lethal force regarding to the sensative site security question.


Yeah. I think it should be something like this - If people(unarmed) are found past the first fence, you get ONE warning. If you don't move back, then they get hosed. If they proceed or are found further in the base perimeter, they're hosed. Pretty simple. Don't come inside if you don't want to die....

Reactor-Axe-Man
11-05-2009, 10:53 PM
Trespassers into nuclear weapons facilities need to be shot. Period. Otherwise the signs warning that deadly force is authorized become meaningless. Even letting these fucks get within line of sight of the Delta Pier is unacceptable. Remember, you only have to do it once - these guys were counting on the leniency of the reaction force. It's time to return a lot more uncertainty to their calculations.

Also, speaking as a Roman Catholic, the Church needs to get back to rooting out the fucking Marxists from its ranks of priests and nuns. Pope JPII had a nice start when he excommunicated the Liberation Theologists (i.e., Catholic Marxists) in Latin America, but the job was only half finished. He let the ones in North America off with a warning that has since gone unheeded.

nastyleg
11-06-2009, 02:42 AM
I agree to lethal force but to a point. How bad would it look if the military shot and killed a priest and a nun? Senoir fucking citizens for crying out loud

ghost
11-06-2009, 10:01 AM
I agree to lethal force but to a point. How bad would it look if the military shot and killed a priest and a nun? Senoir fucking citizens for crying out loud


It would probably look just as bad(if not worse) if the priest and the nun had explosives strapped on them, and took out the base mess hall, while everyone was having lunch. In every other country, warning signs are taken literally. Why not here?

Reactor-Axe-Man
11-06-2009, 10:58 AM
I agree to lethal force but to a point. How bad would it look if the military shot and killed a priest and a nun? Senoir fucking citizens for crying out loud

How does them being old, or being clergy, exempt them from a law authorizing lethal force? Either the law authorizing lethal force itself is wrong, or we are declaring that we believe in a system of some people being more equal under the law than others. When we say lethal force is authorized for violating the security of our NUCLEAR WEAPONS, and then allow that security to be breached time and again with no lethal force used, will anyone actually believe that the reaction force is serious?

That priest and nun counted on the restraint of the reaction force. Would they have violated the weapon station's security if they believed that they were more than likely to die attempting it? Are we not lulling the reaction force itself into a false sense of security by allowing these idiots to do what they did with no lethal repercussions? Oh it's those damn peaceniks again. And again. And again. Maybe not the exact same people doing it, but still the same.

I assure you, the age and occupation of these fools will most certainly be taken into account by the justice system, and they will get a slap on the wrist for this. The next time maybe some young people accompany them on their little 'mission of conscience,' only they won't be the stupid hippies the older stupid hippies (and the gulled reaction force) think they are.

What then?

Sixx
11-06-2009, 11:04 AM
Yeah. I think it should be something like this - If people(unarmed) are found past the first fence, you get ONE warning. If you don't move back, then they get hosed. If they proceed or are found further in the base perimeter, they're hosed. Pretty simple. Don't come inside if you don't want to die....

Yeah I'm not too much into shooting unarmed people...

nastyleg
11-06-2009, 02:25 PM
How does them being old, or being clergy, exempt them from a law authorizing lethal force? Either the law authorizing lethal force itself is wrong, or we are declaring that we believe in a system of some people being more equal under the law than others. When we say lethal force is authorized for violating the security of our NUCLEAR WEAPONS, and then allow that security to be breached time and again with no lethal force used, will anyone actually believe that the reaction force is serious?

That priest and nun counted on the restraint of the reaction force. Would they have violated the weapon station's security if they believed that they were more than likely to die attempting it? Are we not lulling the reaction force itself into a false sense of security by allowing these idiots to do what they did with no lethal repercussions? Oh it's those damn peaceniks again. And again. And again. Maybe not the exact same people doing it, but still the same.

I assure you, the age and occupation of these fools will most certainly be taken into account by the justice system, and they will get a slap on the wrist for this. The next time maybe some young people accompany them on their little 'mission of conscience,' only they won't be the stupid hippies the older stupid hippies (and the gulled reaction force) think they are.

What then?

Believe me I understand what you are saying. Just think of the fallout even if it was justified to use lethal force. Sure the anti nuclear pukes would think twice before attempting a stunt like this. If it wasnt bad enough that vietnam vets were treated like shit but if those who were on guard duty were to kill them there would be no end to the political shit storm. Congress would want the lethal policy reviewed then indictments against those who pulled the trigger and further down the spiral we go.

joedan
11-06-2009, 08:20 PM
I was in an 8" howitzer unit in West Germany in 74, 75, 76 and since we were nuclear capable we had to rotate guard duty, with the other nuclear capable units, at the storage sites. We were usually there 2 or 3 weeks once a year. There was standing, Shoot On Sight, orders if we found anyone in the exclusion zone. If we found someone in the buffer zone orders were to capture the intruders as long as it didn't present a safety hazard to ourselves. Otherwise........It just wasn't a good idea to decide to take an impromptu tour of those sites. That was a good way to have a bunch of bullet holes come find you.

dmaxx3500
11-08-2009, 10:51 PM
i don't think they should have been shot,but 5-10 years in a military prison would be ok

BooMBooM.OsM
11-08-2009, 11:19 PM
These old persons have a old way of thinking. Most were not thinking but acting
on faith they believe is right. In the USA we have tolerances in justice. Shooting
them is not the answer. We all have strong beliefs that flourish in our free society.
I would like to see one of these persons do anything to a nuke. Could they identify
a real nuke? No threat here. Our security worked, call it a training exorcise.
Trust the marines standing duty!

Acidfish
11-09-2009, 11:14 AM
It would probably look just as bad(if not worse) if the priest and the nun had explosives strapped on them, and took out the base mess hall, while everyone was having lunch. In every other country, warning signs are taken literally. Why not here?

Ghost, have you ever been in the military?. Yes, a nuclear silo is the one place you want a shoot on sight policy. But you also implied these marines werent trained. The fact that they assesed the situation before lighting them up shows a great deal of training. "What if they have bombs" is a pretty stupid defence for blindly shooting unarmed people. It's that kind of mindless droneing that gets innocent people killed because some asshole with a badge got spooked and shot someone before he assesed the situation.

yes, a bunch of old hippies/clergymen broke into a nuklear facility, A HUGE BREACH OF SECURITY, but if you cant tell the difference between a threat and non-combatent then you have no bussness holding a gun and having a position of security.

ghost
11-09-2009, 12:01 PM
Ghost, have you ever been in the military?. Yes, a nuclear silo is the one place you want a shoot on sight policy. But you also implied these marines werent trained. The fact that they assesed the situation before lighting them up shows a great deal of training. "What if they have bombs" is a pretty stupid defence for blindly shooting unarmed people. It's that kind of mindless droneing that gets innocent people killed because some asshole with a badge got spooked and shot someone before he assesed the situation.

yes, a bunch of old hippies/clergymen broke into a nuklear facility, A HUGE BREACH OF SECURITY, but if you cant tell the difference between a threat and non-combatent then you have no bussness holding a gun and having a position of security.


No, I have never been in the military. Tried to get into the Marine Corps, six years ago. Failed my hearing exam at MEPS. Couldn't get a waiver. That's my story.

I wasn't trying to imply that the Marines were not trained. I had just never looked at it that way. I read the article and replied with my opinion, and obviously stepped on your dick while doing that.

I apologize.