OMNI STAR WARS NEWSLETTER #1 ON MILITARIZATION OF
OUTER SPACE, December 13, 2006, BUILDING A CULTURE OF PEACE
Edited and written by Dick Bennett
These materials are offered for you information and
use. Feel free to draw from them in
contacting our Congressional delegation and other officials high and low.
I am writing this Dec. 13 at a time when the debate over
ending the war has suddenly shifted into high gear, esp. with the announcement
by Cong. Dennis Kucinich that he will run for the presidency to end the
occupation of
NEW
VIDEO ON MILITARIZING OUTER SPACE
(Following are notes by Dick written while watching the
film.) “The High Frontier,” new video
seen on FSTV for the first time Dec. 10, 2006, about the military and
commercial exploitation of outer space.
$30 billion being spent by
Commercial:
The Outer Space Treaty gives space to all nations and
peoples. The Moon Agreement gave all
profits in space to all, especially the poor nations. But both treaties are totally disregarded by
the
NASA: the chief
Commercial satellites:
The military has 60 known satellites, but it rents many more, how many
more not known because secret by “national security.” For example, the Pentagon bought all
commercial images of
For war, satellite cameras can pinpoint not only an
Weapons in space are being developed in secrecy. The
Privacy laws in
These notes are only a small part of what “The High
Frontier” exposes. Buy the film and show
it, write about it, call your Congressional delegation. Support the UN, join the UN/USA organization.
OBJECTIONS TO
EXPLORING MARS, MOON, SATURN, AND BEYOND
Space Exploration Contributes to Militarization of
Space
As Jack Manno’s Arming the Heavens showed, NASA was
enmeshed in the Pentagon from its inception. The Pentagon has always sought to
use space programs for its own purposes of violent force and domination, and it
continues to do so. But it was never a
simple domination, but always a contestation of aims and powers. Carl Sagan illustrates the conflicts: he was
a great supporter of space research but also as great an opponent of
militarization of space. He believed the
two could be kept separate, but were they?
So we must gather the evidence and then interpret and assess the
dangers.
The Military History of Space Exploration and NASA
Hitler’s V-2
rocket genius, Werner von Braun, enabled the
The Army moved
its missile operations to
Later that year
NASA was formed, and Werner von Braun and his team developed the Saturn V, as
tall as a 30 story building. Saturn went
to the moon nine times.
Then Pres. Nixon
ended the moon trips, because it was so expensive, and new NASA goals included
the Skylab space station and the space shuttle in the 1970s and 1980s. The shuttle has reached 100 flights
already. Mars exploration was being
planned during this time, and space tourism.
(Source: Marcia
Dunn, “Aiming for the Stars,” NAT (November
21, 1999) C10).
BOOK
Jack Manno, Arming the Heavens: The Hidden Military Agenda for Space,
1945-1995. Dodd, 1984 (UG1520
M36). A comprehensive study of the
military uses of space. The election of
Ronald Reagan and his push for Star Wars ABM in disregard of the 1972 ABM
Treaty, signaled the end of
Arming
the Heavens
By the time of
the Gulf War, all of this research paid off in the quick destruction of the
Iraqi Army.
The Pentagon
wants the next war to be controlled with even better weapons in space and
directed from control rooms in places like
The details of
this program to control outer space have already been developed at the Lawrence
Livermore Laboratory, directed by Lowell Wood, and is being strenuously
lobbied by retired Air Force General
Daniel Graham, head of the lobbying group High Frontier and by the Heritage
Foundation, a conservative think tank.
(Source: Jeffrey Klein & Dan Stober, “Star Wars:
The Sequel,” In These Times (Sept.
30-Oct. 13, 1992) 12-13.
Cassini Mission
The Cassini
rocket to Saturn carried 72.3 pounds of plutonium. Had the rocket exploded and that amount of
plutonium scattered into the atmosphere and on Earth, the risk of cancer would
have increased in all people. Why would
NASA prefer the world’s deadliest substance over solar energy, which would have
provided all the energy the probe needed?
A report from the Jet Propulsion Laboratory said solar power was
adequate. So why plutonium? Because atomic power in space has been a
mainstay of
(Source: review of
Grossman’s The Wrong Stuff: The Space
Program’s Nuclear Threat to Our Planet in The Nation (Oct. 6, 1997)).
“Vision for 2020”
Report (2000)
(source: “U.S. Military Moves to Control Space and Be
Enforcement Arm for the Global Economy,” by Karl Grossman)
That the
A key document is
the U.S. Space Command’s “Vision for 2020” Report. Its cover depicts a laser weapon shooting a
beam down from space zapping a target below.
The U.S. Space Command, set up by the Pentagon in 1985, describes itself
in “Vision for 2020” as “integrating Space Forces into warfighting capabilities
across the full spectrum of conflict.”
The motto of the Space Command is: “Master of Space.”
For what
purpose? For the old purpose in a new
domain of “dominating the space dimension of military operations to protect
Why is the public
ignorant of this plan even though it has been stated in print? One reason is the PR spin of a new Missile
“Defense” System to protect against a “space Pearl Harbor,” as the
Rumsfeld Space Commission Report state,
combined with an uncritical media establishment (the
military-industrial-presidential-congressional- MEDIA complex it should be called). Missiles are not our real problem (
But other nations
do understand what the
(Grossman’s books include The Wrong Stuff: The Space Program’s Nuclear Threat to Our Planet
and Weapons in Space, and his video
documentaries include “Nukes in Space: The Nuclearization and Weaponization of
the Heavens.” Kgrossman@hamptons.com)
Additional evidence:
The Deep Space
Program Science Experiment using the Clementine spacecraft technology launched
in 1944 was sponsored by the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization and
NASA. Its main objective was to space
qualify lightweight imaging sensors and other technologies for the next
generation of Pentagon spacecraft—i.e. for Star Wars. (Source:
Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space data sheet
dated 10-27-99)
The space shuttle
Endeavour launched in 2000 from
Why have these
projects not become widely known?
Because the
Pentagon control of the overall space budget increased from
the 1970s to the 80s. Nearly 70% of the
overall space budget in the 1980s was controlled by the Pentagon. Nearly $80 billion was spent on military
space activities during the Reagan years.
(Source: Cong. George E. Brown, Jr., “Pentagon Usurps Civilian Space
Program,”Bulletin of the Atomic
Scientists (Nov. 1987) 26ff.)
Manno and Grossman show the connections between the Pentagon
and US space explorations. Perhaps an advocate of space exploration would argue
that it is not inherently linked to militarization, that just because it has
been true in the past does not inevitably make it happen in the future. Perhaps.
Certainly, if we believe in space exploration that does not lead to
future wars, we should not allow it to be contaminated by the military of a
nation determined to dominate space as is the U.S. Japan has by law refused to
apply the results of its space development program to military purposes. But all
Additional Reasons to Oppose Weapons in Space (and
therefore any exploration which contributes to proliferation of weapons in
space and
A great threat to the security of the
The use of space as a battlefield will be devastating to the
world’s ability to travel away from Earth because of the amount of orbiting
space junk that would result from such a conflict in space. Outer space is already becoming hazardous
because of exploration/military litter.
That US attempts to dominate space militarily will lead to
further expansion of weaponry and national rivalry is certain. It will continue the Cold War pattern of
NASA PLANS MOON BASE
TO CONTROL PATHWAY TO SPACE
by Bruce Gagnon
(This essay argues that the
At a time when the
The NASA plan is portrayed as the next phase of the space
agency’s exploration agenda after space shuttles are retired in 2010. NASA’s
ambitious schedule includes a 2009 test of one of the lunar spaceships, a 2014
manned test flight of the new Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) without a
Moon landing, and a 2020 flight with a four-astronaut crew that would land on
the Moon for a short visit. NASA envisions people living on the Moon for
six-month intervals beginning in 2024.
Just to ensure that Congress will support funding for the
Moon program, NASA is spreading the operation out to 13 states: Alabama,
Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Louisiana, Maryland,
Minnesota, Ohio, Texas, Utah, and Virginia. Pratt & Whitney in
Last year, NASA said it would cost $104 billion just to
return to the Moon for a first visit, but has declined to give estimates for
the total cost of a permanent base. The Government Accountability Office (GAO)
reports that NASA’s procurement plan for the Moon lander risks delivering a
product that is late, over budget, and short on capability. This is what
happened in the case of the International Space Station (ISS) that was
originally supposed to cost taxpayers $10 billion; the price has grown to $100
billion and the station is still not complete.
The idea of a
In 1999, John Young, former Gemini, Apollo, and space
shuttle astronaut, said that the Moon would also be useful for “planetary
defense.”
Recognizing that “control” of the Moon could cause enormous
conflict over time, the United Nations created the Moon Treaty in 1979. Much of
the Moon Treaty reiterates earlier and internationally-accepted “space law,”
particularly the Outer Space Treaty of 1967. Article 11 of the treaty
maintains, “The Moon and its natural resources are the common heritage of
mankind.” The treaty also prohibits national appropriation, adding the words
“by means of use or occupation, or by any other means.” In other words, no
military bases and no claims of ownership are allowed. The
A 1989 study commissioned by Congress, called "Military
Space Forces: The Next 50 Years" reports that whoever holds the Moon
militarily will control the "earth-Moon gravity well" and thus will
essentially control the front gate to the Moon.
Former Nazi Major General Walter Dornberger, who was in
charge of the entireV-1 and V-2 missile operation for Hitler’s Germany,
testified before the U.S. Congress in 1958 that America's top space priority
ought to be to "conquer, occupy, keep, and utilize space between the Earth
and the Moon." (Dornberger, along with 1,500 other top Nazi scientists,
was smuggled into the
The Moon has one resource that is getting everyone’s
attention. It is helium-3, and, say many space enthusiasts, could be used for
fusion power back here on Earth. In a 1995 New
York Times op-ed, science writer Lawrence Joseph asks the question: “Will
the Moon become the
One person who is not ignoring helium-3 on the Moon is
former astronaut and engineer Harrison Schmitt who has created a corporation to
mine the Moon for it. Schmitt, though, is concerned about obstacles to his
grand plans. In a 1998 piece for the industry newspaper Space News called “The Moon Treaty: Not a Wise Idea” he writes,
“The strong prohibition on ownership of ‘natural resources’ also causes
worry….The mandate of an international regime would complicate private
commercial efforts…. The Moon Treaty is not needed to further the development
and use of lunar resources for the benefit of humankind...including the
extraction of lunar helium-3 for terrestrial fusion power.”
Some scientists predict that one metric ton of helium-3
could be worth over $3 billion.
Researchers at the Princeton University Plasma Physics Laboratory have
estimated that some one million tons of helium-3 could be obtained from the top
layer of the Moon.
If all this turns out to be true and scientifically
possible, imagine the gold rush to the Moon and the conflict that could follow
in years to come. Who would police the Moon, especially when countries like the
The U.S. Space Command's plan, Vision for 2020, says, "Historically, military forces have
evolved to protect national interests and investments — both military and
economic. During the rise of sea commerce, nations built navies to protect and
enhance their commercial interests....Likewise, space forces will emerge to
protect military and commercial national interests and investment in the space
medium due to their increasing importance."
I have always been convinced that, by creating offensive
space weapons systems, one of the major jobs of the Space Command would be to
control who can get on and off planet Earth, thus controlling the “shipping
lanes” to the Moon and beyond.
There has long been a military connection to NASA’s Moon
missions. In early 1994, NASA launched the Deep Space Program Science
Experiment, the first of a series of Clementine technology demonstrations
jointly sponsored with the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO). The
Pentagon announced that data acquired by the spacecraft indicated that there is
ice in the bottom of a crater on the Moon, located on the Moon’s south pole —
the same venue NASA now envisions as the site for the 2024 permanent base.
According to a Pentagon website, “The principal objective of the lunar
observatory mission though was to space qualify lightweight sensors and
component technologies for the next generation of Department of Defense
spacecraft [Star Wars]. The mission used the Moon, a near-Earth asteroid, and
the spacecraft’s Interstage Adapter (ISA) as targets to demonstrate sensor
performance. As a secondary mission, Clementine returns valuable data of
interest to the international civilian scientific sector.”
In the end, the NASA plan to establish permanent bases on
the Moon will help the military “control and dominate” access on and off our
planet Earth and determine who will extract valuable resources from the Moon in
the years ahead.
The taxpayers will be asked to pay the enormously expensive
“research and development” costs of this program that in the end will profit
the aerospace industry and those corporation like Bechtel that intend to build
the bases and extract resources on the Moon.
NASA is not really looking for the “origins of life,” as it
tells school children today. Instead, it is laying the groundwork for a new
gold rush that will drain our national treasury and enrich the big corporations
that now control our government. It is beyond time for the American people to
wake up to the shell game underway.
Bruce K. Gagnon
Coordinator
Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
PO Box 652
Brunswick, ME 04011
(207) 729-0517
http://www.space4peace.org
globalnet@mindspring.com
http://space4peace.blogspot.com
(our blog)
One of the foremost hero opponents of the militarization of
outer space is Bruce Gagnon, founder and
director of Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in
Space. OMNI (thanks to Mark Swaney) brought Bruce
here several years ago, and his speech focused and inspired us. To learn about him go to google and type in
Gagnon Bruce.
Another Level of Argument: Human Needs Should Precede Outer Space
Exploration. The example of Arkansas
Defenders of exploration argue that there is always an
argument for present human/social needs over scientific research into space, so
unless we are always to refuse to do research,
we must find a balance. But this
proposition is too vague for me. I
prefer constantly to weight priorities (should we have first-class pre-natal
care or first-class highways?), particularly when the practical value of a
research project is undemonstrable or at least vague. And often no balance is possible because it
should not be when the aims and results are incommensurate: one is universally
recognized as essential to human life while the other is expensively
unimportant: cure malaria or
potholes? In these cases human needs
should take priority. The clichéd “human
thirst for knowledge” must take second place to urgent social needs, when the
search for knowledge has minimal utility compared to other projects.
Proposition:
If the enhancement of life of all sentient creatures on
Earth should be our main priority, as I think, then the people and creatures of
our Earth urgently need increased assistance instead of shockingly expensive
and trivial space programs promulgated by the self-interest of scientists and
corporations, or instead of the $1.5 trillion tax cut for the wealthy
engineered by Pres. Bush.
Consider
The useless expenditure of over $100 million to enlarge a
football stadium for a few games a year contrasts to
Among lowest in teacher pay.
42nd in nation in per-pupil school spending. Ark. Constitution guarantees both an equal
and adequate education, but the state provides neither.
Among lowest in per capita income.
2nd highest divorce rate.
Working
poor in distress: in 1998 32% of children under 13 lived in low-income
households with both parents working; 69% of children have both parents
working.
No
financial assistance to the working poor for daycare. State’s day-care workers among lowest paid in
state and nation (consequence: child neglect and abuse, unreadiness for school,
etc.). Recent study shows that children
who spend most of their time in child care are 3 times more likely to display
behavioral problems in kindeergarten.
Urgent shortage of
nurses.
Gov. Huckabee recommended 100% cut in state aid to
libraries.
Some of the lowest health ratings in the nation. State cuts $7 million from Health Department,
cutting school health clinics that administer medical care and counseling to
thousands of poor children. (10 million
children in US have no access to health care.)
Early and periodic screening diagnosis and treatment for
infants to be scrapped.
Private duty nursing program reduced (patients requiring
total care must move to institutions).
Highest per capita smoking percentages; near top in
smoking-related deaths; 4th for lung cancer deaths.
Babies less healthy than national average; high
low-birthweight births.
Extreme need for more and better foster-care case workers.
Fewer than half the state’s counties have teams to
investigate child abuse.
Early childhood programs for poor children eliminated.
Only state that does not fund domestic-violence shelters.
One of 19 states levying income taxes on people below the
poverty line.
General lack of public transportation.
Inadequate mental health benefits for children and
youth. More than half of jailed youth
receive little help for their mental illnesses.
Inadequate AIDS medical care.
Public Defender Commission out of money.
Low workers pay because few unions.
AEGIS summer programs for high school students (Academic
Enrichment for the Gifted in Summer) cut.
Global Systems Institute Summer Program (GSI, an AEGIS
program) at Uof A to be cut
School health clinics cut.
AIDS epidemic, infection rate maybe four to five times
higher than reported.
Thousands upon thousands of jobs lost each year.
Teen-age nonviolent offenders can be sent where the most
brutal offenders are contained.
(Yet Pres. Bush cut taxes mainly of the rich by est. $1.35
trillion over the next 10 years! And
Tyson Foods Inc. urges improvements in highways.)
If I were to make a similar list for the world, the data
would be a hundred times more atrocious and revolting—for example, one million
people die each year from malaria; two million from tuberculosis. The diseases are preventable and curable, if
the money were spent.
The Way to Peace: Disarming the Heavens Through Cooperative
Treaties
The
Humans Can Create a Culture
of Peace in the Heavens
Claims that wars are
unavoidable are untrue; such claims are a type of self-fulfilling
prophecy. Let the
OMNI SEEKS A WORLD FREE OF WAR AND THE THREAT OF WAR, A
SOCIETY WITH
CONTACT YOUR
CONGRESSIONAL REPRESENTATIVES
--Senator Mark Pryor: Web
Site (see contact link): www.pryor.senate.gov ; http://pryor.senate.gov/contact/
Phone: (202) 224-2353 Fax: (202) 228-0908
Main District Office:
Phone: (501) 324-6336 Fax: (501) 324-5320
--Congressman John
Boozman, District 3, 12 counties from
Harrison office: 870-741-6900; 402 N. Walnut,
DC address: 1708 Longworth House Office Bldng.,
Dick
Bennett
No comments:
Post a Comment