If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Weasel Zippers)   House Democrat Moonbats seek to establish National Park on the Moon   (weaselzippers.us) divider line 143
    More: Silly, Eddie Bernice Johnson  
•       •       •

1268 clicks; posted to Politics » on 09 Jul 2013 at 7:21 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



143 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-07-09 06:29:34 PM
If you don't like it make your own park....with blackjack and hookers.
 
2013-07-09 06:47:36 PM
 UN - Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (5 December 1979)

Article 11
1. The moon and its natural resources are the common heritage of mankind, which finds its expression in the provisions of this Agreement, in particular in paragraph 5 of this article.

2. The moon is not subject to national appropriation by any claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means.

3. Neither the surface nor the subsurface of the moon, nor any part thereof or natural resources in place, shall become property of any State, international intergovernmental or non- governmental organization, national organization or non-governmental entity or of any natural person. The placement of personnel, space vehicles, equipment, facilities, stations and installations on or below the surface of the moon, including structures connected with its surface or subsurface, shall not create a right of ownership over the surface or the subsurface of the moon or any areas thereof. The foregoing provisions are without prejudice to the international regime referred to in paragraph 5 of this article.
 
2013-07-09 06:49:46 PM
Maybe if they offer to name it after Reagan...
 
2013-07-09 06:50:31 PM
Stupid Dems. Now let's get back to our 38th destined-to-fail attempt to repeal the ACA.
 
2013-07-09 06:56:55 PM

RexTalionis: UN - Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (5 December 1979)

Article 11
1. The moon and its natural resources are the common heritage of mankind, which finds its expression in the provisions of this Agreement, in particular in paragraph 5 of this article.

2. The moon is not subject to national appropriation by any claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means.

3. Neither the surface nor the subsurface of the moon, nor any part thereof or natural resources in place, shall become property of any State, international intergovernmental or non- governmental organization, national organization or non-governmental entity or of any natural person. The placement of personnel, space vehicles, equipment, facilities, stations and installations on or below the surface of the moon, including structures connected with its surface or subsurface, shall not create a right of ownership over the surface or the subsurface of the moon or any areas thereof. The foregoing provisions are without prejudice to the international regime referred to in paragraph 5 of this article.


So what you're saying is there's a chance?
 
2013-07-09 07:07:31 PM

RexTalionis:  UN - Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (5 December 1979)

Article 11
1. The moon and its natural resources are the common heritage of mankind, which finds its expression in the provisions of this Agreement, in particular in paragraph 5 of this article.

2. The moon is not subject to national appropriation by any claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means.

3. Neither the surface nor the subsurface of the moon, nor any part thereof or natural resources in place, shall become property of any State, international intergovernmental or non- governmental organization, national organization or non-governmental entity or of any natural person. The placement of personnel, space vehicles, equipment, facilities, stations and installations on or below the surface of the moon, including structures connected with its surface or subsurface, shall not create a right of ownership over the surface or the subsurface of the moon or any areas thereof. The foregoing provisions are without prejudice to the international regime referred to in paragraph 5 of this article.


You own what you can hold on to. Anyone who can get up there and make ago of mining it is going to be tough to dislodge.
 
2013-07-09 07:12:57 PM

EvilEgg: RexTalionis:  UN - Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (5 December 1979)

Article 11
1. The moon and its natural resources are the common heritage of mankind, which finds its expression in the provisions of this Agreement, in particular in paragraph 5 of this article.

2. The moon is not subject to national appropriation by any claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means.

3. Neither the surface nor the subsurface of the moon, nor any part thereof or natural resources in place, shall become property of any State, international intergovernmental or non- governmental organization, national organization or non-governmental entity or of any natural person. The placement of personnel, space vehicles, equipment, facilities, stations and installations on or below the surface of the moon, including structures connected with its surface or subsurface, shall not create a right of ownership over the surface or the subsurface of the moon or any areas thereof. The foregoing provisions are without prejudice to the international regime referred to in paragraph 5 of this article.

You own what you can hold on to. Anyone who can get up there and make ago of mining it is going to be tough to dislodge.


In other words, if I come to your house and I am able to physically eject you from it by force and then prevent you from returning to it, then the house is mine.
 
2013-07-09 07:23:30 PM
www.one-quest.com
 
2013-07-09 07:24:55 PM

RexTalionis: EvilEgg: RexTalionis:  UN - Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (5 December 1979)

Article 11
1. The moon and its natural resources are the common heritage of mankind, which finds its expression in the provisions of this Agreement, in particular in paragraph 5 of this article.

2. The moon is not subject to national appropriation by any claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means.

3. Neither the surface nor the subsurface of the moon, nor any part thereof or natural resources in place, shall become property of any State, international intergovernmental or non- governmental organization, national organization or non-governmental entity or of any natural person. The placement of personnel, space vehicles, equipment, facilities, stations and installations on or below the surface of the moon, including structures connected with its surface or subsurface, shall not create a right of ownership over the surface or the subsurface of the moon or any areas thereof. The foregoing provisions are without prejudice to the international regime referred to in paragraph 5 of this article.

You own what you can hold on to. Anyone who can get up there and make ago of mining it is going to be tough to dislodge.

In other words, if I come to your house and I am able to physically eject you from it by force and then prevent you from returning to it, then the house is mine.


Practically speaking? Yes.
 
2013-07-09 07:25:39 PM

RexTalionis: UN - Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (5 December 1979)


Which is all nice and dandy, but only applies to the idiots who have agreed to it.

We ain't one of 'em.
 
2013-07-09 07:26:10 PM

RexTalionis: EvilEgg: RexTalionis:  UN - Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (5 December 1979)

Article 11
1. The moon and its natural resources are the common heritage of mankind, which finds its expression in the provisions of this Agreement, in particular in paragraph 5 of this article.

2. The moon is not subject to national appropriation by any claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means.

3. Neither the surface nor the subsurface of the moon, nor any part thereof or natural resources in place, shall become property of any State, international intergovernmental or non- governmental organization, national organization or non-governmental entity or of any natural person. The placement of personnel, space vehicles, equipment, facilities, stations and installations on or below the surface of the moon, including structures connected with its surface or subsurface, shall not create a right of ownership over the surface or the subsurface of the moon or any areas thereof. The foregoing provisions are without prejudice to the international regime referred to in paragraph 5 of this article.

You own what you can hold on to. Anyone who can get up there and make ago of mining it is going to be tough to dislodge.

In other words, if I come to your house and I am able to physically eject you from it by force and then prevent you from returning to it, then the house is mine.


Correct. This is how nations work. Countries own an area by force (and with the consent of the people within) and people create contracts by which they can own property and other items. They buy protection by paying taxes to the local, state, and national entities in which they reside. Basically a government is a very large and powerful racket.
 
2013-07-09 07:26:59 PM

RexTalionis: In other words, if I come to your house and I am able to physically eject you from it by force and then prevent you from returning to it, then the house is mine.


Technically...yes.
 
2013-07-09 07:27:00 PM

RexTalionis: EvilEgg: RexTalionis:  UN - Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (5 December 1979)

Article 11
1. The moon and its natural resources are the common heritage of mankind, which finds its expression in the provisions of this Agreement, in particular in paragraph 5 of this article.

2. The moon is not subject to national appropriation by any claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means.

3. Neither the surface nor the subsurface of the moon, nor any part thereof or natural resources in place, shall become property of any State, international intergovernmental or non- governmental organization, national organization or non-governmental entity or of any natural person. The placement of personnel, space vehicles, equipment, facilities, stations and installations on or below the surface of the moon, including structures connected with its surface or subsurface, shall not create a right of ownership over the surface or the subsurface of the moon or any areas thereof. The foregoing provisions are without prejudice to the international regime referred to in paragraph 5 of this article.

You own what you can hold on to. Anyone who can get up there and make ago of mining it is going to be tough to dislodge.

In other words, if I come to your house and I am able to physically eject you from it by force and then prevent you from returning to it, then the house is mine.


Until someone bigger and stronger comes along, then for all practical purposes, yes.  It might not be right or legal, and the cops might be the bigger and stronger guys to come along, but until then, yeah, it's yours.

Ask the Native Americans how it works.  Or any other conquered peoples across the globe throughout history.
 
2013-07-09 07:28:22 PM

RexTalionis: UN - Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (5 December 1979)

Article 11
1. The moon and its natural resources are the common heritage of mankind, which finds its expression in the provisions of this Agreement, in particular in paragraph 5 of this article.

2. The moon is not subject to national appropriation by any claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means.

3. Neither the surface nor the subsurface of the moon, nor any part thereof or natural resources in place, shall become property of any State, international intergovernmental or non- governmental organization, national organization or non-governmental entity or of any natural person. The placement of personnel, space vehicles, equipment, facilities, stations and installations on or below the surface of the moon, including structures connected with its surface or subsurface, shall not create a right of ownership over the surface or the subsurface of the moon or any areas thereof. The foregoing provisions are without prejudice to the international regime referred to in paragraph 5 of this article.


When did we start listening to the U.N.?
 
2013-07-09 07:34:23 PM

RexTalionis: EvilEgg: RexTalionis:  UN - Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (5 December 1979)

Article 11
1. The moon and its natural resources are the common heritage of mankind, which finds its expression in the provisions of this Agreement, in particular in paragraph 5 of this article.

2. The moon is not subject to national appropriation by any claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means.

3. Neither the surface nor the subsurface of the moon, nor any part thereof or natural resources in place, shall become property of any State, international intergovernmental or non- governmental organization, national organization or non-governmental entity or of any natural person. The placement of personnel, space vehicles, equipment, facilities, stations and installations on or below the surface of the moon, including structures connected with its surface or subsurface, shall not create a right of ownership over the surface or the subsurface of the moon or any areas thereof. The foregoing provisions are without prejudice to the international regime referred to in paragraph 5 of this article.

You own what you can hold on to. Anyone who can get up there and make ago of mining it is going to be tough to dislodge.

In other words, if I come to your house and I am able to physically eject you from it by force and then prevent you from returning to it, then the house is mine.


Interesting argument.  Let me ask a few Native Americans what they think of it.
 
2013-07-09 07:40:47 PM
Oh, god.  The comments.
 
2013-07-09 07:44:29 PM
Meh. Big deal. I can't imagine this is going to cost all that much.
 
2013-07-09 07:45:09 PM

RexTalionis: EvilEgg:

You own what you can hold on to. Anyone who can get up there and make ago of mining it is going to be tough to dislodge.

In other words, if I come to your house and I am able to physically eject you from it by force and then prevent you from returning to it, then the house is mine.


That is correct.  Has been correct since the dawn of man.  You rely on a force more powerful than the occupier to undo it (i.e. the government, poliice, army, etc).  If you are unable to do that, however, it's no longer yours.  That seems pretty straightforward.   The rule of law only has an effect if it's enforced, physically if necessary.
 
2013-07-09 07:45:57 PM
Yeah, I'm not so sure that the stars 'n' stripes have the jurisdiction to do this, but protecting the moon landing artifacts as a historical site - even nominally - isn't really a stupid idea.
 
2013-07-09 07:47:12 PM
I wonder if there's oil up there.
 
2013-07-09 07:50:13 PM

Soup4Bonnie: Oh, god.  The comments.


BuildPrisonsOnTheMoon.jpg
 
2013-07-09 07:50:30 PM

Inchoate: Yeah, I'm not so sure that the stars 'n' stripes have the jurisdiction to do this, but protecting the moon landing artifacts as a historical site - even nominally - isn't really a stupid idea.


How many park rangers do you think the Dems authorized hiring with this bill?
 
2013-07-09 07:52:54 PM

tbeatty: How many park rangers do you think the Dems authorized hiring with this bill?


No rangers needed.  Just 16,000 IRS agents to run the Lunar Death Panels and force you to buy broccoli.
 
2013-07-09 07:53:51 PM
Wow, what a nontroversy.....
 
2013-07-09 07:54:01 PM
I guess I am a moonbat, sounds like a reasonable idea.

Can someone explain to me why this is such a dumb idea?
 
2013-07-09 07:54:34 PM
This is the kind of aggressive imperialism that Richard M. Nixon went to the Moon to prevent. You can't own the Moon! It's got no oil!

Besides, a National Park on the Moon would violate any number of statements such as ("we come in the name of all mankind") and even treaties (see above).

No, the Moonbats should establish their own National Park to protect the Moon from sub-lunar commercial interests. But let's not call it a Moonbat National Park. In anitcipation of the arrival of those commercal interests, let's call it a Moonbat Wildlife Refuge.

And let's declare the whole Moon the Luna Moonbat National Forest. That way the commercial interests will feel right at home when the arrive. Sell the logging rights now before they realize where it is. You can worry about water and minerals later.
 
2013-07-09 07:54:49 PM

Inchoate: Yeah, I'm not so sure that the stars 'n' stripes have the jurisdiction to do this, but protecting the moon landing artifacts as a historical site - even nominally - isn't really a stupid idea.


JESUS! Again with the rational thought and adult conversation. Can't you see that that sort of thing isn't welcomed here?
 
2013-07-09 07:56:51 PM

Inchoate: Yeah, I'm not so sure that the stars 'n' stripes have the jurisdiction to do this, but protecting the moon landing artifacts as a historical site - even nominally - isn't really a stupid idea.


maybe it's because I live in MA, but I always assumed adding the moon landing sites to the historical registry was a foregone and universally respected idea.

of course, these days we have an embarassingly prominent faction of "americans" who hate science and any reminders of our nerdly pursuits.
 
2013-07-09 07:58:32 PM

LittleJoeSF: I guess I am a moonbat, sounds like a reasonable idea.

Can someone explain to me why this is such a dumb idea?


Well for one thing, I don't think it's really clear that the US has any jurisdiction over the Moon whatsoever.

Was there a public declaration that the Moon is US property? COULD there be?
 
2013-07-09 07:59:26 PM
Moonbat... now there's one I haven't heard in a LONG time. Reminds me of my early days on Fark... back when the main page had the boobies tag.
 
2013-07-09 07:59:35 PM
If the bill does what the article actually states.. which is to declare the ARTIFACTS as protected, then that isn't really stupid at all and definitely isnt against any principle of the moon being commonly owned.. it is a sensible way to say to anyone going back there that this stuff is still ours so leave it alone. Might stop some commercial company who went there from grabbing the lot.

Waste of time really but not QUITE as stupid as painted.
 
2013-07-09 08:00:20 PM

whidbey: LittleJoeSF: I guess I am a moonbat, sounds like a reasonable idea.

Can someone explain to me why this is such a dumb idea?

Well for one thing, I don't think it's really clear that the US has any jurisdiction over the Moon whatsoever.

Was there a public declaration that the Moon is US property? COULD there be?


Well, we never agreed to the treaty that would prevent it... so technically... maybe.
 
2013-07-09 08:03:00 PM

whidbey: LittleJoeSF: I guess I am a moonbat, sounds like a reasonable idea.

Can someone explain to me why this is such a dumb idea?

Well for one thing, I don't think it's really clear that the US has any jurisdiction over the Moon whatsoever.

Was there a public declaration that the Moon is US property? COULD there be?


We did put a flag on it.
 
2013-07-09 08:03:59 PM
This is relevant to my interests.
 
2013-07-09 08:04:02 PM

RexTalionis: EvilEgg: RexTalionis:  UN - Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (5 December 1979)

Article 11
1. The moon and its natural resources are the common heritage of mankind, which finds its expression in the provisions of this Agreement, in particular in paragraph 5 of this article.

2. The moon is not subject to national appropriation by any claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means.

3. Neither the surface nor the subsurface of the moon, nor any part thereof or natural resources in place, shall become property of any State, international intergovernmental or non- governmental organization, national organization or non-governmental entity or of any natural person. The placement of personnel, space vehicles, equipment, facilities, stations and installations on or below the surface of the moon, including structures connected with its surface or subsurface, shall not create a right of ownership over the surface or the subsurface of the moon or any areas thereof. The foregoing provisions are without prejudice to the international regime referred to in paragraph 5 of this article.

You own what you can hold on to. Anyone who can get up there and make ago of mining it is going to be tough to dislodge.

In other words, if I come to your house and I am able to physically eject you from it by force and then prevent you from returning to it, then the house is mine.


No. The house belongs to whomever owns the deed. If you eject the owner and prevent him to come back, you have committed a number of criminal offences and you will share your bed with Bubba.
 
2013-07-09 08:07:57 PM

winterbraid: Inchoate: Yeah, I'm not so sure that the stars 'n' stripes have the jurisdiction to do this, but protecting the moon landing artifacts as a historical site - even nominally - isn't really a stupid idea.

maybe it's because I live in MA, but I always assumed adding the moon landing sites to the historical registry was a foregone and universally respected idea.


One of the provisions of the bill is to submit the the site to the UN as a World Heritage Site:

SEC. 8. WORLD HERITAGE SITE DESIGNATION.
Not later than 1 year after the establishment of the Historical Park, the Secretary, in consultation with the Administrator, shall submit the Apollo 11 lunar landing site to the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) for designation as a World Heritage Site.
 
2013-07-09 08:10:00 PM

DisposableSavior: whidbey: LittleJoeSF: I guess I am a moonbat, sounds like a reasonable idea.

Can someone explain to me why this is such a dumb idea?

Well for one thing, I don't think it's really clear that the US has any jurisdiction over the Moon whatsoever.

Was there a public declaration that the Moon is US property? COULD there be?

We did put a flag on it.


Yeah but that just says we've been there.

This in no way proves ownership.
 
2013-07-09 08:13:53 PM

whidbey: DisposableSavior: whidbey: LittleJoeSF: I guess I am a moonbat, sounds like a reasonable idea.

Can someone explain to me why this is such a dumb idea?

Well for one thing, I don't think it's really clear that the US has any jurisdiction over the Moon whatsoever.

Was there a public declaration that the Moon is US property? COULD there be?

We did put a flag on it.

Yeah but that just says we've been there.

This in no way proves ownership.


Exactly. What kind of lowlife country do you think this is? Spain?
 
2013-07-09 08:18:10 PM

Soup4Bonnie: Oh, god.  The comments.


They are full blown retarded
 
2013-07-09 08:19:45 PM
My 3 year old son put a Spongebob sticker on Ann Hathaways leg last year.  We own her!!!
 
2013-07-09 08:23:29 PM

winterbraid: Soup4Bonnie: Oh, god.  The comments.

BuildPrisonsOnTheMoon.jpg


www.e-reading.mobi
 
2013-07-09 08:24:13 PM

Type_Hard: UN
World Heritage Site:


4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-07-09 08:27:13 PM
Oh please. "The Moon." It's a ridiculous liberal myth.

It amazes me that so many allegedly "educated" people have fallen so quickly and so hard for a fraudulent fabrication of such laughable proportions. The very idea that a gigantic ball of rock happens to orbit our planet, showing itself in neat, four-week cycles -- with the same side facing us all the time -- is ludicrous. Furthermore, it is an insult to common sense and a damnable affront to intellectual honesty and integrity. That people actually believe it is evidence that the liberals have wrested the last vestiges of control of our public school system from decent, God-fearing Americans (as if any further evidence was needed! "Daddy's Roommate?" God Almighty!)

Documentaries such as Enemy of the State have accurately portrayed the elaborate, byzantine network of surveillance satellites that the liberals have sent into space to spy on law-abiding Americans. Equipped with technology developed by Handgun Control, Inc., these satellites have the ability to detect firearms from hundreds of kilometers up. That's right, neighbors .. the next time you're out in the backyard exercising your Second Amendment rights, the liberals will see it! These satellites are sensitive enough to tell the difference between a Colt .45 and a .38 Special! And when they detect you with a firearm, their computers cross-reference the address to figure out your name, and then an enormous database housed at Berkeley is updated with information about you.

Of course, this all works fine during the day, but what about at night? Even the liberals can't control the rotation of the Earth to prevent nightfall from setting in (only Joshua was able to ask for that particular favor!) That's where the "moon" comes in. Powered by nuclear reactors, the "moon" is nothing more than an enormous balloon, emitting trillions of candlepower of gun-revealing light. Piloted by key members of the liberal community, the "moon" is strategically moved across the country, pointing out those who dare to make use of their God-given rights at night!

Yes, I know this probably sounds paranoid and preposterous, but consider this. Despite what the revisionist historians tell you, there is no mention of the "moon" anywhere in literature or historical documents -- anywhere -- before 1950. That is when it was initially launched. When President Josef Kennedy, at the State of the Union address, proclaimed "We choose to go to the moon", he may as well have said "We choose to go to the weather balloon." The subsequent faking of a "moon" landing on national TV was the first step in a long history of the erosion of our constitutional rights by leftists in this country. No longer can we hide from our government when the sun goes down.
 
2013-07-09 08:28:35 PM
I'm... not seeing a problem with this at all. This is seeing a potential problem that can come up (You think there won't be people who want to do a full moon tourist bit, once SSTOs become more developed?), and addressing it ahead of time in a way that would force US Companys to comply and work within the boundaries of known international laws and treaties.

I'm... not certain that this *is* moonbatty.
 
2013-07-09 08:28:43 PM

brantgoose: You can worry about water and minerals later.


I would not be so casual about water rights.  There is water on the moon, but it is so scarce that, should anyone manage to go there again, access to it will be one of the major logistical concerns.  Some legal decision made flippantly in the early 21st century could be a real pain in the ass to people later.
 
2013-07-09 08:32:57 PM

So democrats want to keep hypothetical future private moon landings from farking up the Apollo landing sites?


THIS IS AN OUTRAGE!!
 
2013-07-09 08:34:39 PM

gaspode: Might stop some commercial company who went there from grabbing the lot.


Think of the artifacts recovered from the Titanic.  Given that the Soviets were able to land an autonomous probe on the moon that returned with a core sample a few days after Apollo 11, it should be feasible in the 21st century for a private company to retrieve artifacts from the Apollo landing sites.  They may need the buyers to pay in advance, though.
 
2013-07-09 08:36:50 PM
Well, I think it's a great idea, because you know damn well Bezos (Blue Origin) is going to try to sell the LM and the rocks under her on Amazon if that asswipe Musk doesn't ebay them first.
 
2013-07-09 08:38:45 PM
WHAT did Obama know about the moon.

WHEN did he know it.

WHY were there no Marines on the moon when the Mooninites attacked.
 
2013-07-09 08:38:59 PM
You gonna get scrootched...

1.bp.blogspot.com
 
Displayed 50 of 143 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report