Tuesday, January 18, 2011

Space Preservation Act

The Space Preservation Act sponsored by representative Dennis Kucinich calls for a ban on the weaponization of space. This is an extension of the Outer Space Treaty of 1967 which bans the stationing of weapons of mass destruction in space. Its first introduction on October 2, 2001 included an extensive list of what could be called exotic weapons--psychotronics, chemtrails, weather modification, tectonic weapons, and others. On April 19, 2002 an unfavorable executive comment was received from the DoD pertaining to this bill. According to Doug Gordon, Kucinich’s spokesman, “[mind control] was not the concentration of the legislation, which is why it was tightened up and redrafted”. The bill was reintroduced on January 23, 2002 with exotic weapons presumably being redefined as 'undeveloped means'. Both bills died in committee. The redraft with some further edits was introduced in both the 108th and 109th Congresses only to again die in committee. As of now the bill has not been introduced in any subsequent Congress. The bill is summarized on Mr. Kucinich's website where peculiarly the 2001 version is not mentioned.

The most relevant line pertaining to space-based mind control was omitted in later versions of the bill:
The terms `weapon' and `weapons system' mean a device capable of any of the following:...(ii) Inflicting death or injury on, or damaging or destroying, a person (or the biological life, bodily health, mental health, or physical and economic well-being of a person)...(II) through the use of land-based, sea-based, or space-based systems using radiation, electromagnetic, psychotronic, sonic, laser, or other energies directed at individual persons or targeted populations for the purpose of information war, mood management, or mind control of such persons or populations
Assuming this definition was redefined as an 'undeveloped mean' in later versions, would a space-based mind control weapon developed in secrecy still apply? And would the damage now have to be strictly physical instead of psychological considering the physical nature of the other redrafted definitions?

The purview of the bill also excludes putting a ban on any surveillance, reconnaissance or remote sensing activities that are not related to space-based weapons or systems. As clarification of this point Mr. Kucinich's website says "The use of space-based reconnaissance and intelligence equipment would be permitted". Does this mean a space-based system which facilitates telepathy is not a weapon? Or is it only considered a weapon when it is used for mind control. And what about the privacy of thought? Are we entitled to having our thoughts private or are they open for capture from space-based systems?

In my view there should be legislation banning these systems. It's the safe thing to do. For those affected it would grant rights and for the disbelievers it should not matter, it's not real, right?

Space Preservation Act of 2001, 2002, 2003, 2005

House Session 2974, Stop the Weaponization of Space, (5/19/05):


House Session 2991, H.AMDT.326 to H.R.2863 An amendment to add a new section entitled "Space Preservation Act of 2005", (6/20/05)

1 comment:

  1. I'd say this is still a great step forward.

    The fact that a U.S. congressmen actually tried to ban space weaponry says a lot about their existence (as does the fact that the DoD blocked this legislation).

    I think it's about time the public weighs in on such matters.

    ReplyDelete