Space Station

[MikePA]

mjarrels has not returned to this thread to explain his comment. You are jumping to conclusions.

 

[crk133]

mjarrels has not returned to this thread to explain his comment. You are jumping to conclusions.

Oh, I think it was quite obvious what he meant.

 

[bugstruck]

"mjarrels has not returned to this thread to explain his comment. You are jumping to conclusions."

Exactly. More than a few jumping to conclusions.


Even if their impressions of his comment is correct I think I understand it. I may not personally have that same feeling towards an American of any makeup, but I could find some fault with a country or a people of a country who assist, fund or give safe harbor to our enemies. I'm not naive enough to place the blame on a government and think the people within don't have some control or authority over their government's actions. And I might just be myopic enough to lump them into a group and label them. We, including our news outlets do it every day and say it's OK. Just how you couch it that makes it acceptable...... or not.

It mattered that my mother was female and caucasian, how old she was, and if she was a lifetime citizen on an application I had to fill out for the government Wednesday. Let's not pretend to be too pure.

I like tractors too, but I won't lie under the wheels of a moving one. I have different opinions of the same thing, perspective matters.

 

[Tom_H]

mjarrels has not returned to this thread to explain his comment. You are jumping to conclusions.

In the realm of effective reading skills, there is a considerable difference between the ability to draw conclusions and jumping to conclusions. There is not much that appears to need cryptic deciphering. If you want to stand in defense of his words, be my guest.

As to returning here, my guess would be that he has returned, but after seeing that others have a broader world view than he, he is too contrite to continue his polemic.

 

[Tom_H]

... I could find some fault with a country or a people of a country who assist, fund or give safe harbor to our enemies.

So here's a woman who has given up citizenship of her own country, studied American civics, and sworn to support and defend the constitution of the United States. Yet in your wisdom, you infer that she may have "assisted, funded, or given safe harbor to our enemies" based upon the fact that she is Muslim and was born in Iran. Hmmm, interesting logic.

And I might just be myopic enough to lump them into a group and label them.

I think that statement speaks for itself.

Let's not pretend to be too pure.

Knowing, advocating, and doing what is right is not an equivocation of a claim to be pure.

 

[bugstruck]

Does anyone share my American concept of innocent until proven guilty? Beyond that, what law did the man break? Must have denied her a job or something. He had a three word comment some are certain they understand. Now we have a flame. Brilliant. Over what, a dissenting opinion?

Nah, your right, string him up, he's the enemy

I can't tell which opinion or comment in this thread is the scariest.

 

[Tom_H]

Now to move on to something lighter.

Space tourisim...when you feel like you just gotta go.

I can see it already. Carnival Cruises offering space flights with moon walk excursions. Ive said it before and I'll say it again, the moon will be prime real estate one of these days and the Star Spangled Banner is the only flag flying up there right now. I hope we stand by that and claim it when the time comes. If I had the money to get up there, I would be the first moon squater. Laugh at me now, envy me 15 years from now when everybody and their brother want to use my docking station to refuel, repair and restock their cruise ships.

So far, they've only let ONE tourist at a time go. They could make a whole lot more if they let TWO go at a time. If I had $40 million, I would gladly spend it to take my wife on a second honeymoon to an orbiting honeymoon suite. I can just envision it now, beautiful decor (maybe), delicious food (squeezed from a bag), but best of all: ZERO GRAVITY: WEIGHTLESSNESS: EVERYTHING FLOATS. Old tired biceps and knees? Don't have the cardiovascular strength you did in your youth? Not to worry at The Heavenly Honeymoon Hotel. BTW, I know there have been at least two different married couples who were both astronauts. Wonder if NASA ever considered letting them go up there together?

 

[Tom_H]

Does anyone share my American concept of innocent until proven guilty? Beyond that, what law did the man break? Must have denied her a job or something. He had a three word comment some are certain they understand. Now we have a flame. Brilliant. Over what, a dissenting opinion?

Nah, your right, string him up, he's the enemy

I can't tell which opinion or comment in this thread is the scariest.

I don't see any sarcasm in my posts, but I do in yours. "String him up"? I don't see any calls for that. "Innocent until proven guilty"? I very much agree with that, but does that apply to the woman? The last several comments seem to think it doesn't apply to her. "Dissenting opinion"? Hmmm, seems to me you don't want anyone to dissent with yours. "Flame"? Well, I'd say take a close look at all the posts here and see who it is that's "rolling his eyes." "can't tell which....is the scariest"? I share that sentiment.

 

[bugstruck]

I don't see any sarcasm in my posts, but I do in yours. "String him up"? I don't see any calls for that. "Innocent until proven guilty"? I very much agree with that, but does that apply to the woman? The last several comments seem to think it doesn't apply to her. "Dissenting opinion"? Hmmm, seems to me you don't want anyone to dissent with yours. "Flame"? Well, I'd say take a close look at all the posts here and see who it is that's "rolling his eyes." "can't tell which....is the scariest"? I share that sentiment.

Tom, I'm not defending prejudice on anyone's behalf. But you may have jumped to that conclusion. I said I understand it. Huge difference. I get the impression you have mistaken my opinions on this matter based on some of your responses. I can understand that. Maybe I didn't put my comment in the correct person? I doubt you could slip a piece of paper between your and my stance on people and their rights as citizens of this Country. I think that woman's success story is a great thing and I'm proud to count her among us. Because the first error in prejudice is coming to conclusions before you have all the facts, I challenged some of us on being overly critical IMO. Hopefully, I provoked some thought and intresting reading. We aren't in a contest here. You're too bright and well written to think we are.

 

[mjarrels]

Glad I was wrong... but I did get a little nervous about the unexplained chemical leak next to a O2 generator.

Life is good

mark

 

[MikePA]

If you want to stand in defense of his words, be my guest.

Please point out where I defended his words? I'll save you the trouble, I did not defend his words. I was willing to wait for him to explain them. You were not.

 

[Tom_H]

Please point out where I defended his words? I'll save you the trouble, I did not defend his words. I was willing to wait for him to explain them. You were not.

The man's words do not need explaining. They clearly speak for themselves. Rather than acknowledging the man's obvious plainspokenness, you seem to have some need to pretend his meaning is obscure and somehow unclear. It isn't. So let me save you some trouble. The man stated that he had heard the paying passenger going to the space station is a woman, an Iranian American and, a Muslim. He closes by saying he hopes he is wrong.

I am willing to acknowledge that the man is exactly what he appears to be. You are not. In doing this, you ARE defending him.

 

[Tom_H]

You know, mjarrels does deserve an opportunity to return here and explain himself. In fact, I would be MOST interested in hearing him explain exactly what he meant. To that end I have sent him a P.M., the exact text of which appears below. So let's see if he is willing to come back and explain himself.

Please visit the thread you statred re. the space station. There you will see that a number of us believe that your meaning was explicitly clear in that you hope that you wrongly heard that the visitor to the space station is an Iranian American Musilm woman.

On the other hand, a couple of members believe that your meaning somehow is not clear, that it doesn't actually mean what it says, that if you come back to the thread and explain your words, we will find that there was some other meaning and the rest of us are mistaken in our belief that your words clearly express exactly what you meant them to.

Please return to the board, mjarrels. We want to know. If you meant what many of us think you clearly said, I would very much like to hear you publicly expound on your comments. Are you willing to return and speak your mind? Alternatively, if you didn't mean to say what you said, would you please return and explain what you meant to say?

 

[Inspector507]

You know, mjarrels does deserve an opportunity to return here and explain himself. In fact, I would be MOST interested in hearing him explain exactly what he meant.

He did return........
Glad I was wrong... but I did get a little nervous about the unexplained chemical leak next to a O2 generator.

 

[bugstruck]

So let's see if he is willing to come back and explain himself.

Tom, He's a retired warrior and your a guy who talks about people, places, and things. So where exactly is your high ground and how will YOU defend it? 10 posts later you'll have tried.

 

[MikePA]

I am willing to acknowledge that the man is exactly what he appears to be. You are not. In doing this, you ARE defending him.

Do not put words in my mouth. I specifically stated I am NOT defending him.

You have a penchant for doing this. Instead of allowing mjarrels to explain himself, you've 'educated' all of us with what he really meant and now you're doing the same thing to me.

 

[LMTC]

A man stated his opinion. Interpret it as you will, agree or disagree. Provide some facts if you expect him to convert to your disagreeing point of view, otherwise be content to speak your piece as he has spoken his.

That's an unfortunate yet all too common trend in modern academia based on my own personal (and limited, I freely admit) experiences....education by demeanment and intimidation, driven by an uncanny ability to "know" what the rest of us might require some substantiation to believe--or may simply disagree with as a matter of preference. No questions need be asked, no facts gathered, no information processed. A large dose of general arrogance is usually involved. Also an overriding unwillingness to allow differing opinions or attitudes to even exist.

I can disagree strongly and profoundly with any of you and walk away comfortable in my own beliefs....I may "shake my head" internally in amazement, but I have no need to force you to accept my position; just allow me to live in peace with my own positions. My experiences with academic professionals have demonstrated them all too often to have a need to drown out opposing positions to the point of eradication. Their efforts seem to redefine beating a dead horse. Just my $.02 worth. I still wish you a good day whether you agree or disagree....but if you have a need for me to abandon my position or succumb to the way you think....well, then I don't really care what kind of day you have.

 

[mjarrels]

My point is risk assessment. Loyality is no longer a issue in todays world nor is dollars. The destruction of the space station would set back decades of work and be the ultimate in destruction.

I have a "Saffari to Suez" plaque in the garage... May 1981 the USS American Battle Group went thru the Suez canel... fun trip and I had a great time but can you vision a entire US Navy Battle Group trapped in the Canel? Take about setting ducks. Was the time and DFM (diesel fuel marine) worth it? I don't think so.

The world has changed and I think we need to look at things differently. Yes, I am for racial profiling.

Who put the dead rabbit on my fence last night?

"VC-5 Checker Tails"

mark

 

[riptides]

This thread should be locked and or deleted, it serves no tractorial purpose.

-Mike Z.

 

[LMTC]

Maybe it should and maybe it shouldn't, but if "tractorial" is the sole criterion how many of the THREADS you started were specifically "tractorial"?