U.S. Security Clearances

*

eye95 said:

One who truly honors the confidences bestowed upon him as a result of the level of trust his clearance grants him does not announce, "I know something you don't know."

Click to expand...

Well this was your quote, this was what you said. This was the third post on this thread. This was what you directed at? And if it isn't any clearer than that I don't know what is.

1245A Defender said:

Way too prove the point of the eye95 quote!
did you even read it? did you understand it?

ive read your posts, im not impressed.
but i dont have to brag about what secrets i might know,

those that say, dont know.
those that know, dont say.

Click to expand...

MCX I read his post, and I've read yours also,,and truth be known, you don't impress me either. Did I brag about knowing secrets?I suppose that by saying I know something you don't know could be saying that yes,,but hell I know the cost of corn today, do you? In truth my rant was strictly at one that always seems to go after a friend, yours was just to berate someone you have NO idea what I've been through or done. Which in my opinion is just as bad if not worse than my statements. Having said that, I'll leave you to your pitiful existance of only finding fault in someone who comes to the defense of a friend. Have a great day.

Uncharacteristically, I'll offer my opinion. My fellow Coloradan, Since, is an online friend, as well. I wouldn't take kindly to anyone attacking him. Eye and I (I and Eye, Eye and Eye, I and I...) often disagree on cops, but generally in a cordial manner, and give each other the respect of considering each other's contrary opinion before rebutting it. I don't think Eye was attacking Since. I think Since was having a little fun and Eye took it too seriously, but did not make it personal or carry on. Just my 2C, but I hate to see people I like and respect get into ******* contests with each other--and frankly there are quite a few on this thread. That's for me and the Administrators...This thread has a lot of good people responding. Let's leave it at that.

Anybody seen any good movies lately? :lol:

Yes, but I can't tell you where, when, or what if any snacks were involved.

no prob kansas, rant all you want, it's a free and democratic society, me i think i'll be innocent of instigation, and retreat- knock you off my friends list, and put you on the ignore list. see ya!

dumped my posted comments too, i guess i aint welcome in this lounge.

McX said:

no prob kansas, rant all you want, it's a free and democratic society, me i think i'll be innocent of instigation, and retreat- knock you off my friends list, and put you on the ignore list. see ya!

dumped my posted comments too, i guess i aint welcome in this lounge.

Click to expand...

I welcome your comments, but then, I've been thrown out of better lounges than this...

I don't know what this thread is supposed to be about but I always wonder how the same people that claim that our government is so sloppy and incompentent about everything is able to keep the secret of the aliens landing at Roswell for almost 70 years now. But this is only an example of the thousand of secrets held by our government that absolutely no one will talk about other than those who wind up not even being born whet they were supposedly eyewitnesses to the event. We know that the government took down the Twin Towers on 9/11 and blew up the levees in New Orleans just to mention a couple of things. But those are recent so it will take some time before the truth comes out.

One secret that I know the government is hiding is the first words spoken on the moon. When Neil Armstrong placed his foot on the Moon Buzz Aldrin asked him "Are you down yet"? He answered, "Yeah, ain't that something". Only after that did he recite his little speech that had been written for him. NASA went into immediate cover up mode and even got Uncle Wlater Chronkite to change his statements after a commercial break. Go to NASA's site and check to transcription logs of the "recorded" conversation that night and you will find "radio interference" and a time gap just before Neil's little speech. Since he screwed up the speech people have spent more time arguing about that than what he really said, like any of it means anything. Russian astronauts carried a pistol with them into space in case they ran into any Aliens, but I think the Americans were unarmed. :lol:

Actually, the first words from the Moon were something along the lines of, "Houston, Tranquility Base here. The Eagle has landed."

Also, on the Russian's approach v. the American: NASA spent millions developing an ink pen that would write in zero G. If you have ever tried to write upside-down, you know that gravity is critical to the operation of the typical ink pen. Anyway, NASA spent millions. The Russians used a 5-cent pencil.

So the reds went armed. smart choice in my opinion, wonder if they took my Disruptor, or a variant of it with. how would a gun fire in no atmosphere. plus, for Americans, we could debate who has jurisdiction over the moon, and what permit would be required to carry. Open Carry no permit required on the moon? Castle Doctrine apply there? bet this has never been debated on here ever.

McX said:

So the reds went armed. smart choice in my opinion, wonder if they took my Disruptor, or a variant of it with. how would a gun fire in no atmosphere. plus, for Americans, we could debate who has jurisdiction over the moon, and what permit would be required to carry. Open Carry no permit required on the moon? Castle Doctrine apply there? bet this has never been debated on here ever.

Click to expand...

Gunpowder contains its on oxidizer. No atmosphere is necessary.

i guess it's just you and me eye. gunpowder works in a vacuum, wow. so onto the rest; jurisdiction over the moon i bet would be tied to who's crap has landed where. rovers and such. i suppose that each nation that put something on the moon would claim the immediate vicinity as a sovereign territory. We'd get the largest chunk as we got the most stuff up there, walked around and planted the flag and all. If we went armed i'd say Castle Doctrine; stand and defend would apply. aint no where to retreat to, your as far out as it gets. as far as divvying up ground, i bet it would patchwork out like ant-artica, sorta. permits would be argued over for years, i guess the state they launch from would qualify in my book, but if the moon and the project is federal, i wonder what laws would apply. OC would be a no-no since Fla. doesnt allow it, past or present. Unloaded and encased seems kinda lame. I wonder if the recoil would launch an astronaut if he did fire a gun in zero-G's. your thoughts?

McX said:

i guess it's just you and me eye. gunpowder works in a vacuum, wow. so onto the rest; jurisdiction over the moon i bet would be tied to who's crap has landed where. rovers and such. i suppose that each nation that put something on the moon would claim the immediate vicinity as a sovereign territory. We'd get the largest chunk as we got the most stuff up there, walked around and planted the flag and all. If we went armed i'd say Castle Doctrine; stand and defend would apply. aint no where to retreat to, your as far out as it gets. as far as divvying up ground, i bet it would patchwork out like ant-artica, sorta. permits would be argued over for years, i guess the state they launch from would qualify in my book, but if the moon and the project is federal, i wonder what laws would apply. OC would be a no-no since Fla. doesnt allow it, past or present. Unloaded and encased seems kinda lame. I wonder if the recoil would launch an astronaut if he did fire a gun in zero-G's. your thoughts?

Click to expand...

The Moon became technically the property of the US when we landed there repeatedly and planted flags each time. Although, I am sure that we'd play nice and share. The Chinese are trying to go to the Moon. When they get there, if we haven't returned, they will claim it as their own, asserting that we have abandoned our claim. They don't strike me as a nation that will share.

We should go back, but President Obama has pretty much put the kibosh on NASA. The only way we'll be going into space in the future is by hitching rides. Very expensive rides.

No Constitutional authority to be in space except for national security or possibly other military reasons.

Well its kinda related. but I use to work for a fabrication shop. For 4 months we had some guys come down (our foremans said all we needed to know is they worked for aerospace company) and had us make 1-4 parts. they would come in early morning give each of us a set of plans and we were to make the parts and then upon completion mark the part and then shred the prints. Was very interesting. we all looked at each others parts(though we were told not too) and none of us could figure out what they were trying to build or have us make.

If any of you have ever had any shop experience I am sure that you can agree that it is frustrating as hell to try to make sure your part is being made right if you dont know what its for. If we had any questions we were told to just make what we thought it said and move on. Was kinda cool, but kinda creepy. maybe we made the next missle, or maybe we made some silly park artwork who knows!

eye95 said:

Gunpowder contains its on oxidizer. No atmosphere is necessary.

Click to expand...

In highschool I took this silly little test that I guess they give to potential NASA astronauts(well when the US bothered with NASA). on it was .38 revolver. Nobody could figure out what it was for other then offing yourself should something happen. APparently nasa said firing a .38 would porject enough force to fly you over (I cant remember exactly, so I will fudge it) 1/2 mile ravine. Funny how silly little things like that stick with ya. just thought I would share that since this topic doesnt really have a topic... so I cant be off topic... atleast I dont think I can.

rodbender said:

No Constitutional authority to be in space except for national security or possibly other military reasons.

Click to expand...

There was no constitutional authority for the Louisiana Purchase, neither.

As to jurisdiction for gun laws and permits on the moon, since the moon is not a state, and the federalism relationship between the states and fedgov is not an issue, the fedgov would gleefully pass all sorts of laws, probably using territorial laws from the 1800s as a template. They don't bother with the constitution anymore; being on the moon wouldn't pause them one bit.

An article about the Russians carrying guns in space and calling for a ban on guns in space.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23131359/ns/technology_and_science-space/

many good points to consider. it is unfortunate that we dont fund our space program as needed, as we are rapidly using our planet up as a whole, and the only real guarentee of our survival as a species is to move out into space, and colonize. we as a nation have done astounding things, putting a man on the moon, a space station in orbit. but now we have decayed down to the k-mart mentality; our space fleet is too old to fly anymore, we hitch rides to the space station on other countries equipment. we explore nothing anymore, at least not in the manned flight sense. i imagine someday well into the future who owns the moon will be argued at length, once enough of us, nations wise, have gotten there. When we first went to the moon, it could be argued that the astronauts there existed in a lawless zone, with no laws to direct them, and no one there to enforce them. even the laws of gravity there are limited. but as colonization in the future begins to occur, where ever we go, where ever we settle we will bring our laws with, from our country of origin, and we should also bring our weapons with for a variety of reasons; defense from unknown or unanticipated life forms, defense from each other, as at that point crime will not be limited to just our planet, and where the best of us go, the worst of us follow.