Masters of Space: Stop USA Weaponization - A Media Blackout

[Nommos Prime (Dogon)]

Stop USA Weaponisation Of Space! (A TOTAL MEDIA BLACKOUT)

“Weapons In Space: A Media Blackout”;
http://members.bellatlantic.net/~userwho/aquarian/star-wars.html

“Counterspace Operations For Information Dominance”
http://www.fas.org/spp/eprint/lee.htm

http://www.abc.net.au/cgi-bin/common/printfriendly.pl?/science/news/stories/s783734.htm

From;
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewnews.html?id=284
“Senior U.S. Air Force leaders have begun the process of planning to implement the recommendations of the National Security Space Management report, and have set April as their deadline for a structured plan, according to USAF Chief of Staff Gen. Michael Ryan. But Ryan and other senior Air Force leaders warned last week that part of the increasing attention to Space Control will include the likelihood of bringing weapons platforms into low Earth orbit. "Space capabilities in the near future will be about the security of the nation," Ryan told an Air Force-led aerospace power symposium last week in Alexandria, Virginia. "Space will be, at some time in the future, part of the battlefield. But for the foreseeable future we will be orbitally bound," Ryan said. "We cannot weaponize space as yet, but eventually someone will try to take us on in space," he added. The service-and the nation’s national security structure -must begin now to plan for the day when space warfare will become a reality facing U.S. forces. "We don’t want to have a Pearl Harbor in space," Ryan said.
The theme was echoed by U.S. Space Command CINC Gen. Ralph ‘Ed’ Eberhart. Eberhart bluntly told the symposium that weapons in space would be inevitable, albeit regrettable. "Space superiority will become increasingly important," Eberhart said last Thursday. "We had better start planning for force application (in space)," he predicted. "We have to plan for bringing weapons in space. ..we may hope that will never be needed." But Eberhart also sounded the theme of a growing imbalance in the use and reliance upon space assets as countered by their vulnerability. "We’re not using space properly," he said. "We can’t just think of space as a higher hill. ..commercial interests are involved in space. We must protect the commercial space assets just like the navies sailed to protect sea commerce."

“Star Wars” exists already folks! See below quote and link;
Note that “Brilliant Pebbles” Star Wars Rail Gun (refer to my link to the book “At Work In The Fields Of The Bomb”, which actually CONTAINS A PICTURE of this weapon!) was deployed to Pine Gap way back in the late 70s. In the STS-48 video you can see a later generation of this weapon in action, “shooting” at the UFOs. The Brilliant Pebbles originate from Pine Gap!
See below link;
Laser-weapons tests at White Sands;
http://www.prop1.org/2000/cassini/9708lasr.htm

Selected Quotes from USA officials regarding their plans for “Weapons In Space”;
“Space dominance, we have it, we like it and we’re going to keep it.”
- Keith Hall (US Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Space)

“We will engage terrestrial targets someday – ships, airplanes, land targets – from space. We will engage targets in space, from space.”
- General Joseph Ashy (US Space Command Commander in Chief), 1996

“It’s politically sensitive, but it’s going to happen…. we’re going to fight in space. We’re going to fight from space and we’re going to fight into space….”
- General Joseph Ashy (US Space Command Commander in Chief), 1996

“We can’t just think of space as a higher hill…commercial interests are involved in space. We must protect the commercial space assets just like the navies sailed to protect sea commerce.”
- General Ralph ‘Ed’ Eberhart (US Space Command CINC)

I can find only two quotes from “known figures”, who raise voices of dissent against this utter crap that the US is trying to pull;
“Outer space is the common heritage of human beings. It should be used entirely for peaceful purposes and for the economic, scientific and cultural development of all countries as well as the well-being of mankind. It must not be weaponized and become another arena of the arms race.”
- Wang Xiaoyu (First Secretary of China to the UN)

“…codify principles which can ensure that outer space remains weapons-free.”
- Kofi Annan (UN Secretary General)

“Follow the money and you find corporate America.
…
A poster for the project shows a laser firing a beam in space above the curve of the Earth’s surface. An American flag floats in the heavens like an aurora borealis. A seal shows the “team” working on the project: TRW, Boeing, the Air Force, the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization.”
- from “Waging War In Space” article (linked above), regarding the Long Range Plan

The Greatest Crime

“In November 138 nations voted in the UN General Assembly to reaffirm the Outer Space Treaty and its provision that space “shall be for peaceful purposes.” Only the United States and Israel abstained.”

 

[member 5645]

We abstained, thus we are breaking no treaty. Space will be the next "weapons race". With an increasingly large number of nation proliferating nuclear devices, the anty is being uped.

Atleast we are didn't sign and then go for it, a la China :)

 

[Nommos Prime (Dogon)]

The USA WITHDREW from the Treaty

Abstaining is what the USA and Israel ALWAYS DO – when they wish to break international law. ALWAYS.
Note that the USA ratified the Outer Space Treaty in 1967.
http://www.oosa.unvienna.org/treat/ost/ost.html

Now they withdraw.
Does anybody seriously doubt that this withdrawal is done for anything other than sinister purposes?

The USA and Israel in the UN.
A Complete and Utter FARCE.

 

[member 5645]

Originally posted by Nommos Prime (Dogon)
Abstaining is what the USA and Israel ALWAYS DO – when they wish to break international law. ALWAYS.
Note that the USA ratified the Outer Space Treaty in 1967.
http://www.oosa.unvienna.org/treat/ost/ost.html

Now they withdraw.
Does anybody seriously doubt that this withdrawal is done for anything other than sinister purposes?

The USA and Israel in the UN.
A Complete and Utter FARCE.

Should we instead stay in and just break the rules secretly? Would that make you happier? Then we can join the ranks of China, Russia, France, Germany, Iran, and Iraq.
Ratified it, and then left it. Have a problem with it? Sanction us! Or do like Canada is doing RIGHT NOW and push for a ban, and therefore it WOULD be international law. It is NOT presently international law.

Sinister eh? I guess that all depends on what you think is sinister. Holding a higher hand than countries like N. Korea, who has nukes with no populous to answer to, isn't sinister. Developing it as protection for permanent fixtures in space, and on the moon, isn't sinister. The only thing that is sinister would be to develop them in order to threaten other countries with their use. This would fall in the same lines as our nuclear weapons. The populous won't support such an attack in any case but retalitory one. It is, and has been a long standing pact that we will not launch a first strike initiative with our nuclear weapons. They are there as a detterence and response to such a strike. All other democratic countries have atleast implied the same (even today we and Russia are working on lower the number of nukes in both countries SEVERLY over the next 10 years). Counntries like N Korea (who say "we will destroy the world " ) or Iraq under Saddam ("I will rid the Arab world of Israel" (paraphrased)) have alternate motives for their weapons - not limited to, but including lucrative sells to other countries and underground groups.


Now for the REAL farce - your statement
The US and Israel in the UN is farce? You mean the US, who provides 25% of the entire UN budget? Or the US who proposed the idea in the first place? Promoting democracy with via the UN from South Africa, to Taiwan, to Japan, to S Korea. All that is a farce?
Perhaps you are one of those people who wishes Iraq to fail, just so you can have another soapbox to bash the country that has been there for you countless times as well. Even to this day we hold our promise for your security and to be there to protect you if the need arises. Your country has so graciously fought beside us in every major war since WWII. Somehow, people like yourself believe it all to be a farce, I'm sure. Maybe we should break ties with you now, and just let you hook up with China. Perhaps they will honor their allegiance more than we have? [zz)]

 

[kat]

Bravo! Bravo!

 

[Nommos Prime (Dogon)]

The Response I expected...

First of all, it is international law (just because the USA and Israel decide to railroad it, doesn’t change this FACT). Refer;
“Space law is a field of international law concerned with the law applicable
to exploration and use of outer space.”
http://www.cs.ntu.edu.au/sit/resources/resource/cprogram/assess/c4a.dat

Posted by phatmonkey;
“Sinister eh? I guess that all depends on what you think is sinister. Holding a higher hand than countries like N. Korea, who has nukes with no populous to answer to, isn’t sinister.”
Ah, didn’t the US invade North Korea?
Has North Korea ever invaded the USA?
And of course you Americans have all received a SATISFACTORY explanation from your leader Muppet Little Bush for both wars on Iraq (where are those Nukes?), and September 11 (still waiting). Hmmm… yeh, your population is real inquisitive. Ha!

Posted by phatmonkey;
“It is, and has been a long stranding pact that we will not launch a first strike initiative with our nuclear weapons.”
Oh?
I must have misconstrued the whole Cuban Missile Crisis THREATS OF FIRST STRIKE, must have also misread the “Vietnam Policy” (where a PLAN was certainly made to use NUKES to waste the Cong).

I don’t think I‘ll bother with the US paying 25% of the UN budget? Sheeeeshhh.
They actually OWE the UN money. Check it out.
I’m bored with all your errors. Time for some homework…

 

[member 5645]

Originally posted by Nommos Prime (Dogon)


1>First of all, it is international law (just because the USA and Israel decide to railroad it, doesn’t change this FACT). Refer;
“Space law is a field of international law concerned with the law applicable
to exploration and use of outer space.”
http://www.cs.ntu.edu.au/sit/resources/resource/cprogram/assess/c4a.dat

2>Ah, didn’t the US invade North Korea?
Has North Korea ever invaded the USA?

3>And of course you Americans have all received a SATISFACTORY explanation from your leader Muppet Little Bush for both wars on Iraq (where are those Nukes?), and September 11 (still waiting). Hmmm… yeh, your population is real inquisitive. Ha!

4>I must have misconstrued the whole Cuban Missile Crisis THREATS OF FIRST STRIKE, must have also misread the “Vietnam Policy” (where a PLAN was certainly made to use NUKES to waste the Cong).

5>I don’t think I‘ll bother with the US paying 25% of the UN budget? Sheeeeshhh.
They actually OWE the UN money. Check it out.
I’m bored with all your errors. Time for some homework…

1>Look, get off your soapbox. Quit trying to MAKE yourself right, and accept the facts! http://www.oosa.unvienna.org/SpaceLaw/outerspt.html HOw about you actually look to the UN instead of a definition from a page that doesn't even make your own point. (oddly you posted a link that supports your original post may in fact be totally false!)

The Outer Space Treaty provides the basic framework on international space law, including the following principles:

The Canadians, as of this week, are pushing for a ban on space weapons. There is no such ban outside of the agreed treaty framework thus far! So, like I said. Stop your whining. Stop looking for something wrong, and go make things happen! Talk is cheap, and that is all you are doing. If you have a problem with it, write your leaders with support of the Canadians push for a ban. Until then, it no more international law than the NPT. It is only illegal if you a signatory and you break the laws.

2>WHAT? Are you joking? Are you alluding to the Korean war, in which the UN allied forces fought out the invading North?! What are you on?
3>Can't continue on the Space topic? I can show proof that the Iraq war was sound to consider and even further legal. Start another thread and we can have a go at it. Until then, stop trying to change the subject.
4>Are you missing my words? "long standing", not "forever". And what did they decide in vietnam? Let me quote:

The bottom line of the study is that the use of nuclear weapons in Vietnam -- to block the Ho Chi Minh trail, kill large numbers of enemy soldiers, or destroy North Vietnamese air bases and seaports -- would have offered no decisive military advantages to the United States but would have had grave repercussions for U.S. soldiers in the field and U.S. interests around the world," she said.

Oh yes! The same precident that we go by today!
Let me quote the NPT:

"pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to...nuclear disarmament."

Ah yes, exactly the case as was Cuba.
We are also members of the test ban treaty, as all other nuclear weapons states of the time, and the low yield nuclear weapon ban.

As has been stated. We don't stay in a treaty, and then sneak around. We openly enter, or exit from it. Just as we did with the ABM and the outer space treaty.

5>Are you an idiot? Yes it's amazing, we pay 25% and we do owe them money! Maybe you need to complete your own homework. You are wrong, misguided, and show a disgusting contempt for those that disagree with you. Luckily, your countrymen are not nearly as far out on the fringe as you are.[/QUOTE]

 

[member 5645]

Now, I'm tired of playing on the defensive. Let's look at the source YOU posted.

Signatories pledged not to place weapons of mass destruction, including
nuclear weapons, in space or to establish military bases there. (The 1963
Nuclear Test Ban Treaty prohibited nuclear testing in outer space

We are still part of the Test ban, chicken little.

The United States, among other nations, still had not signed the treaty
by 1981, perhaps out of concern that aspects of the law--for example,
requiring the sharing of space technologies--may inhibit exploration.

hrrrmm, it would seem the US , and others, may have their reasons for not signing.

 

[member 5645]

And since you have shown your inability to search for information for the topic at hand:


http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:jkIRoQ5g3WcJ:www.un.dk/danish/Budget/ST.ADM.SER.B.597.pdf+united+nations+states+46%25+budget&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

Sorry, we are down to only 22% (changed a year ago) from the 25%. I guess next you will tell us we should still be paying the 46% we were paying when we started it?

Now, why should the UN get it's 800million reality in NY for free, if we are the ones behind?

Why is the UN looking for a 1.2 billion dollar interest free loan from the US to build a new location?
http://www.forbes.com/markets/newswire/2004/03/15/rtr1299667.html


The fact is that we don't owe the UN. Even thought the UN doesn't count our 15 billion dollars worth of peacekeeping put forth in the 90's, we STILL paid up via the helms biden act.

Find the next problem with us

[zz)]

 

[Nommos Prime (Dogon)]

A Lesson

Ok.
http://www.globalpolicy.org/finance/info/usdebt.htm
Hmmm…
http://www.globalpolicy.org/finance/tables/core/un-us-03.htm
http://www.globalpolicy.org/finance/tables/core/usvtotalgraph.htm
http://www.cnsnews.com/ForeignBureaus/archive/200108/For20010802e.html
http://southmovement.alphalink.com.au/southnews/USdebt.htm
How to “weasel” your way out of debt;
http://www.unausa.org/newindex.asp?place=http://www.unausa.org/publications/reimburs.asp
http://www.globalpolicy.org/finance/tables/dbttab99.htm
http://www.betterworldlinks.org/book75d.htm
http://globalpolicy.igc.org/finance/docs00/sing.htm
http://globalpolicy.igc.org/finance/unitedstates/2002/1009un.htm
http://globalpolicy.igc.org/finance/unitedstates/2002/0623usun.htm
http://www.unausa.org/newindex.asp?place=http://www.unausa.org/issues/adminpos.asp

By the way, PAYMENTS BY PROXY (eg. Saudia Arabian “blood-money”) doesn’t count.
“Writing-off” debt, doesn’t count, and neither does “fictional interest-free loans” (that are merely a “pipe-dream”). Mate, the loan is a trade-off!
Like I said before, check it out. You have no idea…

 

[member 5645]

So links to information like this:

Sums in $US, rounded to the nearest million
Totals include debt for International Tribunals and Capital Master Plan (new for 2003)
Percentages show US proportion of debt to the total UN debt in each category
Go to more complete debt information


31 December 2003
Regular Budget: $268 million (61%)
Peacekeeping: $482 million (45%)
Total: $762 million (48%)

Links that show us paying 22% of the UN's budget is supposed to counter my argument that that is in fact true? I don't get it.
You dismiss the payback setups we have negotiated with the UN. You dismiss the billions spent that we don't ask back for. You dismiss what we have paid back because of the source.
You are on the fringe - a slim edge of the population that wears blinders while accusing all others of doing the same. You can only see bling hatred and contempt, and it really pissed you off that I show you otherwise. You've proven you are unreasonable. You've proven you can't stay on your own topic. I shoot one thing down, you move to the next. I'm done with this thread (without some real input being asserted), and now it can sink slowly to the bottom of the page :)

Edit - this was a thread where you were telling me how big and bad the US was, and how we are a farce.

 

[Nommos Prime (Dogon)]

Better to be on the fringe than a Lemming...

Yeh, good one, you win champion!

I'm sick to death off your narrow-minded Nationalistic tripe.
Do they still vote in the USA?
I'm sure you do, don't you...

 

[The_Professional]

Originally posted by Nommos Prime (Dogon)

I'm sick to death off your narrow-minded Nationalistic tripe.
Do they still vote in the USA?
I'm sure you do, don't you...

HAHAAA..and we're sick and tired of your Conspiracy theories and USA is evil drunken rantings.

 

[member 5645]

Originally posted by Nommos Prime (Dogon)
Yeh, good one, you win champion!

I'm sick to death off your narrow-minded Nationalistic tripe.
Do they still vote in the USA?
I'm sure you do, don't you...

Because I don't think the USA is the ultimate evil? Because I don't think it's trendy and cool to lie in order to find ways to hate the USA? Should I get a foil hat and come join you?

I have rebutted everything you have said. Your only response is "waaahhhh, the USA is making space weapons when I don't want them to". Like I said. Either get over it, or go write your local leaders and push for a ban like the Canadians.
I guess, until then, you can keep calling me nationalistic (which, dare I SAY IT I AM BY DEFINITION!**) and find other ways to detract from the situation. You hate us. You look for ways to hate us. Why, really I mean it, should anyone care, when you are open with your hate? You are a self loathing, self hating, australian. Thank goodness the rest of your countrymen are not so out on the fringe, or Australia wouldn't be the great nation it is today.




**
na·tion·al·ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (nsh-n-lzm, nshn-)
n.
Devotion to the interests or culture of one's nation.


Yep! Yep! That's me!


Edit- and as a matter of fact, I DO vote. You say it as if it were a bad thing! I guess, without compulsory voting, you find it difficult to believe that I would willingly get out and vote?

 

[member 5645]

Originally posted by The_Professional
HAHAAA..and we're sick and tired of your Conspiracy theories and USA is evil drunken rantings.

Hey now! We really are making jewish space rockets to strike down upon the muslims that we owe money to at the UN.

 

[kat]

Originally posted by The_Professional
HAHAAA..and we're sick and tired of your Conspiracy theories and USA is evil drunken rantings.

Second that!

 

[Nommos Prime (Dogon)]

HA!

Very funny Kat!

I'm drunk on the fermented froth spouting forth from your rabid mouth of staunch Establishment defending of attrocities and violations of International Law.

Bllllleeeeehhhhh...