SO UAE is also getting a 265 million spaceport

[Generator]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/space/02/20/space.tourism.ap/index.html

UAE to get $265 million spaceport

Monday, February 20, 2006; Posted: 11:11 a.m. EST (16:11 GMT)

LOS ANGELES, California (AP) -- A day after Space Adventures announced it was in a venture to develop rocket ships for suborbital flights, the company said Friday it plans to build a $265 million spaceport in the United Arab Emirates.

The commercial spaceport would be based in Ras Al-Khaimah near the southern end of the Persian Gulf, and the UAE government has made an initial investment of $30 million, the Arlington, Virginia-based company said in a statement.
~

Spaceport? WHAT the hell is a spaceport? I thought I was just kidding about Cheney being from another planet. We ARE living in a sci-fi novel.

Coincendence. Sure. So that's why they no worry about global warming huh?

[woodsprite]

1. Well, when they identify another earthlike planet,

they'll take their billions and hightail it to the other planet from the spaceport. Only thing is, once they get there, they will find they left all the workerbees in the Gitmo-style detention centers.

[Whoa_Nelly]

2. Take a look at Prodea (financing suborbital vehicles)

From the article:

The agreement between Space Adventures and the Texas-based venture capital firm Prodea would help finance suborbital vehicles being designed and built by the Russian aerospace firm Myasishchev Design Bureau.




And here's PRODEA

http://www.prodea.com/

And Hamid Ansari is the co-founder/general partner for PRODEA
http://www.siliconiran.com/company_profiles/top_officers/officers/hamid_ansari.shtml

Along with Anousheh Ansari:
http://www.siliconiran.com/women/women_profiles/anoosheh_ansari.shtml

And Amir Ansari

The whole Ansari family
http://tinyurl.com/qh3ku
Celebrating Anniversary of Historic Space Flight, Ansari Family's Donation Gives Huge Boost to Future Space Travel and Tourism

There is more going on than we know right now. THings are weirder and weirder....

[Emit]

3. Yikes, look at those chemtrails on their homepage!

[HeeBGBz]

6. That's kind of creepy

Those flashes of light traveling on the trails.

[Emperor_Norton_II]

4. OMG! A telecom engineer named Hamid is running a venture capital group!

IT'S THE END OF THE WORLD!!! RUN!!!

Jesus H. Motherfucking Christ. Bigot much?

[hopeisaplace]

5. Ok. That's it. ALIENS. They're all ALIENS.

Next the fight will be over who "owns" outer space?????
Holy crap, stop the world I want THEM TO GET OFF.

[anarch]

28. yeah, that'd be a hell of a thing to find out, huh?

All this time, we thought we were being sold out to the corporations...and instead it's to some kind of transdimensional space monsters!


Ever see the movie They Live?

[hopeisaplace]

35. Haven't seen it...if it's a horror movie, can't watch them..total fear

lol to your thought about thinking corps were the enemy when its
green men (no offense meant to anyone-not black,brown,yellow or Corps)
..now that's funny :rofl:

[Emperor_Norton_II]

7. Spaceport (n.): A place from which spacecraft arrive and leave.

Is it really that hard a concept to grasp? People want to go into space, therefore they pay big moneys and leave from the UAE or Las Cruces, NM.

[Ikonoklast]

8. Also a place with the capability to launch

Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles. They can use the same launch vehicle to insert a satellite into orbit or a warhead.


Think about it.

[Posteritatis]

9. Think about what?

The fact that the gosh-durned Ay-rabs are actually doing this just so they can nuke the United States and Israel at their earliest opportunity?

Really now. Do you actually believe that drivel? Lay off the Kool-Aid. And read about ICBMs a little while you're at it; they're utterly dissimilar to manned vehicles.

[Ikonoklast]

11. You are kidding, right?

Atlas launch vehicles were used to put both astronauts and warheads into space. A conventional (non-nuclear) or nuclear weapon can be easily launched by almost any appropriate booster. They are not only similar, they are almost exactly the same; the payload is the only difference.

Read a book.

[Posteritatis]

14. I read a great many books

And have yet to find one where someone convincingly argues that the moment a country builds a spaceport, they'll use it to fire nuclear weapons at the United States or something. You seem convinced that this is the prelude to an attack, which is only really betraying your ignorance of the subject.

Though I suppose if you want to swallow the administration's talking points on this sort of thing, you're free to do so.

[Ikonoklast]

17. There has not been one country yet in the history of this planet

That has launch capability of any kind that does NOT have a weapons program to go along with it. Not one.

United States
Great Britain
France
China
Israel
India
Pakistan
Russia


These are just the countries with launch capabilities for (known) nuclear missiles. The list is much larger for those able to launch conventional weapons using a sub-orbital or orbital launch platform. Much larger.

Iraq was one
Germany
North Korea
Iran.....and so on.

I apologize for my ignorance on the subject. Facts are such nasty things to deal with.

[Emperor_Norton_II]

10. Yeah, and O'Hare Airport can be used to scramble bombers.

They can use the same facilities to service 767s or B-52s.

Think about it.

...

Jesus. Listen to what you're saying. I'd expect that kind of paranoid horseshit from LGF, not a bastion of so-called "progressive" values like this. WTF, man?

[Ikonoklast]

12. See above

Listen to yourself. There is dual-use capability in almost any aerospace venture. THAT, I am afraid to inform you, is a fact.


I don't care what country is building a spaceport, launch facility, whatever. If it was Peru (and they were able to build it) they would still have the capability to insert a weapon system into orbit.

[Emperor_Norton_II]

13. So what's your point?

You're the one peddling fear.

[Ikonoklast]

15. What are you talking about?

I am pointing out FACTS. If you do not care to deal with them, I am sorry, but the fact of the matter will not change just because you choose to ignore it.

I state a series of facts, and you respond with ad hominem attacks. Yet, no refutation of the stated fact.

[Emperor_Norton_II]

16. What facts?

You don't state what the hell the port facilities are capable of supporting. Try finding that out before you go wandering around telling people about ICBMs.

[Whoa_Nelly]

18. Perhaps some information and searching of same will make a difference

Easy search to find info re: weapons and spaceports.

Here's one of many that came up under search parameter of "spaceport weapons capability":

http://www.afa.org/magazine/march1999/0399space.asp

<snip>
"One possible outcome of our roadmap is a highly operable vehicle for both space and atmospheric missions at orbital speeds," the SAB said. "With the appropriate payloads, the system would allow a photoreconnaissance mission, delivery of a precision weapon, or other 'surgical' effects delivery anywhere on Earth in something like 45 minutes from the 'go' order."

If anyone here has not seen the documentary Arsenal of Hypocrisy:The Space Program and the Military Industrial Complex, I highly recommend it. I first watched this documentary on Free Speech TV (FSTV), and just viewed it again after purchasing it from Peace Resource Project at http://www.peaceproject.com/books/dvd50.htm

It arrived within three days after ordering.

This documentary, and its producer/commentator Bruce Gagnon, is very credible.

[Emperor_Norton_II]

20. Oh, for fuck's sake..

Are you implying with a straight face that the UAE are planning on building suborbital bombers?

[Whoa_Nelly]

22. Oh, for fuck's sake

are you saying you won't do some thinking, investigating and keep an open mind?

[Emperor_Norton_II]

24. Way to not answer the question

Look, all the available data says this is a civilian project, built in order to seperate upper-class people from their money. The UAE doesn't own a single spacecraft or rocket, just the concrete and baggage carousels. Unless you're going to claim that Virgin Galactic is secretly owned by the military, you've really got no legs to stand on save open bigotry.

[Whoa_Nelly]

26. Where did I insert bigotry implied or overtly?

All you did was attack, have provided no information links, and are adamant that you know, and everyone else is out to lunch and going off on a tangent.

And, again, you simply attack. Bigotry? Where and when did that enter into this per my original post? If you're referring to my other post about PRODEA, all I did was share what I found. No where did I imply or openly suggest anything about race, nationality or anything else to infer bigotry on my part. If you tok it that way, then that's your perspective. Don't try to make me responsible for how you interpret things.

[Emperor_Norton_II]

32. Let's put it to the test, shall we?

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/11407719/

ALBUQUERQUE, New Mexico - New Mexico lawmakers agreed Thursday to proceed on a three-year commitment of funds to build a regional spaceport, designed to support commercial rocket launchings, including passenger-carrying suborbital vehicles.

"Our view of this is all systems go for the spaceport," said New Mexico Economic Development Secretary Rick Homans, also Chairman of the New Mexico Spaceport Authority in nearby Santa Fe.

"This sends out a message loud and clear that New Mexico is setting out on this bold plan," Homans told reporters in a telephone briefing. "This is real and we're moving forward on this."

Now, the Southwestern Regional Spaceport will cost roughly about the same amount of money to build as the UAE's facility ($225,000,000 vs. $265,000,000), and provide nearly identical services for commerical space traffic - the main use being for suborbital tourist flights. The difference between the two is, one is in New Mexico, and the other is in Ras Al-Khaimah.

Why freak out about one and not the other?

[Whoa_Nelly]

33. Didn't know about the one in NM

And I still think there is more to this than we know at the moment.

It's not bigotry. It's questioning the future use of spaceports.

So, what test were you trying to conduct? I don't get it.

[Whoa_Nelly]

23. And BTW, am not implying

Am just sharing info I found

[Emperor_Norton_II]

25. No, you're implying.

Don't play disingenuous. Your simple "sharing of info" is intended to imply a conclusion.

[Whoa_Nelly]

27. Am not being disingenous

I shared info, entered in links (which you don't seem to be able to do), and gave the opportunity for anyone who wanted to look deeper into things could do so. I found it interesting that there is a ot of information regarding spaceports and weapons cabability. If you;re not interested, then don't bother taking the time to look for more info.

Oh...but you do have the time to discount and attack without any back up to what you state.

You are disingenous in believing you get to decide what I was thinking. Trust me, no one is that grand.

[Wind Dancer]

34. Arsenal of Hypocrisy should be required viewing.

It's not based on conspiracy or propaganda. I found it to be one of the most horrifying yet informative documentaries I've ever seen. If you take the time to look at the experts involved in making this incredible film, your suspicion is unfounded.

More:

Video on arms race in space


ARSENAL OF HYPOCRISY:
The Space Program and the Military Industrial Complex

You may now order the newly produced video called Arsenal of Hypocrisy that features GN Coordinator Bruce Gagnon, Noam Chomsky and Apollo 14 astronaut Edgar Mitchell talking about the dangers of moving the arms race into space. The one-hour production features archival footage, Pentagon documents, and clearly outlines the U.S. plan to "control and dominate" space and the Earth below. The video spells out the dangers of the Bush "Nuclear Systems Initiative" that will expand the use of nuclear power in space by building Project Prometheus -- the nuclear rocket.

Mitchell, the 6th man to walk on the moon, warns that a war in space would create massive bits of space junk that would create a mine field surrounding the Earth making it virtually impossible to launch anything into the heavens. Mitchell calls space a fragile environment that must be protected.

Noam Chomsky talks about how the U.S. intends to use space technology to control the Earth and reminds the viewer that the U.S. refuses to negotiate a global ban on weapons in space. He also speaks about the role of the media in suppressing this important issue.

The video contains archival sound of President Dwight Eisenhower in 1961 warning the American people about the power of the military industrial complex.

Arsenal of Hypocrisy was produced by filmmaker Randy Atkins from Gainesville, Florida.


-----------------------------------

[Generator]

19. Okay but

it's not an everyday thing!

[Emperor_Norton_II]

21. No, but it will be.

Give it thirty years or so. New Mexico's putting in plans for a civilian spaceport facility, Singapore's looking into the idea, and of course there's the government ports at Kennedy, Baikonur and Jiuquan.

Personally, I see it as a positive - people are starting to take the idea seriously.

[anarch]

29. heh...it's the "arriving" part that worries me n/t

[Emperor_Norton_II]

30. I recommend therapy.

[Warren DeMontague]

31. I'd much rather have my money going towards science and exploration

of the Universe than to the stuff it's being blown on now, like the war.