NASA's foremost mission? Improve relations with Muslims.

[GrouchoMarxist]

i can see the headlines on al jazeera now

"Great Satan fakes life on other planets to draw Muslims away from Allah"

Got a link?

 

[Pardalis]

Got a link?

Isn't it obvious that defaultdotxbe meant it as a joke?

 

[applecorped]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/12/white-house-muslim-outreach-task-nasa/

"
White [COLOR=blue ! important][COLOR=blue ! important]House[/COLOR][/COLOR]
Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said Monday that NASA Administrator Charles Bolden must have misspoken when he told Al Jazeera last month that one of his top priorities is to reach out to Muslim countries.
"That was not his task and that's not the task of NASA," Gibbs said.
Bolden, though, said last month in the interview that it was President [COLOR=blue ! important][COLOR=blue ! important]Obama[/COLOR][/COLOR] who gave him that task. He made a similar claim in February. "


Riiiight.

 

[theprestige]

"That was not his task and that's not the task of NASA," Gibbs said.

You know what would be awsome? If, instead of saying what the White House thinks the task of NASA isn't, the White House Press Secretary told us what the White House thinks the task of NASA actually is.

And before you argue that this shouldn't be necessary, on account of how everybody already knows what the task of NASA is, let me just point out that apparently not even the head of NASA actually knows what the White House thinks the task of NASA is.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

The Fox version of this story, which it seems rings true for the right wingers in the thread is just so different from how I view the comments, it's hard to comprehend.

"When I became the NASA administrator -- or before I became the NASA administrator -- he charged me with three things. One was he wanted me to help re-inspire children to want to get into science and math, he wanted me to expand our international relationships, and third, and perhaps foremost, he wanted me to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science ... and math and engineering," Bolden said in the interview.

We are at war with Islamic fundies who insist on destroying modernity. You have a culture of impotent men who lash out (or are manipulated to) against the US to whom the impotent men feel abused by.

How do you address this impotent inadequate ignorant mass of men who need to feel powerful by waving guns, playing warrior and murdering people? You encourage the modern thinking, intelligent men among them to become leaders in science thus becoming better role models than the bearded wife abusing jihadists waving their guns.


I totally get this. It's farsighted. It demonstrates a more well thought out approach to the whole problem than the simple minded, just blow them up with our superior fire power, attitude of the right wingers.

 

[Ziggurat]

How do you address this impotent inadequate ignorant mass of men who need to feel powerful by waving guns, playing warrior and murdering people? You encourage the modern thinking, intelligent men among them to become leaders in science thus becoming better role models than the bearded wife abusing jihadists waving their guns.

You seem to be under the impression that if you're "modern thinking" and "intelligent" and don't beat your wife, then you're not part of the problem. Well, I hate to have to tell you this, but that's simply not true. Your "impotent inadequate ignorant mass of men" are just cannon fodder. The brains behind jihad are indeed intelligent and educated, and often "modern thinking" too. The Islamists are quite capable of repurposing scientific ability.

I totally get this. It's farsighted. It demonstrates a more well thought out approach to the whole problem than the simple minded, just blow them up with our superior fire power, attitude of the right wingers.

No it's not. It's myopic and naive. If you want to pursue "engagement", that's fine. But NASA doesn't have the tools, the experience, the cultural understanding, the personnel, or the ability to do that in any meaningful way. That's not their job. It's like asking Phys. Ed. teachers to try to teach calculus: it doesn't matter how noble you think the goal is, it's a mismatch in mission and capability.

The most generous reading I can give of that interview is that he's not telling the truth, that it's a convenient fiction aimed at a particular audience and which was never intended for domestic consumption.

 

[Darth Rotor]

The idea of helping the Muslim world enter the 21st century

as fertilizer

is a good one.

I quite agree.

 

[GrouchoMarxist]

The Fox version of this story, which it seems rings true for the right wingers in the thread is just so different from how I view the comments, it's hard to comprehend. We are at war with Islamic fundies who insist on destroying modernity. You have a culture of impotent men who lash out (or are manipulated to) against the US to whom the impotent men feel abused by.

How do you address this impotent inadequate ignorant mass of men who need to feel powerful by waving guns, playing warrior and murdering people? You encourage the modern thinking, intelligent men among them to become leaders in science thus becoming better role models than the bearded wife abusing jihadists waving their guns.


I totally get this. It's farsighted. It demonstrates a more well thought out approach to the whole problem than the simple minded, just blow them up with our superior fire power, attitude of the right wingers.

Destroyers of modernity? Impotent? Ignorant? Inadequate? Abusers of bearded wives? Gun waving murderers?
ouch.

 

[WildCat]

How do you address this impotent inadequate ignorant mass of men who need to feel powerful by waving guns, playing warrior and murdering people? You encourage the modern thinking, intelligent men among them to become leaders in science thus becoming better role models than the bearded wife abusing jihadists waving their guns.

OBL, KSM, Ramzi Yousef... all highly educated men, all terrorists.

The failed Times Square bomber, also highly educated. As were most of the 9/11 hijackers.

Not a lot of terrorists fit your meme of ignorant caveman.

 

[Jekyll's Guest]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/05/nasa-chief-frontier-better-relations-muslims/

"NASA Administrator Charles Bolden said in a recent interview that his "foremost" mission as the head of America's space exploration agency is to improve relations with the Muslim world."

He just means they're going to work on better engines for Predator drones.

 

[Jekyll's Guest]

NASA's mission is very simple. It is to sit in moth balls, and be ready in case the MTV satellite needs repaired.

Eventually the Chinese will get in to Space in a big way, and suddenly the government will be pouring trillions in to NASA, and being an astronaut will be cool again.

Space doesn't make money, so it's only a priority when there is d*&% waving or future mineral/territorial rights at stake.

We just need the next Sputnik to scare the government in to a spending frenzy.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

You seem to be under the impression that if you're "modern thinking" and "intelligent" and don't beat your wife, ....

Oh hell no. That would be a false extrapolation of what I said. We are talking large collective thought here, not simply individual men who either can't control their anger, or, bully people (including women) out of the same feelings of impotence as some of these terrorists and suicide bombers.

No it's not. It's myopic and naive. If you want to pursue "engagement", that's fine. But NASA doesn't have the tools, the experience, the cultural understanding, the personnel, or the ability to do that in any meaningful way. That's not their job. It's like asking Phys. Ed. teachers to try to teach calculus: it doesn't matter how noble you think the goal is, it's a mismatch in mission and capability.

The most generous reading I can give of that interview is that he's not telling the truth, that it's a convenient fiction aimed at a particular audience and which was never intended for domestic consumption.

You're missing the bigger picture here. And I didn't take from that interview the same meaning from the comments as you seem to be seeing.

Tell me which Arab or Persian countries contribute to the space program? Russia, Japan, France, India all contribute. Why shouldn't NASA seek to include Muslim or Arab/Persian countries that may have populations which would benefit psychologically from being involved?

When India tested their nuclear weapon, a friend of mine from India expressed pride in her country's accomplishment. It would be much better to have had pride in a space program than a nuclear weapon. I think we in the West may have a hard time understanding how these accomplishments feel to cultures that have yet to experience such accomplishments. National/ethnic pride is not just about the World Cup, you know.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

OBL, KSM, Ramzi Yousef... all highly educated men, all terrorists.

The failed Times Square bomber, also highly educated. As were most of the 9/11 hijackers.

Not a lot of terrorists fit your meme of ignorant caveman.

Who says education means you aren't an impotent emasculated male?

It's not the 'caveman' aspect I'm talking about at all here. It's the testosterone with no place to go. It's the low self esteem that these guys try to fix by playing warrior in the terrorist training camp.

 

[BeAChooser]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100712/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_nasa_muslims_1 "White House denies NASA remark on Muslim outreach"

Only took them how many days?

 

[Ziggurat]

Oh hell no. That would be a false extrapolation of what I said. We are talking large collective thought here

And what makes you think that plucking a few elites from the upper class to form token participants in NASA missions will have any effect on the "larger collective thought"?

And I didn't take from that interview the same meaning from the comments as you seem to be seeing.

Apparently you didn't take the same meaning as Robert Gibbs, either.

Tell me which Arab or Persian countries contribute to the space program?

Well Saudi Arabia has, but their only real contribution was money (they bought a satellite from France and paid for it to be launched with the shuttle, and sent one of their princes along for the ride as an astronaut). This was already mentioned in this thread.

Russia, Japan, France, India all contribute.

Russia, Japan, France, and India all have the technical resources and expertise to contribute more than just money. Can the same be said about any muslim nation? It does not appear so.

Why shouldn't NASA seek to include Muslim or Arab/Persian countries that may have populations which would benefit psychologically from being involved?

I don't mind if they do. But it sure as hell shouldn't be a priority.

When India tested their nuclear weapon, a friend of mine from India expressed pride in her country's accomplishment. It would be much better to have had pride in a space program than a nuclear weapon.

Yes, it would be. But you're a fool if you think NASA actually has the capability to make that change in mentality.

I think we in the West may have a hard time understanding how these accomplishments feel to cultures that have yet to experience such accomplishments. National/ethnic pride is not just about the World Cup, you know.

And what, exactly, do you think they're going to take pride in? Letting us show them our high-tech toys like they're school kids on a field trip? Having been included as token representatives whose only real contribution is money? That's likely to backfire, as the populace feels (with some justification) that their own governments are stealing money from their own poor to give to us.

Pride comes from actual accomplishments. The sad reality is that muslim nations are not in a position to accomplish much of anything in regards to space exploration.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

And what makes you think that plucking a few elites from the upper class to form token participants in NASA missions will have any effect on the "larger collective thought"?

Well that's not how I view the effort or the result. (The latest White House comments not withstanding.)

Apparently you didn't take the same meaning as Robert Gibbs, either.

I want to investigate further before commenting on Gibb's politically motivated reply

Well Saudi Arabia has, but their only real contribution was money (they bought a satellite from France and paid for it to be launched with the shuttle, and sent one of their princes along for the ride as an astronaut). This was already mentioned in this thread.

Russia, Japan, France, and India all have the technical resources and expertise to contribute more than just money. Can the same be said about any muslim nation? It does not appear so.

It seems pretty simplistic to make such a broad statement.

I don't mind if they do. But it sure as hell shouldn't be a priority.

Could be an out of context nit pick you are making. And I don't attribute the same meaning to the statement that you are assuming.

Yes, it would be. But you're a fool if you think NASA actually has the capability to make that change in mentality.



And what, exactly, do you think they're going to take pride in? Letting us show them our high-tech toys like they're school kids on a field trip? Having been included as token representatives whose only real contribution is money? That's likely to backfire, as the populace feels (with some justification) that their own governments are stealing money from their own poor to give to us.

Pride comes from actual accomplishments. The sad reality is that muslim nations are not in a position to accomplish much of anything in regards to space exploration.

It seems to me that this whole reaction to a single comment really stretches the imagination. It's like the typical, less than critically thinking, knee jerk reaction to slogans and other one liners that unfortunately the US public is so easily persuaded by, and the news media so readily focuses on.

 

[applecorped]

It's like the typical, less than critically thinking, knee jerk reaction to slogans and other one liners that unfortunately the US public is so easily persuaded by, and the news media so readily focuses on.

And people so readily post about.

 

[Ziggurat]

I want to investigate further before commenting on Gibb's politically motivated reply

Investigate what? What is there to investigate which isn't already under discussion?

It seems pretty simplistic to make such a broad statement.

I note you aren't willing to claim that it's inaccurate. So why is the simplicity of this statement relevant?

Could be an out of context nit pick you are making.

There's nothing out of context here. That's a weak excuse, revealed as such because you can't provide the context which would actually change its meaning. Oh, you might be able to construct a hypothetical one, but you can't find it from the actual interview.

And I don't attribute the same meaning to the statement that you are assuming.

You keep saying that, and it keeps being irrelevant. I don't care what meaning you attribute to the statement, I care about what the statement actually meant. And you seek to avoid that at every turn.

It seems to me that this whole reaction to a single comment really stretches the imagination. It's like the typical, less than critically thinking, knee jerk reaction to slogans and other one liners that unfortunately the US public is so easily persuaded by, and the news media so readily focuses on.

In fact, you appear to have abandoned the defense of his comments completely here, and are now only attacking critics of his comments.

You would have done much better to claim that the issue is unimportant and that he was just playing politics to Al Jazeera's audience.

 

[DC]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100712/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_nasa_muslims_1 "White House denies NASA remark on Muslim outreach"

Only took them how many days?

Comrade Obama was busy taking over your economy.

 

[Chris L]

You would have done much better to claim that the issue is unimportant and that he was just playing politics to Al Jazeera's audience.

Which may indeed have been what he was doing. Unfortunately, Bolden doesn't understand that in an interconnected world like ours, what you say to audience A is actually heard by everyone else too. In using the phrasing he used, he really made it seem like this (the outreach) was one of the most important goals of his agency. That made it easier for people who don't like Obama or his space policy, to ridicule the whole policy. So the more practical aspects of the policy get torpedoed because Bolden was trying to kiss up to our "friends" in the Middle East. That is why the WH is trying to run way from clarify Bolden's statements.