Quick hide the tanks quote: "And an international band of amateur astronomers has determined to find, track and webcast the location of all the members of this orbital fleet for anyone who cares to look--including such less than friendly sorts as Saddam Hussein and Kim Jong-il." Ted said "The reality is that Al Qaeda has little or nothing to gain from knowing the precise orbits of spy satellites." Maybe you could go to Afghanistan, start a training camp and wave at all the Keyhole sats?.Then duck when the smart bomb hits you. Graham Original Message ----- From: "Ted Molczan" <molczan@rogers.com> To: "SeeSat-L" <SeeSat-L@satobs.org> Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2004 11:51 PM Subject: RE: N Korea needs us! > Graham wrote: > > > What has this N Korea nonsense got to do with this dissussion?, > > as it this data would be used by North Korea!,this > > is wildly throwing reality out the window.Arm chair > > sluths get real!.The only people using this data > > for destructive purposes would be Al Qaeda > > sympathizers.Stick to the facts and reality > > The reality is that Al Qaeda has little or nothing to gain from knowing the > precise orbits of spy satellites. > > Soon after the shock of the 9-11 attacks, came the further shock that the > perpetrators had lived and trained to fly aircraft in such lovely communities as > Boca Raton, Deerfield Beach and Delray Beach, all located in South Florida, > U.S.A. They had hidden in plain sight, coincidentally, in places which one can > be certain were not tasked for U.S. spysat imaging. > > Even if they had been training in countries routinely tasked for imaging, > terrorists operate on such a small scale that they are nearly impossible to > distinguish from the communities in which they reside. > > Imaging reconnaissance satellites are products of the cold war, designed to > image missiles, aircraft, naval vessels, tanks, and their supporting military > bases and industrial infrastructure (e.g. factories, railways, sea ports). Most > of these facilities are large and fixed in location, often taking years to > construct - all of which make them ideal imaging targets. Despite Russia's > robust capability to track the imagers, which informed their deception and > denial programs, it could not hide everything it did, all of the time. > > In contrast, terrorists hide out in rural caves and urban safe houses, drive > around in cars and SUVs, and the closest thing they have to military bases are > little more than boot camps. They do not remain in one place very long. All of > this makes them poor targets for imaging. > > Consider the 9-11 perpetrators. As far as is known, their principle activities > consisted of surveilling their targets (by visiting them, much as a tourist > would), taking flying lessons, personal combat training, and meeting in hotel > rooms in the U.S. and abroad. None of this would have stood out meaningfully in > a satellite image. > > Much more useful against terrorists are the SIGINT (signals intelligence) > satellites, which can intercept communications transmitted via radio. The > satellites in question operate in very high orbits, of the geosynchronous and > Molniya class. Knowing the precise orbits of SIGINT sats is of zero use to > terrorists because there is virtually no place on Earth that is not under the > constant surveillance of one or more such satellites. The only certain way for > the terrorists to evade detection by such satellites is to avoid modes of > communication which involve radio transmissions, which they did not learn from > SeeSat-L. > > > > Do as others have done and tighten access > > to data.Turning security into a joke isn't only idiotic, > > it's dangerous. > > The roughly dozen or so folks who contribute most of the spy sat observations > are mostly mature, well-educated, thoughtful people, from around the world, > including the U.S.A. Our professions include law, science, applied sciences, and > business. We range in age from 51 to 78 years (median 63 years). I cannot recall > the last time any of us joked about security on SeeSat-L. Nor do we joke about > it in private. > > I do not pretend to speak for the others, but as I see it, what would be truly > idiotic, and dangerous to democracy, would be to engage in meaningless > self-censorship, either in the mistaken belief that it would do any good, or out > of concern for our image. > > Ted Molczan > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Subscribe/Unsubscribe info, Frequently Asked Questions, SeeSat-L archive: > http://www.satobs.org/seesat/seesatindex.html > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Subscribe/Unsubscribe info, Frequently Asked Questions, SeeSat-L archive: http://www.satobs.org/seesat/seesatindex.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Aug 10 2004 - 10:32:29 EDT