>Cassini Launch Faces Lawsuit, Protests
>
>Posted to the web: Wed Oct 8 18:51:19 EDT 1997
>GAINSVILLE, Florida, October 8, 1997 (ENS) - The controversial
>plutonium-powered Cassini satellite scheduled for launch from Cape
>Canaveral on October 13 is now facing a legal challenge as well as
activist
>protests. The Florida Coalition For Peace & Justice and the Hawaii
County
>Green Party jointly filed a lawsuit yesterday in Federal District Court
in
>Honolulu, Hawaii seeking an injunction to block the launch.
[snip}
The pro-Cassini NATIONAL SPACE SOCIETY (Western Spaceport Chapter) gets
the prize for the most timely updates on the legal front, when, on Sat,
11 Oct 1997, they wrote:
<excerpt>>>>>
>On Tuesday, October 7, the Hawai'i County Green Party and the Florida
>Coalition for Peace and Justice filed suit in Honolulu federal court in
an
>effort to stop NASA from launching the Cassini mission. Due to the
impending
>launch date of Monday, October 13 at 1:55 a.m. (Pacific), a second
action was
>filed requesting the court to grant a temporary restraining order
delaying
>the launch and providing more time for the litigation. [snip]
>
>The presiding judge has determined that the space agency has taken the
>necessary measures and precautions to ensure the safety of the launch,
and
>have proven the benefits of the mission outweigh the perceived risks.
> Similar measures have been initiated by the Florida Coalition -- and
>rejected by the Federal Court System -- during the Galileo mission of
1989
>and the Ulysses mission of 1990.
</excerpt><<<<<<<<
It wasn't until several hours later that word was received from the
anti-Cassini side.
>>>>
> Attorney Lanny Sinkin said 72 pounds of radioactive plutonium on
board
> the probe pose a potential threat to the environment and the public's
> safety.
>
> Since the 1960's, the United States has launched 24 devices carrying
> nuclear material into space. Three of these met with accidents.
That's
> an accident rate of 12.5%! Anti nuclear activists have been
especially
> vocal about the Cassini project, which will use more plutonium for
the
> seven-year journey through the solar system than any previous
mission.
>
[snip]
> Sinkin is seeking a temporary restraining order from U.S. District
Judge
> David Ezra to stop the launch at Cape Canaveral, Fla. The blastoff is
> scheduled for 10 55 p.m. Sunday, Hawaii time.
>
> U.S. District Judge David Ezra scheduled a hearing on the request for
9
> a.m. Friday.
> Judge Ezra denied our motion.
>>>>
<<<<<<<<
The anti-Cassini crowd might take a few pointers from the SPACE SOCIETY
folks -- many of whom claim to be against weapons and the militarization
of space -- they write well, type well, and, most importantly perhaps,
they're prompt, informative, and often factually correct.
>>>>
VANDENBERG AFB, CA (October 11 [8:40 p.m.]) -- After holding the count at
T-6
minutes for nearly an hour past it's targeted liftoff time, the launch of
a
Lockheed Martin Titan IV from Space Launch Complex-4 East (SLC-4E) was
called
off this evening by launch officials.
The mission to launch a classified satellite for the National
Reconnaissance
Office was scrubbed due to unacceptable upper atmospheric winds.
No decision to reschedule has been made at the present time. It is
thought
it will be delayed until after Monday morning's pre-dawn launch of the
Cassini mission aboard a Titan IV-B from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station
in
Florida. That launch is set for 1:55 a.m. (Pacific).
<<<<<<<<
On the other hand, pro-Cassini idealogues seem to pride themselves on
their practical and/ or "scientific" skepticism. Some like to chide the
"anti-nuclear" and "environmental" idealogues about their "paranoid"
fears of questionable government motives fueling the space program.
Thus, there might be yet some reason to suspect that techno-progressives
aren't entirely perfect either. The space cadets deny, or at least don't
admit to, desires of militarizing space, yet their skepticism runs out
when it comes to wondering about the peaceful desires behind a "mission
to launch a classified satellite for the National Reconnaissance
Office."
Does this indicate inconsistant logic, or is it just a case of being
under(hypo)critical?
Thomas