Space independance

In a message dated 9/11/02 12:42:21 PM, aglobus@... writes:

<< Well now, a small weak space nation will have a launch vehicle, right?
And a launch vehicle with a nuclear payload can destroy any city in the
U.S., right? So if Osama or his buddies take over this nation, mate
their stolen Soviet nuke and launch it at, say, Chicago, (not that easy,
but probably doable), we lose a city. Therefor, the US will need to
supply protection.

Or the US could simply invade the little nation itself. Think Grenada
or any of countless of US invasions of Caribean and Latin American
countries. >>

This is a kind of runaway fear I am warning about. Let's take Osama for this
post. Before he can take over a island, he need a inside support. For all
the media talks, the fact remains that his boys are very small in number in
comparison to a island population. They have to let him take over by
invitation or by passive resignation. That mean the population must be: 1)
Muslims given to strict code of conduct and authoritian structure for a long
time before his invasion and 2) they have a history of bitterness toward a
more powerful group such as their state or their dominating neigbor. If they
don't want him, they can use some means to defeat his plan. One step is
arming the whole island as their own mintuemen and women. Such people can
forms network of security in same way we formed security against privataters
and Indians. The islands in South Sea have strong clan structure which can
be use for security. For the actual spaceport, there are many layers that
can be used. The first is the most important, open communications with your
own workers and neigbors. No matter how good CIA or FBI will claims to be,
they will never match the knowledge found in clan sysyetms because such
groups are often close to the 150 people-memory limit found in our brains.
That mean they will know those people's habits, train of thought and so
forth. To access those knowledge, you have to treat the people fairly in your
personal and business dealings. They will return the favor to you. Then you
have other security systems to deal with, but in my opinion, NOTHING replace
the good will of the natives. This is the biggest weakness in airport
security.

The federalized security, because they don't have to fear for getting fired
in same way as private guards, tends to take a very poor attitude toward
everybody and in fact acts like bullies to everybody. That attitude will
blowback on them as the customers the guards are "servicing" will resent them
and think, "Fuck you assholes. If you're so good, you can do your job without
my help." In that stroke, the most important part of the whole security, the
eyes and ears and brains of the customers are lost to the feds and the danger
increase because now the airports are truly blind like the bats. Worst, the
airports will lose business which will lead to chain reaction as more big
airlines go broke, leading to more crowding of remaining large airlines which
make it easier for potential terrorists to sneak in. Finally, the small
airlines flying out of thousands of small airports and that also armed pilots
and take care of their own airplanes' security and also treat the passagers
as partners in prevention will stop the downward spiral. The nation will end
up where they should be long time ago: they individualize the means of
security. The individualization of security would have prevent the problem
of terrorism before they became a problem. But that's whole another story.

Carl E. Mullin
visionary artist and entrepreneur
homo asteralis
ravenart@...
www.ravenartstudio.com

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety." -Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of
Pennsylvania (1759)