Coincidance - Principia Discordia

182 COINCIDANCE
prisoners in each of the three major power blocs. 1 think this system
guarantees Amnesty's objectivity and therefore our credibility.
Nonetheless, the Wall Street Journal recently denounced you personally. They mentioned
your receiving the Lenin Peace Prize in a way that implied you were some sort of Soviet agent or
apologist.
That was hysteria, and it had nothing to do with Amnesty anyway. Thev
were annoyed by a report which 1 helped to write for UNESCO on
Communication and Society, the so-called MacBride Report. 1 believe that
they had not read the report, because they claimed that it urged the
imposition of new controls and limitations on journalistic freedom. Exactly
the opposite is true. The report is, I believe, the most advanced and
progressive document ever written in that area—we specifically urged
greater freedom for journalists. We want them to have access to things
governments are trying to hide. What we did wish to limit was the monopolization
of the media, and 1 personally have urged steps to encourage the
decentralization of ownership and control of the media. But before we leave
this subject, let me just note that the Wall Street journal did not mention that I
have received the American Medal of Justice in Washington. 1 believe that 1
am the only person not an American citizen to have received that award.
Considering the vast C.I.A. dossiers on every dissident in the world, the U.S.
government would hardly be so careless as to give that award to a
Communist agent.
Aside from Amnesty and various UNESCO projects, one of your principle concerns in
recent years has been to oppose the proliferation of nuclear weapons. You have argued that the
CRUISE and PERSHING missiles are not only dangerous ami unmoral hut strictly illegal.
Would you explain that?
As a lawyer and President of International Peace Bureau in Geneva and a
member of the International Commission of Jurists, I have studied this
question for many, many years. I have submitted my legal opinion to the
Federal Court in New York. I believe the deployment of these weapons is a
clear-cut violation of international law and an act of terrorism. We won t
have time for your other questions if 1 present my whole legal argument
here but briefly 1 can say this much: as early as 1874, the International
Declaration concerning the Laws and Customs of War specifically denied
that governments have "an unlimited power in the adoption of means of
injuring the enemy," and the Hague convention of 1.907 prohibits
"bombardment of towns, villages, dwellings or buildings which are
undefended." All the laws against poison gas adopted after World War I are
so worded that it is their clear intent to criminalize the indiscriminate killing
of non-combatants. These were some of the precedents with which Nazi