NASA's foremost mission? Improve relations with Muslims.

[Chris L]

ok SG, I think we got it. You don't like Fox News, thank you. Can we now return to you trying to defend statements that the WH has already walked away from?

 

[GrouchoMarxist]

Your comments are like many of the right wingers. If one is critical of anything then one must be a commie who hates America. It's baloney[sandwiches].


Faux News makes no effort to report the news honestly. [snipped absurdities]

What are you trying to say?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

About the Media grinding their credibility to shreds just to get Obama elected, here is some more proof --....

I don't see a lot of supporting evidence in that rant. The guy makes some claims, but not much to support them.

In OutFoxed, there were a number of pieces of specific evidence presented to support the fact Faux was planning its news programming to include repeatedly repeating the day's political talking points everywhere one could get away with it, often when the talking point was an obvious non sequitur.

Faux has a newly manufactured lie this week. They've gotten a woman fired using an edited clip of a speech she gave in the mid 80s suggesting she used her government job to get even with white people. Turns out, one she didn't have a government job at the time, she was a volunteer, and two, her recorded talk was about how she felt about the white couple that asked for help (I think I heard her father was murdered by the KKK), but that she helped them anyway after realizing prejudice was wrong. The white couple in question have been in the news supporting the woman, saying she saved their farm and they've been friends ever since.

This time the mainstream news media didn't take so long to investigate the real story.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

ok SG, I think we got it. You don't like Fox News, thank you. Can we now return to you trying to defend statements that the WH has already walked away from?

Using the name, Faux News is appropriate. I have not used it to side track the discussion.

 

[Pardalis]

Why don't you just say "False News"?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Why don't you just say "False News"?

Since this is bordering on a side track, I've started a new thread about the most recent attempt by Faux News to manufacture political outrage:

Manufacturing racist charges to cover up racism.

I used the name, Fox news, to keep the thread from getting sidetracked on minor issues.

 

[Chris L]

SG, here is the situation. A statement was made that more than a few people think is both easily ridiculed and culturally arrogant. This statement was indeed used by opponents of Obama's space policy (and I am not one of those) to ridicule said policy. The WH has since backed away from the statement. The president's allies in congress have indeed compromised on the space policy. That adds up to the statement (to be generous) as not being helpful. Talking about how much Sean Hannity is a poopy head (and he is) will not change that.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

SG, here is the situation. A statement was made that more than a few people think is both easily ridiculed and culturally arrogant. This statement was indeed used by opponents of Obama's space policy (and I am not one of those) to ridicule said policy. The WH has since backed away from the statement. The president's allies in congress have indeed compromised on the space policy. That adds up to the statement (to be generous) as not being helpful. Talking about how much Sean Hannity is a poopy head (and he is) will not change that.

Chris, here's the situation. A statement was taken out of context and made to sound like something it wasn't. Unfortunately Gibbs replied in the press conference based on the reporter's version of the story without verifying the facts surrounding Bolden's statement.

And given the latest WhiteHouse knee jerk regarding the Sherrod incident, I'd say it confirms my concern the problem here is not the initial actions of the administration, it's kowtowing to the right wing media distortions of these incidents instead of standing up for a valid principle.

The principle of reaching out with the arm of science rather than the arm of the military is sound. Changing gears in our relationship with the Arab world from one of bully to one of friend is a sound policy. The idea it will backfire is the attitude of the NeoCons who do not have a track record of success. It's time to stop falling for this repeating ploy of distorted news and it's time to stop fearing the outcome of not sticking to NeoCon policies.

 

[Ziggurat]

A statement was taken out of context and made to sound like something it wasn't.

You keep saying that, but it keeps not being true. The only "missing context" you can provide comes from subsequent statements which don't explain but contradict what he said in the part people are attacking.

Unfortunately Gibbs replied in the press conference based on the reporter's version of the story

There is no "reporter's version of the story", there's the actual quote.

The principle of reaching out with the arm of science rather than the arm of the military is sound.

Thanks for showing that you aren't paying attention. Nobody is claiming NASA shouldn't do any outreach.

 

[Chris L]

The principle of reaching out with the arm of science rather than the arm of the military is sound.

And I am not saying that outreach as a secondary objective is a bad idea. It isn't though, one of the main functions of NASA. I know it, you know it, and the people Bolden was trying to make "feel better about themselves" know it. It was BS, and I have no doubt his audience saw through it. So whatever PR purpose it was meant to serve, failed.

 

[Xephyr]

Wow...

I can't believe you guys have been completely overlooking the obvious throughout this entire thread.

NASA wanting to get all chummy wummy with the "muslim" world has absolutely nothing to do with being all neighbourly and such.

I'll give you three words :

Black, sticky, stuff



Uh yeah. Oil.
That magical stuff needed in order for NASA to even exist in the first place... oil, petroleum based products, rich arab funding, etc etc. It's simple business tactics and nothing else.



He who possesses the most oil, has the world by its short and curlies.



I mean come off it it you guys... NASA stepping into the politico ring for the sole purpose of just being Mr. Nice Guy neighbour ??

 

[applecorped]

Conspiracy forum>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

 

[Xephyr]

Conspiracy forum>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

What... making perfectly sound business maneuvers is considered conspiracy woo now, is it ?

Me thinks some people spend far too much time in the conspiracy theory section of this forum. It apparently is causing conspiracy woo paranoia.

 

[Ziggurat]

NASA wanting to get all chummy wummy with the "muslim" world has absolutely nothing to do with being all neighbourly and such.

I'll give you three words :

Black, sticky, stuff

What on earth makes you think that NASA outreach is an efficient or even effective method for getting oil from Muslims?

 

[Xephyr]

What on earth makes you think that NASA outreach is an efficient or even effective method for getting oil from Muslims?

International relations = private sector investment procurement

Arab country's have much needed oil and much needed funding. It's a win win. Particularly now that NASA is putting more focus into procuring private sector investments since the federal budget cutbacks.

When you shake hands with foreign business, you stand to gain from all benefits they have to offer.

They're not looking to improve brotherly love with "muslims"... they're looking to improve brotherly love with arab business.

Arab business association = oil and money.

NASA cannot exist without the oil industry, nor can they continue space exploration without the funding to do so.

Arab countries don't offer much by way of science, research and development in the related sciences, etc such as countries like Japan and China... but what the "muslim" (arab) countries do offer is oil and private funding.

Keep in mind that up until the most recent years, NASA was completely federally funded... they had no need to chase the private sector before. But that ballgame has changed for them now, as we all know.

 

[Chris L]

Arab country's have much needed oil and much needed funding.

You really think you can massage the combined egoa of the Saudi Royal Family enough for them to part with a billion dollars or so?

Particularly now that NASA is putting more focus into procuring private sector investments since the federal budget cutbacks.

Actually, the Obama plan calls for budget increases.

But that ballgame has changed for them now, as we all know.

Really? When exactly did NASA adopt the public television model of financing?

 

[Ziggurat]

International relations = private sector investment procurement

Uh, no. No, it doesn't. Especially not in this case. NASA is not a potential fundee for private investments, because they don't produce profits. The only serious potential foreign sources of cash for NASA come from foreign governments.

Arab country's have much needed oil and much needed funding.

Arab countries already sell us their oil (and aren't about to stop - it's fungible, after all). As for their funding, well...

It's a win win.

It's a win for us if they give us money. But why is that a win for them? What do they get out of it? Arab businesses wouldn't get anything out of it.

When you shake hands with foreign business, you stand to gain from all benefits they have to offer.

Why would Arab businesses offer NASA anything? What's in it for them? Nothing, really. Same as with most US companies. The only time companies really want to knock on NASA"s door is when they hope to sell something to NASA, and that isn't about to happen with any Arab companies.

Keep in mind that up until the most recent years, NASA was completely federally funded... they had no need to chase the private sector before. But that ballgame has changed for them now, as we all know.

Evidently "we" don't know.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Uh, no. No, it doesn't. Especially not in this case. NASA is not a potential fundee for private investments, because they don't produce profits. The only serious potential foreign sources of cash for NASA come from foreign governments.

.....It's a win for us if they give us money. But why is that a win for them? What do they get out of it? Arab businesses wouldn't get anything out of it.

Why would Arab businesses offer NASA anything? What's in it for them? Nothing, really. Same as with most US companies. The only time companies really want to knock on NASA"s door is when they hope to sell something to NASA, and that isn't about to happen with any Arab companies.....

Something isn't right with what you are saying here. NASA has many public-private partnerships and private companies are making millions from satellites and the instruments on them, from launching satellites into space and so on.

Outsourcing and Insourcing (NASA policies for public-private partnerships) plus a slew of other related links in the "NASA library".

Maybe I'm not understanding what you are talking about, but I think you have a huge hole in your knowledge base concerning the entire for-profit aerospace industry.

 

[Chris L]

SG, that article talks about NASA as a consumer of contracted services. Are you suggesting businesses in Arab countries could be providing such services? From an outreach level it would make sense, but I just want to be sure that is what you are suggesting.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

SG, that article talks about NASA as a consumer of contracted services. Are you suggesting businesses in Arab countries could be providing such services? From an outreach level it would make sense, but I just want to be sure that is what you are suggesting.

Contracted services can also be partnerships in joint ventures. What I'm saying in terms of funding NASA is that conceivably private corporations could benefit from funding NASA research in public-private partnerships.

Zig said, "Why would Arab businesses offer NASA anything? What's in it for them? Nothing, really. Same as with most US companies. The only time companies really want to knock on NASA"s door is when they hope to sell something to NASA, and that isn't about to happen with any Arab companies.....". Why wouldn't there be valid private interests in NASA research? What about the billion dollar telecom, Internet and GPS industries that use satellites? What about oil companies that use satellite photography to identify potential geological evidence for oil deposits? I don't get the claim private companies would have no interest in NASA projects.