| Raping the Moon, Mars and the Stars; How does
Walmartian sound? Hallunaburton?
Is Bush Aiming to Privatize them and Establish Lunar and Martian
Corporate Territories as Independent Nations?
By Rob Kall
I've been a science fiction and space exploration fan and supporter all
my life. But George W. Bush's plans for NASA scare me. It's simple. I
don't trust him to treat NASA, the moon or Mars any different than the
other aspects of the human commons he's touched.
Any time he evokes a positive promise and vision, enunciating his
speech-writers' words so clumsily, behind those words are plans to do the
opposite-- to ravage and plunder, to tear down and do whatever is most
profitable for him and his cronies. This is very predictable, very
reliable.
So, if George Bush says he's going to improve the space program, that
means he's going to ruin it, and in the process make some
mega-corporations billions, and probably, some pimp neocons hundreds of
thousands of dollars offering consulting services on how to make money off
of the destruction of NASA and the rape of the moon and mars.
I'd assume that, following the lines of the IMF and WTO that the moon
and Mars will be privatized, sold outright to corporation. Why give an
acre of moon-land to a government?
Perhaps, that's the logical next step for Bush and the rest of the
traitors who are sacking the US-- establishing Lunar corporate
territories. The space program could be Bush's biggest giveaway ever.
In the near-term, I fear, as John Glen has also expressed concern
about, that Bush's outer space rape plans will kill or weaken important
NASA programs already under way.
The only thing we can trust about Bush is that he will do the opposite
of what he says when it comes to promising to do good, and that the
opposite will benefit his cronies and money backers.
Even life long space-buffs would be wise to tread cautiously in
welcoming the Bush administration into space... unless, of course, Bush,
Rove and the neocons volunteer to do the Mars trip themselves. That's one
flight suit I'd be truly happy to see on George.
This article has generated some nasty remarks from right-wingers who
think I'm crazy suggesting that Bush might do as I suggest. But I'm not
the only one.
Edward Hudgins, adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute and editor of
Space: The Free-Market Frontier (Cato, 2002,) suggested on CNN (Jan 18)
that large corporations be given rights to their own bases on the moon, in
exchange for them investing in the Bush Space project, (since it is
laughably underfunded.)
Here's an excerpt from the Progress Report, a daily newsletter
from think tank, Center for American Progress:
MARS
The
scene is all too familiar: roll out a big-sounding proposal to great
acclaim, then drastically underfund the proposal after the fanfare
subsides to make room for large tax cuts for the wealthy. No, it's
not the No Child Left Behind bill and the subsequent underfunding of
education, its the President's new Mars proposal. In 1989 when a
similar idea was floated by Bush's father, experts estimated it
would cost about $500
billion. But even as Bush waxed philosophic about the virtues of
exploring the unknown frontier of space, he said his grand vision
could be done by "spending
an additional $1 billion over five years." As USA
Today reports, this amount is so small, it is almost
embarrassing: a single flight of the space shuttle costs roughly
$500 million. In contrast to Bush's Mars proposal, "the
original Apollo program cost $150 billion to $175 billion in 2003
dollars."
Red
Planet Motivations
...there is
one company that has supported a Mars mission for years:
Halliburton. The company, which was headed by Vice President Dick
Cheney and is a major
financial backer of the Administration, has long supported
funding a Mars plan because it is good for its drilling technology
business (it was also Cheney
who spearheaded the Mars plan inside the White House). According
to an 8/20/01 Kiplinger's Business publication, "several
companies and university labs will stand to benefit from new
projects" in a Mars mission - including Halliburton. And the
payoff could be big: Citizens Against Government Waste notes that,
despite the White House's initial lowballing, legitimate "cost
estimates for the new program range from $550
billion to $1 trillion."
HALLIBURTON
ACTIVELY PUSHING FOR MARS FUNDING: In the 4/24/00 edition of
Oil & Gas Journal, Halliburton scientist Steve Streich pointed
out why a Mars program would be so lucrative for Halliburton. He
says a "Mars exploration program presents an unprecedented
opportunity" for the industry and that it "warrants the
support of both government and industry leaders." He says
"one area of great importance is finding out of what the inside
of Mars consists. That's where the petroleum industry comes
in." Specifically, benefits for "the oil and gas industry
may lie in technology that NASA will use for drilling into the
surface of Mars." He says there is "great potential for a
happy synergy between space researchers" on a Mars project and
"the oil and gas industry."
HALLIBURTON
ALREADY INVOLVED IN MARS PLANS: The 4/24/00 edition of Oil
& Gas Journal also reported that Halliburton is already involved
in a preliminary consortium of industry and academia "organized
to support the development of new technology required for the Mars
mission." A 2/28/01 report in Petroleum News confirmed that
"NASA
has been working with Halliburton and others to identify
drilling technologies that might work on Mars."
MILITARY
MOTIVATION: On top of the Halliburton factor, USA Today
reports that Cheney "persuaded Bush that there could be military
benefits, such as space-based defense systems."
Home
Page for Center for American Progress. Sign up for their
newsletter there |
Rob Kall rob@opednews.com
is editor/founder of OpEdNews.com,
president of Futurehealth, Inc. and organizer of the Futurehealth Winter
Brain, Optimal Functioning and StoryCon Meeting.
This article is copyright Rob
Kall and originally published by opednews.com
but permission is granted for
reprint in print, email, blog or web media so long as this credit
paragraph is attached. |
|