Focus 580; Missile Defense and International Security continued

This morning in this part of focus we will return to the subject we've talked about before. In fact just this week and that is the issue of ballistic missile defense for the United States the Bush administration has proposed building a system that would defend against a limited number of incoming ballistic presumably nuclear armed missiles. The idea is that if a nation should decide to launch a few missiles or if a missile is launched by accident the United States would then have some way to shoot that muzzle down before it dropped its buy more bombs on the United States. It within the administration the idea has many supporters and it was actually an idea that was revived during. Clinton administration where they were talking about building such a system. Also this system has many critics there are people that are concerned about the technical issues they're concerned about the amount of money that would be spent to build such a system. And they're also concerned that building this would be de stabilizing that it might in

fact touch off a new arms race. This morning I will be talking with Carl Grossman He's professor of journalism at the State University of New York college at Old Westbury. He specialized in investigative reporting for more than 35 years in fact he chairs SUNY old west breeze media and communications program and for something like the past 15 years he in his own reporting in writing has been focusing on the issue of weaponization of space. He's the author of six books. His most recent weapons in space is published by seven stories press and another titled The Wrong Stuff. The Space Program's Nuclear threat to our planet that's published by common courage press he's also active in television as well as in print his most recent TV documentary which he narrates and wrote is titled Star Wars returns. Distributed by enviro video he has spoken on these issues around the world he has meant addressed members of the British parliament. He's given presentations at the United

Nations. He's also written articles for many publications. Too many to list them all but they include things like The New York Times The Boston Globe The Philadelphia Inquirer The Village Voice Zina magazine The Boston Phoenix and and on and on and he's talking with us this morning by telephone and as we discuss the topic you're certainly welcome to call and perhaps you will have questions or comments that certainly welcome you can be part of the show here in Champaign Urbana 3 3 3 9 4 5 5. We also have a toll free line that's good anywhere that you can hear us and that is 800 to 2 2 9 4 5 5 if you match the letters on the phone with the numbers you get w i l l. So that may or may not make it any easier. Three three three W I L L toll free 800 1:58 W while Professor Grossman Hello. Good morning. Thank you very much for talking with us. We certainly appreciate it. Pleasure. As you you probably know we we have done now two programs a second program this week

that we're doing on the subject trying to talk when we talk with someone who clearly was a proponent and we wanted to talk with someone who clearly was a critic. And one of the things that I did when I started out the other show maybe I'll ask and perhaps ask you the same question noted that the last time we had talked about this topic was last fall. Mr. Clinton was still president. And the question at that point was what happens with this effort to develop this system. And at that point his option either was to say let's go ahead let's kill the program or essentially let's let the next president decide. And at that time we didn't know who that was was going to be so event and we know what happened was eventually he decided to vote the next guy decide. If we look at it where we were then as we were talking about it and look at where we are now. Aside from the fact that we have another administration what has changed or has anything changed. Well I think. It didn't change as we have an administration now which is more gung ho for it and I should perhaps start right away and

explain that missile defense is just one component or one layer in a much broader program of essentially making space a new arena of war. What's being done is there we're out there pushing missile defense missile could be against defense and that's the spin that sits you know missile defenses when you introduced the program you talked about the issue of a rogue state is what they're being called in Washington sending a missile our way. This is a program designed to to deal with that. In fact if you look at the documents and I teach investigative reporting and I've done it this mention for getting all of that 35 years plus if you look at the documents and actually there are. They're accessible they're available on the Internet. I also in this video that I've just completed starwars returns and in this book weapons in space

present them in fact in the book that I reprint pages from these documents. Look at these documents to believe what's really happening and what's really happening is that the U.S. I mean these are the words that are used in these military and government documents. The U.S. seeks to control space. They use that word over and over get control. And from the ultimate high ground of space. They dominate and they use the word dominate the planet below when in fact a motto of the Space Command is nastier of space. And then as you go into the documents what you find is that missile defense is again a layer a component and it is something called theater defense. And then there is space based weapons which is is really the key to it all in this kind of little items in between and I just last week came the unveiling of the plans for a

space bomber which would do a kind of suborbital flights and drop bombs from pretty high up and so forth. But it isn't just my point at missile defense that an answer to a question. At this point we see the Bush administration. Absolutely. I mean promoting and pushing and demanding missile defense and demanding this broader program. Space welfare I just let me read from this is a recent report of the space commission which was chaired by our defense secretary Ronald Rumsfeld composed of 13 members. In the coming period the U.S. will conduct operations to from and through space in support of its national interests both on Earth and in space. If you haven't done a page projection in Rome and space it's possible to

protect terrorists from space in response to events anywhere in the world. Having this capability would give the US an extraordinary number. Advantage. So that's the broad a program again what your listeners mostly have heard about was just that one component which is you know what I mean it sounds okay missile defense but if they knew about it they should know about. You all must know about the write up plan that I think you can understand what has been going on what's going on now under the Bush administration and in fact what went on in the Clinton administration and which this plan I mean it just didn't start with George W. Bush being sworn in in January. It's been percolating. It's been going ahead for years. Well let's talk for a moment about the ABM Treaty and a good deal of the discussion centers on this one thousand nine hundred two treaty that sent that the United States signed on to that essentially said we would not develop or implement such a system. And the big point of discussion is here

whether it is and whether that treaty matters anymore or whether it's important that we continue to stand by it. And perhaps some would say that maybe one of the differences between the sort of answer that question. Yes in fact the guy from the heritage who was talked with us a money that actually said this. The big difference between then and now has to do with the administration's feelings about the ABM Treaty and apparently its decision simply to walk away from it. Why does the ABM Treaty still matter or does the ABM Treaty still matter. Well the ABM treaty was was developed Geron between the United States and the former Soviet Union and what it did was restrict both countries from having two sites for anti ballistic missiles and the idea was kind of to go to prevent the cycle of more and more missiles and more or more anti ballistic missiles and so forth and so on. Now what the folks from the Heritage Foundation which is about a Conservative

Foundation and the Bush administration feel feel that well as as the president says and as Secretary Rumsfeld says this is a relic from the Cold War and it's not important. Well it really is important because I mean this thinking back in the 80s was let's get this ABM treaty in place so we're not going to kind of get a cycle which goes out of control. And indeed if we break the ABM Treaty and we're ready to do that. The administration has. It's been speaking and based on weeks of bumping against the ABM Treaty in the coming months what's going to appear is that Rush air is well I mean President Putin has already announced that they're going to. Well for starters Merv they had missiles in the works put multiple warheads on their missiles to try to amplify the killing potential of their

ICBM fleet. But then what. And this is even more serious sever if you can find something more serious. But President Putin has has said is that if the U.S. goes ahead and breaks the ABM Treaty all bets are off for either to a particular the START treaty is all these treaties that we've been working on for years. That was so difficult to develop to restrict the limits of nuclear weapons and so forth. I mean we were concerned back in the 80s that a spiral going out of control. We have to be controlled concerned now to have a spiral going out of control. But just let me add one thing if I. But ABM treaty is very important but the bigger treaty which is which is an international treaty involving Most nations of the world is called the Outer Space Treaty. And this was developed in the 1970s and acted in 1967 it was developed in the early 60s. In fact by the United States indeed in both the book and the

video that I mentioned that I've done I interview a man who was deeply involved in the development of the Outer Space Treaty. Craig I just read and he explains that what we try to do the US are wise to weaponize space before it got weaponized to keep war out of space. And we've the United States the famine 72 You know the United Kingdom introduced this proposed treaty to the world and it was it was enacted and ratified by most countries of the world and this is the more which keeps keeps space for the peaceful purposes. And just let me know in the United Nations last November. Now this is under Clinton not under Bush. There was a vote too because of what the U.S. is up to. There's broad space military. The program essentially to turn the space into a battleground to turn Bevan's into a war zone. There was a vote to reaffirm the Outer Space Treaty and the vote was one hundred sixty

three. Yes I mean like the world. And what did we do the United States in this. SENATOR CLINTON Let me note again we abstained So first the ABM Treaty will go and then I fear the Outer Space Treaty will go and and all this effort on the Outer Space Treaty to to just keep keep the route of space well go by the books. And what a way to open the new century the new millennium too. To well to turn the heavens a doorstop at this point probably I should introduce Again our guest for this hour a focus for anyone who might have tuned in last little bit we're speaking with Carl Grossman He's professor of journalism at the State University of New York college at Old Westbury in fact he chairs the media and communications program there for the past 15 years he's been focusing on the issue of weaponization of space. He has written a number of books on the subject and contributed articles to many different publications and has spoken on these issues a great deal. We're talking

here about the Bush administration's stated intention to build an anti ballistic missile system for the United States but also beyond what sort of plans the Pentagon. And the administration has for the idea of militarization of space. Questions are certainly welcome here in in Champaign-Urbana 3 3 3 9 4 5 5. We also have a toll free line good anywhere that you can hear us and that is 800 to 2 2 9 4 5 5 V. I'm sure that people will recall when the whole issue of the space based defense against ballistic missiles and also the possibility of weapons location in space was was raised during the Reagan administration. And the fact that over time and then as even more so as the Cold War came to an end and it seemed that there was not so much urgency it just seemed to be something that kind of went away there wasn't a great deal of support for it apparently in the Congress even though and even though we spent a lot of money we didn't seem

to get much out of it and people simply stopped thinking about it until the whole idea of this more limited system was reintroduced. During the Clinton ministration. But what that what people I think have not realized and you certainly have written about is that research has can. Need to go on all this time on offensive space based weapons. Perhaps you can talk a little bit about exactly what what the United States has done in terms of research on these sorts of things. It's actually more than research. I mean again people don't know much about this stuff because our big corporate media don't report it indeed is a and you're familiar with this I'm sure undertaking out in California when you're at the Sonoma State University Project Censored right. And every year they they cite the most under reported or censored stories. And Mike my articles through the

years on the weaponization and nuclearization of space and in fact they're related. Indeed the military is thinking it's going to need nuclear power to energize these weapons these lasers and hype a velocity constant particle beams it would like to deploy in space. Any case my pieces have received over and over again. Six pieces I perceive that this that these awards from Project Censored and I really frankly hope that I don't have to get another award I'd much rather see this information on 60 Minutes or at CBS News. The Nightly News With Dan Rather or wherever on PBS but it doesn't seem to get out the spin meisters said. So you know it's so effective and getting information out in any case it's not just research. In fact again back to Clinton. One shouldn't be partisan about this because the record of the of the Democrats has not been so great I mean frankly I think what's going to be necessary to stop this is a grassroots

movement in which the people lead the leaders. But in December under the Clinton administration the go ahead was given for the development of what's called the space based laser. And this is a it's said 20 to 50 billion dollars that's part of the program. I mean just imagine if this thing goes forward if we don't stop it. The diversion of our national treasure to to alarm the heavens as opposed to spending our money for for the environment and education and health and getting people getting maybe more tax. Think about it. Next that we're getting back bonuses whatever they call them refunds but in a case that was given the government head in December under Clinton. Previously the AFA high energy laser This is just a few months before that underwent its 20 second successful test firing the AF a high energy laser is a TRW

device of the space based laser which is being developed incidentally at NASA's Stennis Space Flight Center in Mississippi. NSA supposed to be a civilian space agency but this isn't a civilian in terms of I mean it's a war. What we've really sent to is when President Reagan announced the Star Wars This is in 1983 to fend off what he called the evil empire the serviette Union. We had all these corporations jump in like TRW and Lockheed Martin and Boeing and basically are those are the four major aerospace corporations in the Star Wars program and they continue to receive I mean it was budget all through Reagan and then Bush and Clinton Clinton at four and five billion dollars a year now under President Bush. He wants the Star Wars program to get a point three billion So again it's in degree it's gotten

worse. The Democrats in Congress however this. Is the newest in the last couple of days want to cut it back to 7.3 billion but the Democrats are quite prepared. Most of them not all of them. In fact last week Congressman Dennis Kucinich of Cleveland Ohio introduced a bill in Congress to ban weapons in space. But most Democrats money to continue research and development of Star Wars and let let me know. I mean Lockheed Martin and Boeing and Raytheon and TRW get all these government contracts but in turn they shower the Congress with campaign contributions. I mean there is it's quite corrupting I believe and they provided a lot of funding for the Bush campaign and they put money into the Gore campaign. So we have a situation here where you know maybe people thought it was over but it wasn't over. It's not your style. The drawing board is not just rhetoric. The systems are being developed

and the problem here is that up at this point the Russians and the Chinese have em and I've heard them make these speeches at the United Nations ready to strengthen the Outer Space Treaty let us not have a war in space they say in Canada our neighbor Canada has been in the lead internationally working in fact with the Chinese and the Russians and the rest of the world in trying to stop this U.S. program. I mean the media can just read a speech from the Canadian representative at the U.N. This is October 2000 and I was there to hear this talks about outer space hasn't yet witnessed the introduction. A space based weapons this could change if the international community doesn't prevent this day that the stabilising development through the time a negotiation of measures banning the introduction of weapons in outer space. It's been suggested our proposal is not relevant because the assessment on which it rests is either

premature or alarmist. In our view it is neither. One need only look at what is happening right now to realize that it's not premature. And he's referring to the U.S. space military program. And then finally this man whose name might be a Tricare candidate there is no question the technology can be developed to place weapons in space. There is also no question that no state can expect to maintain a monopoly on such knowledge of such capabilities for all time. If one state actively pursuing the weaponization of space we can be sure others will follow up and say hey you have you know the world essentially agreeing to keep space for peace I mean that was the object of the Outer Space Treaty and you have these countries wanting to see. Strengthen it. And Russia and China are what I would say you know would have even a stronger outer space treaty and verification mechanisms and so forth. But what the what if what have we been doing to us. We've been blocking this Canadian Initiative we've been voting against is not only in the year 2000 but in

1909 two identical resolutions to be affirmed the Outer Space Treaty. We booked we refused to support the both of those votes and that we're just continuing on the Bush administration is saying we don't care for if our European friends or Russia or China object to error our program and again missile defense is a spin it's a much broader program. We're just going to move ahead. And the result the end result will be if we do what we're doing. Russia and China and then India and Pakistan and who knows who else will respond in kind of begin to move them up into space militarily. And there will be an arms race in space and ultimately war in space and no one will profit other than maybe Lockheed Martin and Boeing and refueling and TRW. We have as our guest this morning in this part of focus 580 Carl Grossman He's professor of journalism at State University of New York has been writing about these issues for quite a long time. This is the second program we've. On this week talking about the issue of

missile defense and other sorts of issues the very first show this week Baker spring from the Heritage Foundation in Washington D.C. talked with us making the case for this missile defense and we also want to hear to hear from a critic and that's what we're doing here this morning. Your questions welcome in fact the lines are full so when we start talking with people who are listening we'll start out with a caller in Chicago on the line number four. Yes. Let me take another tack. Some weeks ago there was a guy on I think this program who took it but hasn't the opposite argument from yours. And I raised the question which I'll raise with you and see what you have to say about it. I got no decent response from him for 10 or 15 years ago or maybe even more. There was information coming out in the public press to the effect that we had spy satellites which could take pictures of

anything on the ground that were you know large known small of the well that were 10 to 10 feet or more in size and the French and the Russians had equipment which would take pictures of things that were about three three and a half feet. These things are currently I understand being used for commercial. Purposes why cannot you or why cannot we use these devices to determine who is building a missile emplacements and so on and thereby preempt the need for the space program that the administration once the arming of space and but by one of these emplacements and some other power in

some other country were detected we could make this information known publicly. Have the UN issue a restraining order or something to that effect and if this proved to be a worthless this this attempt and we could take our own steps to to to destroy the seven play. Since the 70s. And the thing to this argument. Oh yes. I mean we know from 40 years ago when the Cuban missile crisis and that was that was a you to play not not the satellites but the optics they have today the surveillance satellites. We could know we would know. And in terms of the issue of missiles and again to get back to the spin of missile defense in this found Star Wars returns this video we interview admiral retired Rear

Admiral Eugene Carroll that he commanded aircraft carrier among other ships and I think it is quote from Admiral carrots kind of an extension of what you're saying sir. He says missile defense doesn't make any sense and everybody realizes that the least likely threat we face is some third rate nation developing an ICBM and launching it at the United States knowing it will get back 50 times what they send. There are all kinds of ways that a cheaper and more reliable smuggling. A suitcase bomb for example to inflict harm and not be subject to instantaneous retaliation and then what. Carol goes on to say is that what this is really a bat is turning space into a battleground. We had going in to space with lasers space is seen as a new place to wage war. Already we're under water over what are on the way and in the air and now we want to go to another dimension space. So in summary so I think what you're pointing out that like what is the

big problem if any country which started to develop no publicity I mean that's what the botching Saddam Hussein very carefully about. I mean we know we know right away as you know I guess in this program if you look at the documents and I could perhaps give a give a website if I could. Sure you can you can see these documents with the U.S. military talks a bad controlling space and dominating the planet from space. The listeners can just go to the website of the U.S. Space Command and that's w w w dot space com. That's one word dot a f dot mil and my arrow forward slash U.S. space bar none apply easy a way to get it is the other company that. That's produced Star Wars returns and viral video. They have a website and it's w w w dot and viral video. One word in viral

video that time and is links right on the front page of that website to these documents. And another place too is the big group that has been fighting Star Wars as the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear power in space. And that website is w w w dot space for the number four pieces of data that we don't have a space for peace and in any case you got of those websites and you link on to the military's website or go directly to the military website and you will see documents that are showing I mean I'm looking at one right now. Vision for 2020. And there's a laser shooting down a target below and it opens up to U.S. Space Command dominating the space dimension of military operations to protect U.S. interests and investment. That's what the military says so as you study this as you learn about this you see that no missiles are not from a rogue state are not the real

reason for this big program and that's why what you are pointing out here issues of surveillance from space being you know kind of a simple way to deal with the potential problem are really being ignored. Appreciate the comments of the caller had a number. Other people hope you'll forgive me if I want to go on to the next person that will be one. Hello. Yes there is good news and bad news on the media front even in the last few hours. The good news is this is a show like this which is really rare I think but on NPR this morning on the national NPR programming this morning we heard a you know debate quote unquote or to let's say two commentaries pro and con about national missile defense. The problem was Donald Rumsfeld and the con was Sandy Berger. OK. And what Rumsfeld argued was that

anybody who recalls the scud missile missile attack on the U.S. barracks during the Gulf War would have to be from this missile defense. And I didn't really listen carefully to what Berger had to say because I was just so so shocked that he would be seen as a con but apparently he has some see you know sort of strategic or tactical concerns about the ABM treaty and not you know not not getting getting away from the open the ABM Treaty but I guess I'm just concerned about media coverage of this and how it could could be improved if he could be. Although I have to say there's a there's a fairly shocking column in The Chicago Tribune this morning taken right out of the bulletin for Atomic Scientists. I know two full columns on the op ed page which detailed the whole history of deception. The title of the column this thread persists thread vs. reality. The whole history of the lies about the Soviet Union's capabilities

and what the what the truth was all the way going back to the 1940s up to two relatively recently. So I would just be interested to know your your comment especially on you know Rumsfeld versus Berger as presenting both sides of these of these. Well I'm glad you know that there is a debate but I can I say I think it should be. A broader debate. You know it. Well. If I can you can you broadcast in the Chicago area and the billeting of atomic scientists is out of Chicago. Mike Moore feeds years was the editor of the budget and he's now a yes a senior editor and in a press review. It's called Extra. I interviewed more because he and the bullets and it's a wonderful magazine has been writing about these military documents that I'm pointing to and also this this new report of the rummest our space commission and I was quoting from this piece that I did for extra quoting Mr. Moore

the heart of the report rise in the assertion that it is time to weaponize space. And then I ask why aren't reporters writing that when they keep up the missile defense missile defense which is only part of it. And he says under the pressure of time and other tasks only very few reporters have looked at the inn at all the documents and they do it instead of superficial pieces following the lead of government briefers. So in terms of the debate I think it's good that there's Rumsfeld and Berger debating but again it's just a missile defense issue and we have to I think focus really on what the broader programs have been which I just mentioned for example that vision for 2020 report which which listeners can can get on the Internet is get a hard copy to and enter this page which I just read U.S. Space Command dominating the space dimension of military operations to protect U.S. interests

investments just the next page says this is the model for what the U.S. wants to do militarily in space during the rise of the sea commerce nations build maybe's to protect and enhance their commercial interests. Speaking have the Great Bear. Empires of Europe had these armadas these fleets that ruled the waves and thus were able to rule the world to protect their their economic interests and then the next paycheck what would be the reason for the US moving into space is these reports they speak about and essentially controlling space so likely are matters of 500 years ago. Control the seas and thus would be able to dominate the planet below. I think that now hold your breath and listen to this this is this is our Pentagon this is our military. The globalization of the world economy will continue with the widening between fabs and have nots supplanting likely not to be concerned about the evil

empire the Soviet Union anymore. But what we are looking at a military is looking to Star Wars to do would be to make sure the global economy of which the US is the engine keeps bearing and I was half nuts. Don't get out of line and if they do we would sack. From space with these lasers and particle beams and these other weapons. Now I'd like to see a debate about that because that's at the heart of this issue of the close of last year I was at the British Parliament in London giving a presentation on this and I was showing this report and a member of parliament a gentleman by the name of Alan Simpson from from Nottingham. He took this report as I was speaking any he declared. Professor Grossman we understand. We too were once an empire drunk with power and if you look at the documents you look at the plants you look what's happening. It's not just missile defense it's a much broader program and it's

a it's a program involving empire and control and I just don't think that most Americans knew what our government and our military are up to right now militarily in space. They've supported if you would but I think most people would not. We just again we're moving in about our last 10 minutes and we have a number of other callers and we keep going on trying to include some of the people in just. Quick again introduce our guest. We're speaking with Carl Grossman He's professor of journalism at the State University of New York. He has written a lot about these issues. His most recent book if you like to look at that one of them is titled weapons in space it's published by Seven Stories Press. He's also contributed to many other publications. And we'll just keep going here and get as many people as we can. Next is champagne county line number two. Hello. Hi good morning. You know I Acker the sentiment about NPR's coverage they're basically just following the line of you know nine billion or seven million I

forget what the Democrats are offering as a as just a research. It's really going in the same direction I mean there was a book from Syracuse you know the press called pharming the heaven's wonderful book. And in fact in my book weapons in space I interviewed Jack Mann Oh this was a he was a professor. You're up in Syracuse He teaches at also a SUNY College environmental science and first to college and he wrote his book at some landmark book way back in his in the 80s in 84 85 when Reagan first announced Star Wars and then again the focus was the Soviet Union. And I found him interviewed him about his his thinking today and he believes that's just what I just mentioned before that the program stayed alive because of all of its vested interests. The aerospace corporations and and the interests of the military and seizing the ultimate high ground and being able to be so powerful extensively from space. But as he says and I quote him again and weapons in space now there's a new focus and it's the

global economy. But I. It up because it just shows this long term you know juggernaut of the military industrial complex really you know knowing where they're going are long and I brought it up because there's a local fellow from the Arms Control and Disarmament group here on campus who does game theory about this and I brought up this Vision 2020 and I learned about it through the conference that you spoke at in in England which is really available on the web and quite a few different ways or some great documentation there too. I brought it up and he just said oh that's just graphic design. That's that's that doesn't. That doesn't show up. What they're really planning the Bush administration but you know it's really is in denial because the Russell report as you point out in all these ghastly quotes shows exist. They know exactly where they're wanting to go and I just I really applaud your your work and I think people should really go to

this Vision 2020 document and it's not dismiss it as just graphic design the last line and it is as you recall space the war fighters ads that just just absolutely stunning and. Look at the coverage on NPR this morning and this is just you know the condominium in it that we really need to hear authentically critical voices like yours and let someone else think but I had to add that the mention and I can I can't Sara appreciate your comment. It's just again if other people get the information I hope to get a copy of the video if people would like me it's a WW dot in Viral Video dot com. But there's an 800 number 1 800 economic ecology TV forty six and show it in churches and show it at the university and I mean listeners will be amazed to hear Senator Bob Smith of New Hampshire and he is the legislator who wrote the the federal space commission's report.

And we asked him in the video we asked him what about the U.S. confirming space and here this powerful U.S. senator says it's our manifest destiny. And we went from the East Coast to the. Toast of the United States Senate United States and now are they going to move into space. It's our manifest destiny and space those aren't forever. I mean that's so far from missile defense and so I mean real megaman our view of empire and of anybody you know once again in the book from Seven Stories Press of it's a short book with these documents against three pages from them reprinted in the book. You got to see this stuff to believe it just give a call another 800 number 1 800 5 9 6 7 4 3 7 x 1 800 5 9 6 7 4 3 7 and just finally the conference that the that the that the corpsman was speaking about in England was of which I spoke at was organized by the Global Network Against Weapons. Nuclear power and space which is the

main group is the lead group fighting all this and you can give them a call at 3 5 2 3 3 7 9 2 7 4 that's 1 800 3 5 2 3 3 7 9 2 7 4. Get lots of information from them but more important beyond the information from the global network. Our plans for action like on October 13 all around the world is an international day of protest against the militarization of space. And you know listeners and perhaps groups that they're involved with would be wonderful if they could join up with the global networks are again at the grassroots we can rise up and say hey we don't let this Star Wars program and we complete our leaders. You know we we have some of the people you know I have somebody who actually is listening to us over the web who is calling from San Francisco. So I definitely want to talk with this person. Your on line number one. Hello. Hi Carl I'm David Grace from abalone alliance on Sanford. Wonderful to see you.

Yeah let's see. One thing I wanted to raise here I've heard for you know 75 years there's been the Maginot Line actually the Germans were able to get into France by going around their Star Wars of the day. They had a great big wall and the Germans just went around it. And I've heard this Star Wars described is that that centrally we would put all our money into a Maginot Line. And as you read through post-World War 1 history it's understood that there were a lot of people who built that Maginot Line and developed it knowing that they didn't want France to survive. They were essentially the traders the quislings of the day and they the Vichy France of the day. And they essentially wanted Germany to win so they helped design this Maginot Line intending to for France to fall. And I wonder if you had any comments on that specifically. And then secondly if in fact

the Star Wars system which hypothetically shouldnt work if its on a hair trigger. And so essentially we create this huge national line which forces all of the weapon systems of the world to be on a hair trigger. And you know if we're in peace time we're actually making things more dangerous by forcing things to be on a hair trigger. Well in terms of the of the commercial interests and the Maginot Line. And we know what happened with imagine when the Germans just went around it. I think that's a very very interesting parallel in terms of destabilizing the planet. I mean the Chinese have said that if we go ahead them just they have 20 ICBMs don't make many many more enemies ways with decoys and cruise missiles that can fly under neath any Sokol missiles. But furthermore I think I mean it we all must be concerned it's a dangerous world. As I said this correctly

Donald Rumsfeld has said we have to be concerned but let's be concerned the right way let's be concerned about terrorism suitcase bombs and so forth and so on. And just one of the note if I could strike this year from the abalone alliance if an anti nuclear alliance in both the book and the video again this is an important report 50 people to see new welfarist is Air and Space Power for the 21st century. It's a U.S. Air Force Board report that says in the next two to. Decade's new technologies will allow the fielding of space based weapons of devastating effectiveness and raises with reasonable mass to effect very many kills. But then it goes on to tell them occasionally it's make the space based weapons relatively unfeasible however a natural technology to enable high powered this nuclear power and space setting the emotional issues of nuclear power aside this technology offers a viable alternative for Mark your maps of parent

space so you have the military talking about essentially the Chernobyl some the sky and imagine if the heavens are going as a shooting war and we'd have to use nuclear reactors and these plutonium power packs flowing down on our heads. I mean this is real madness. I'm going to have to jump in here because we've come to the end of our time. And I also want to apologize here. We had more people than we could take so I'm I'm sorry that if you did not get in on the show this morning we also want to say thanks to our guest Carl Grossman He's professor of journalism at State University of New York college at Old Westbury. You can look for his books and perhaps you might want to check out one titled weapons in space published by seven stories press if you're interested in reading more on this subject. Professor Grossman will say thank you very much for giving us some of your time today. Absolute pleasure.