interesting comparison Howard. in some ways the revival of National
Missile Defense (Star Wars) is similar to having a great wall around
those countries who will partake in this obscenely funded military
vaporware. it could be deployed around nation-states and boundaries,
to create an outside, and an inside, to interstate and international
agreements. a giant shield, say, either through missiles, lasers, or
the big electromagnetic blanket hovering as an artificial atmosphere.
the use of patriot missile batteries, in Israel, and by deployed U.S.
and other forces, may be another regional defense force, inside what
may be the first perimeter border (NMD) or outside of its EM shielding.
aspects of anti-aircraft and other technologies may be quite an invest-
ment for the real threat at present of more airliners hitting
significant
amounts of new buildings on U.S. and other soil, in that it would be a
much easier thing, since the information is out- for anyone with a
back-
pack and an inside job to go at demo-design as a do-it-yourself kit.
the
facts about building collapses indicate that whole skyscrapers could be
taken down not by the force of unimaginable extents, such as an
airplane
crashing at a few hundred miles into a building, but specifically
placed
explosive charges on certain floors of a building, to cause progressive
and catastrophic collapses, and-or to ignite fires in vulnerable
buildings
(most all tall buildings) and disabling emergency systems, at any time
of
the day or night. with how things actually work in the world, it seems
a
greater threat that people would be able to walk into a building and do
what is needed, and having the knowledge and 'box-cutters' to do such a
planned demolition than it would be necessary for more aerial attacks.
that makes building-security, by design and default, to have to act
more
like military bases, or secure facilities, and have more surveillance
gear
and monitoring of every nook and cranny that a skyscraper then begins
to
pose equal risks, today, and continuing, as do nuclear reactors that
with-
out total control, could begin to have a meltdown and not be able to
stop
such an event, should it begin and get it of control. meaning, should
any-
one be able to replicate the conditions that brought down the WTC
today,
with whatever materials and explosives it would take to do so, probably
could, and probably much easier than is to be admitted for public
safety.
it is hard to imagine how vulnerable buildings are, but only moreso if
the
occupants remain ignorant to the fact that very little if anything is
being
done to prevent replicated circumstances from copy-cat visitors from
hell.
and, this seems to lead in one direction- the direction of more
systematic
control and ordering of every human experience in the natural,
artificial,
and built environment, so as to analyze in real-time all behaviors so
that
rational decisions can be judged, from afar, so as to judge legitimate
and
decent public behavior in all places, at all times. very
science-fiction.
a different approach would take a different philosophy, likely. as to
go
fight an offensive war that is said to be defensive, while creating
more
defensive problems than solving or justifying offensive tactics, is to
be
of great risk to civilian targets. the civilian sector is
indefensible. it
is easy to attack compared to hardened targets. and pseudo-protection,
and
the guts-and-glory vein-popping machismo to beat the living shit out
of any
and everything around, will in the end require purging local societies
of
any 'differences' between people, requiring that all be predictable in
order
to co-exist, to have consistent signs, to share the same uniforms,
behavior.
the best defense would be to learn from failures, including those in
the
realm of architecture, to be proactive through design, which is one of
the
many ways that peaceful change and transition could occur. but instead
there
is a vast popular-opinion of fictionalized polled peoples that
gloriously
believes that ignoring everything, and forging ahead, as is, as ever
was,
is going to change anything about the vulnerabilities laid bare, and
will
be off-limits to exploit when we continue as is, never believing that
what
stands blindingly apparent before us, if not recognized by the
authoritarian
structures and bureaucracies, does not exist, unless it turns into
disaster.
thus, it is curious to imagine what could be next, as the war-bubble
goes on,
the ideological-bubble continues, the educational-malaise remains,
critical
cooperation is void by writ of privatized egos and identities, and
barbarism
is flouted as a solution to despotic power fed by symbiotic
power-sharing of
cults and cultures. architecture is now defeating itself, just as we
are.
bc
Missile Defense (Star Wars) is similar to having a great wall around
those countries who will partake in this obscenely funded military
vaporware. it could be deployed around nation-states and boundaries,
to create an outside, and an inside, to interstate and international
agreements. a giant shield, say, either through missiles, lasers, or
the big electromagnetic blanket hovering as an artificial atmosphere.
the use of patriot missile batteries, in Israel, and by deployed U.S.
and other forces, may be another regional defense force, inside what
may be the first perimeter border (NMD) or outside of its EM shielding.
aspects of anti-aircraft and other technologies may be quite an invest-
ment for the real threat at present of more airliners hitting
significant
amounts of new buildings on U.S. and other soil, in that it would be a
much easier thing, since the information is out- for anyone with a
back-
pack and an inside job to go at demo-design as a do-it-yourself kit.
the
facts about building collapses indicate that whole skyscrapers could be
taken down not by the force of unimaginable extents, such as an
airplane
crashing at a few hundred miles into a building, but specifically
placed
explosive charges on certain floors of a building, to cause progressive
and catastrophic collapses, and-or to ignite fires in vulnerable
buildings
(most all tall buildings) and disabling emergency systems, at any time
of
the day or night. with how things actually work in the world, it seems
a
greater threat that people would be able to walk into a building and do
what is needed, and having the knowledge and 'box-cutters' to do such a
planned demolition than it would be necessary for more aerial attacks.
that makes building-security, by design and default, to have to act
more
like military bases, or secure facilities, and have more surveillance
gear
and monitoring of every nook and cranny that a skyscraper then begins
to
pose equal risks, today, and continuing, as do nuclear reactors that
with-
out total control, could begin to have a meltdown and not be able to
stop
such an event, should it begin and get it of control. meaning, should
any-
one be able to replicate the conditions that brought down the WTC
today,
with whatever materials and explosives it would take to do so, probably
could, and probably much easier than is to be admitted for public
safety.
it is hard to imagine how vulnerable buildings are, but only moreso if
the
occupants remain ignorant to the fact that very little if anything is
being
done to prevent replicated circumstances from copy-cat visitors from
hell.
and, this seems to lead in one direction- the direction of more
systematic
control and ordering of every human experience in the natural,
artificial,
and built environment, so as to analyze in real-time all behaviors so
that
rational decisions can be judged, from afar, so as to judge legitimate
and
decent public behavior in all places, at all times. very
science-fiction.
a different approach would take a different philosophy, likely. as to
go
fight an offensive war that is said to be defensive, while creating
more
defensive problems than solving or justifying offensive tactics, is to
be
of great risk to civilian targets. the civilian sector is
indefensible. it
is easy to attack compared to hardened targets. and pseudo-protection,
and
the guts-and-glory vein-popping machismo to beat the living shit out
of any
and everything around, will in the end require purging local societies
of
any 'differences' between people, requiring that all be predictable in
order
to co-exist, to have consistent signs, to share the same uniforms,
behavior.
the best defense would be to learn from failures, including those in
the
realm of architecture, to be proactive through design, which is one of
the
many ways that peaceful change and transition could occur. but instead
there
is a vast popular-opinion of fictionalized polled peoples that
gloriously
believes that ignoring everything, and forging ahead, as is, as ever
was,
is going to change anything about the vulnerabilities laid bare, and
will
be off-limits to exploit when we continue as is, never believing that
what
stands blindingly apparent before us, if not recognized by the
authoritarian
structures and bureaucracies, does not exist, unless it turns into
disaster.
thus, it is curious to imagine what could be next, as the war-bubble
goes on,
the ideological-bubble continues, the educational-malaise remains,
critical
cooperation is void by writ of privatized egos and identities, and
barbarism
is flouted as a solution to despotic power fed by symbiotic
power-sharing of
cults and cultures. architecture is now defeating itself, just as we
are.
bc
We have yet to face the need that towers must be armed to defend
against attacks. They are really no different than the old towers of
Europe, especially Florence, and the many castles, say, for example,
along the Rhine. All needed to be fortified by sentinals of one kind
or another. There is really no need to wait for an airforce to arrive
at the scene, if towers are fortified. In that sense we live in a
time where people have regressed to the Middle Ages, or earlier. But
who calls the shots?
.H.