A thoughtful compilation and analysis of some important, but underreported and under-researched news stories, with particular focus on keeping the People informed about all Enemies, Foreign and Domestic.
-----The 'Civil Flag' -- Forgotten Flag, or Flag of Fraud and Fiction?
-----Status of the 'Fair Tax Act of 2005' (H.R. 25; S 25)
Weights & Measures:
Anyone is free to comment on this site. Therefore, outgoing links posted by third parties may contain objectional material, but do not reflect the views of this site's owner. When linking to an outside page, links should not direct the reader to nude pictures, erotic stories, or other forms of pornography. Nor should links appear to sites using excessive profanity. Use common sense. If you would be ashamed for your church-going grandmother to see it, you shouldn't link to it. In addition to not linking to any inappropriate material, commenters should watch their language, else their posts will be deleted. Likewise, libelous statements will not be tolerated.
Thursday, May 19, 2005
Air Force Seeks White House Approval to Field Offensive and Defensive Space Weapons "The US Air Force is seeking President Bush's approval of a national security directive that could move the United States closer to fielding offensive and defensive space weapons, the New York Times reported on Tuesday, citing White House and Air Force officials.
An official said a new presidential directive would replace a 1996 Clinton administration policy that emphasised a less aggressive use of space, involving spy satellites' support for military operations, arms control and nonproliferation pacts, the report said."
Okay, weapons in space. Good or Bad? That is the question that is most often debated. The focus is incorrect, though. Weapons are not good or bad. The people who use them are good or bad. If a person uses a weapon used to keep a bad person from doing bad things, that is good. People are good or bad. Bad people wantr to hurt other people. Bad people will seek weapons to make this easier. Bad people will not listen to rules that ban weapons form certain areas. Think about this for a moment: China seeks military supremacy in space. Now, is this bad? Is it bad for someone to seek military supremacy over an area? Again, it depends on the person. The People's Republic of China treats its subjects like slaves. Don't believe me? Ask Zhao Ziyang. . . oh, wait . . . you can't . . . he's dead. He died after more than a decade of house arrest. His crime? He thought that the PRC shouldn't use the so-called "People's Liberation Army" to crush the peaceful protests in Tiananmen Square. For those of you who like to say that China has changed since the, Mr. Zhao died just this year . . . he was still under arrest.
Keeping in mind the nature of the Chinese government, and keeping in mind that our government still at lease claims to know what human rights are, who would you rather have controlling space. Someone is going to put weapons up there, treaty or no treaty, and the first person to do it wins. Game over, the prior rules don't matter. Personally, I would rather it be the US at this time. I would urge the White House to heed the Air Force's request.
---------Air Force seeks Bush nod for space weapons
---------Bush likely to back weapons in space
---------China and the Battlefield in Space
---------Pentagon Report: China's Space Warfare Tactics Aimed at U.S. Supremacy
---------China's Space Capabilities and the Strategic Logic of Anti-Satellite Weapons _____________________________________________
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen."