Nexus - 0906 - New Times Magazine-pages

Page Content (OCR)

... GLOBAL NEWS . ... NEWS SPACE WEAPONS AND WORLD EMPIRE by John Valleau n 1997, the US Space Command published a mission statement titled "Vision for [= (see http://www.spacecom.mil/_private/about_space.htm and also http://www.noos.ca for more details). Since 1997, it has been joined by further doc- uments fleshing out more details of the plan, such as a "Long Range Plan". (Note the date, 2020, which gives a time scale for our concerns.) "Vision for 2020" sees outer space under the unilateral control of the United States and filled with weapons able to maintain this control and also able to attack the Earth below. The stated purpose is "dominating space" to "protect US interests and invest- ment". This involves "control of space", meaning "access to space, freedom of opera- tions within space, an ability to deny others the use of space" and also "global engage- ment", which is "the application of precision force from, to, and through space" as "an active warfighter" with "space-based earth strike weapons". Apparently, then, we are all meant to live not only under constant US surveillance, but under constant threat of violence from a blanket of space weapons. Most of us would consider this an indignity too great to be supported. To what end? The purpose already quoted makes that quite clear: namely, the force- ful control of the first whole-world commercial empire. This is driven home by what "Vision for 2020" calls an "historic perspective", which states that "...military forces have evolved to protect national interests and investments" and "during the rise of sea commerce, nations built navies to protect and enhance their commercial interests. During the westward expansion of the continental United States, military outposts and the cavalry emerged [sic] to protect our wagon trains, settlements and railroads", and so on. It goes on to say that "the emergence of space power follows...these models" (i.e., of former empires and of genocide). This is only to confirm, in a surprisingly frank way, what has become the common worldwide understanding of the intense US pressure to impose the neo-liberal agenda and structural adjustment on Third World nations (and others)—namely, to facilitate the classic imperial aim of seizing the resources and exploiting the labour of less-developed countries, where possible with the help of puppet governments. But imagine space with a blanket of orbiting surveillance equipment and space weapons such as particle-beam and laser devices, rocket and missile launchers, devices to disable electromagnetic equipment or to control the weather locally, and so on. With this, it would be possible to apply force locally and instantly, to choose just that level of pain deemed appropriate, and to do so with impunity. It would mark the end of local sovereignty and much of human dignity. The role of the Ballistic Missile Defence (BMD) project can be seen, in this light, pri- marily as a stalking horse: a relatively benign-sounding excuse (after all, "defensive" and, anyway, certain to be ineffective) for abrogating an Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty that would otherwise stand in the way of the bigger plans. However, there seems at last to be a growing awareness among US citizens of what has been going ahead in their name. One sign of this is the bill HR3616 presented to Congress by Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio), which would prevent the US administration from proceeding to develop or put in place space weapons. Meanwhile, various US NGOs are pushing for a new international treaty banning all weapons from space. Although the events of September 11 helped the Bush administration to forward its space agenda initially, the travesty of the Afghan "anti-terrorism war" is making people start to question the direction of US policy. There will certainly also be worldwide opposition to the imposition of US military domination of space as the intention becomes widely recognised. It is the right time to speak out for a civil world order and reject the threat of techno-tyranny. (Source: Global Outlook, 9-11: Foreknowledge or Deception?, no. 2, Summer 2002, at http://globalresearch.ca/articles/VAL206A.html. John Valleau is Professor Emeritus of Chemistry at the University of Toronto and an active member of Science for Peace.) ave been contaminated by pollination. On Thursday September 5, the three- judge appeal court panel unanimously ruled in Monsanto's favour, dismissing all of Mr Schmeiser's 17 points of contention. However, the panel also rejected a bid by Monsanto to see the damages raised to more than $100,000. Mr Schmeiser was not available for com- ment, but his lawyer, Terry Zakreski, said is client was disappointed. "We're still reviewing it and considering whether to seek leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada," he said. Trish Jordan of Monsanto said the money Mr Schmeiser has been ordered to pay will be put into the corporation's fund to reinvest into the agricultural community as part of a larger corporate charity pro- gram. "We have always said we will not profit from people doing illegal things," she said. Despite his loss in court, Mr Schmeiser has become somewhat of a folk hero among farm and consumer activists around the world who are opposed to genetically modified food and the use of GM organ- isms in agriculture. (Source: The Canadian Press, September 9, 2002, website http:/www.cp.org) US PRISON/CORRECTIONAL POPULATION AT 6.6 MILLION lhe number of Americans in prison or under supervision by authorities as a result of crimes grew by 2.3 per cent by year-end 2001 to almost 6.6 million Americans, or one in every 32 adults, the US Department of Justice announced on Sunday [August 25]. The rise in the number of people in the US correctional system was slower than the 3.6 per cent average annual increase between 1995 and 2001, but the total num- ber is a new high. About three per cent of the US adult population is in the US correctional sys- tem. Of these, 1.3 million were in prison, while 631,240 were in jail, the Department said. There were 3.9 million on probation and 731,147 people on parole, according to the government's data. At year-end 2001, one in five probationers were women, while one in three were black. (Source: Reuters, August 26, 2002, hitp://www.reuters.com/; also see US DoJ Bureau of Justice Statistics releases at http:/www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/) NEXUS ¢ 9 OCTOBER — NOVEMBER 2002 www.nexusmagazine.com