Obama directs NASA to Improve Relations with the Muslim World

[saden1]

Notice something?

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by saden1

Notice something?

I don't know. All I see is an olive branch

[saden1]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I don't know. All I see is an olive branch

You mean that green thing on the left isn't camouflaging sharp edged knife?

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by saden1

You mean that green thing on the left isn't camouflaging sharp edged knife?

Actually it is, it represents our special ops forces.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by saden1

Notice something?

I just see a bunch of arrows. J/K

From wiki:
The olive branch and arrows denote the powers of peace and war. The eagle faces towards the right to show a preference to peace over war.

However peace/war, middle east bombs, etc. isn't the point. The point is this type of outreach and diplomacy isn't and should never be NASA's primary function. Nothing wrong with attempting to work with friendly nations when possible, but Bolden stated this was a primary focus given to him directly by the POTUS. Even the WH backed off Bolden's statement because they know it looks bad under scrutiny.

That being said, what would the outrage have been on CNN, ABC, NBC, MSNBC etc. if the NASA Administrator under Bush had come out and said as one of his primary directives was "(Bush) wanted me to find a way to reach out to the (Christian/Jewish) world and engage much more with dominantly (Christian/Jewish) nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science ... and math and engineering."

[saden1]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

I just see a bunch of arrows. J/K

From wiki:
The olive branch and arrows denote the powers of peace and war. The eagle faces towards the right to show a preference to peace over war.

However peace/war, middle east bombs, etc. isn't the point. The point is this type of outreach and diplomacy isn't and should never be NASA's primary function. Nothing wrong with attempting to work with friendly nations when possible, but Bolden stated this was a primary focus given to him directly by the POTUS. Even the WH backed off Bolden's statement because they know it looks bad under scrutiny.

That being said, what would the outrage have been on CNN, ABC, NBC, MSNBC etc. if the NASA Administrator under Bush had come out and said as one of his primary directives was "(Bush) wanted me to find a way to reach out to the (Christian/Jewish) world and engage much more with dominantly (Christian/Jewish) nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science ... and math and engineering."

I'm sure it won't be their primary focus, he's on Al-Jazeera and is pitching a sale. The White House backed off? I was under the impression that White House spokesman Nick Shapiro recently said:

“The President has always said that he wants NASA to engage with the world’s best scientists and engineers as we work together to push the boundaries of exploration. Meeting that mandate requires NASA to partner with countries around the world like Russia and Japan, as well as collaboration with Israel and with many Muslim-majority countries. The space race began as a global competition, but, today, it is a global collaboration.”

As for your Bush bit I think we're already doing that aren't we? So if he did it would be stating the obvious. And that's fine, collaboration is fine.

BTW, the AJ interview is fantastic.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by saden1

I'm sure it won't be their primary focus, he's on Al-Jazeera and is pitching a sale. The White House backed off? I was under the impression that White House spokesman Nick Shapiro recently said:

It was NASA that issued the pull-back statement not the WH directly, my mistake:

A NASA spokesman on Tuesday claimed Bolden was referring to his outreach priorities, not his priorities overall, and that space exploration is still the No. 1 mission. It's unclear whether the White House or NASA will face pressure to say any more.

As for your Bush bit I think we're already doing that aren't we? So if he did it would be stating the obvious. And that's fine, collaboration is fine.

I thought we were working with the nations that would be helpful for space exploration regardless of primary religion. Last I checked Japan is not a Christian or Jewish nation and Russia/Canada are primarily secular. I also don't think membership in the European Space Agency has anything to do with a country's primary religion.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

It was NASA that issued the pull-back statement not the WH directly, my mistake:

A NASA spokesman on Tuesday claimed Bolden was referring to his outreach priorities, not his priorities overall, and that space exploration is still the No. 1 mission. It's unclear whether the White House or NASA will face pressure to say any more.

I thought we were working with the nations that would be helpful for space exploration regardless of primary religion. Last I checked Japan is not a Christian or Jewish nation and Russia/Canada are primarily secular. I also don't think membership in the European Space Agency has anything to do with a country's primary religion.

To be honest I thought as much, it would be retarded to think that NASA all of a sudden is going to repurpose all it engineers for outreach mission.

I assume when we're talking about the Muslim World we're talking about countries whom we have strained relationship with or a large portion of its population have a negative view of America. When we deal with Japan and Canada and the EU we call these countries First World/Wester World countries. That is to say its usage is for semantic grouping of countries. I am sure if there was more than one Jewish country we'd here the term the Jewish World instead of talking about just Israel.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by saden1

I'm sure it won't be their primary focus, he's on Al-Jazeera and is pitching a sale. The White House backed off?

I guess I was a few days early:

FOXNews.com - Muslim Outreach Not the Job of NASA, White House Says

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

I just see a bunch of arrows. J/K

From wiki:
The olive branch and arrows denote the powers of peace and war. The eagle faces towards the right to show a preference to peace over war.

However peace/war, middle east bombs, etc. isn't the point. The point is this type of outreach and diplomacy isn't and should never be NASA's primary function. Nothing wrong with attempting to work with friendly nations when possible, but Bolden stated this was a primary focus given to him directly by the POTUS. Even the WH backed off Bolden's statement because they know it looks bad under scrutiny.

That being said, what would the outrage have been on CNN, ABC, NBC, MSNBC etc. if the NASA Administrator under Bush had come out and said as one of his primary directives was "(Bush) wanted me to find a way to reach out to the (Christian/Jewish) world and engage much more with dominantly (Christian/Jewish) nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science ... and math and engineering."

Actually Reagan asked for NASA outreach to the Russians during the Cold War. The idea of mixing space exploration and diplomacy is not as weird as you make it sound.

In terms of a specific outreach to Muslims, Muslims invented the concept of zero in operative mathematics (that is, not just a placeholder). The Maya did too, independently, but Western mathematics got the concept of zero from Muslim mathematicians. Muslims also developed algebra. Given that a motivation for terrorism arises from a felt loss of heritage (read the books of Georgetown Univ.'s John Esposito if you don't believe me), helping Muslims feel good about their historical contributions to mathematics actually is a terror-fighting tool. Plus it helps us to recruit bright minds from places like Egypt, Jordan, etc., to contribute to space advancements.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by Lotus

Given that a motivation for terrorism arises from a felt loss of heritage (read the books of Georgetown Univ.'s John Esposito if you don't believe me), helping Muslims feel good about their historical contributions to mathematics actually is a terror-fighting tool. Plus it helps us to recruit bright minds from places like Egypt, Jordan, etc., to contribute to space advancements.

Nice try at spin, but no cigar. Esposito is wrong. Muslims who are motivated to terrorism are motivated by religious zealotry and extremism, nothing more, nothing less. NASA reaching out to help make Muslims "feel good" as a tool to "fight terrorism" is a HUGE reach.

Any Muslim who doesn't have extremist views and is one of the "best and brightest" in that region certainly doesn't need NASA or anyone else in the U.S. to tell him/her about Muslim contributions to math/science.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Nice try at spin, but no cigar. Esposito is wrong. Muslims who are motivated to terrorism are motivated by religious zealotry and extremism, nothing more, nothing less. NASA reaching out to help make Muslims "feel good" as a tool to "fight terrorism" is a HUGE reach.

Any Muslim who doesn't have extremist views and is one of the "best and brightest" in that region certainly doesn't need NASA or anyone else in the U.S. to tell him/her about Muslim contributions to math/science.

No spin. Esposito is a professor of Muslim studies who is recognized around the world as an expert on Islam. What makes you more of an expert on Islam than he is?

Your "spin" doesn't work. It begs the question of where that "religious zealotry" comes from. I've already provided one answer to that question.

Please try reading one of Esposito's books on Muslim extremism before you judge his books by their covers. Or try reading Rohan Gunaratna, who is considered perhaps the world's best scholar of al-Qaeda.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by Lotus

Please try reading one of Esposito's books on Muslim extremism before you judge his books by their covers. Or try reading Rohan Gunaratna, who is considered perhaps the world's best scholar of al-Qaeda.

I'm no expert on Muslim studies, but there are plenty of folks that are experts in this field that have an opinion similar to mine.

So without going down the whole Islamic extremist hole and completely hijacking the thread, maybe you should read the Koran itself, or books from Robert Spencer (Spencer is a weekly columnist for Human Events and FrontPage Magazine, and has led seminars on Islam and jihad for the United States Central Command, United States Army Command and General Staff College, the U.S. Army's Asymmetric Warfare Group, the FBI, the Joint Terrorism Task Force, and the U.S. intelligence community). I'd say if the folks that fight terrorism for a living are listening to him, his opinion carries a lot more weight than the opinion of an academic.

Maybe you could ask yourself why sharia law allows for stoning to death of women. People have killed over extreme religious views for thousands of years, I don't recall any evidence of people killing because they felt slighted over acknowledgment of their contirbutions to the world-wide math/science community.

I'm thankful that here we can have this debate, in countries ruled by sharia law I'd be executed. Or I could be just full of $hit and "toiling on top of the toilet bowl".

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

I'm no expert on Muslim studies, but there are plenty of folks that are experts in this field that have an opinion similar to mine.

So without going down the whole Islamic extremist hole and completely hijacking the thread, maybe you should read the Koran itself, or books from Robert Spencer (Spencer is a weekly columnist for Human Events and FrontPage Magazine, and has led seminars on Islam and jihad for the United States Central Command, United States Army Command and General Staff College, the U.S. Army's Asymmetric Warfare Group, the FBI, the Joint Terrorism Task Force, and the U.S. intelligence community). I'd say if the folks that fight terrorism for a living are listening to him, his opinion carries a lot more weight than the opinion of an academic.

Maybe you could ask yourself why sharia law allows for stoning to death of women. People have killed over extreme religious views for thousands of years, I don't recall any evidence of people killing because they felt slighted over acknowledgment of their contirbutions to the world-wide math/science community.

I'm thankful that here we can have this debate, in countries ruled by sharia law I'd be executed. Or I could be just full of $hit and "toiling on top of the toilet bowl".

I have read the Koran, several times actually, just as I have read the Bible several times. I read a lot of literature about religion.

You seem to be confused in terms of experts. Robert Spencer is a consultant regarding how to militarily engage Muslims. John Esposito is an expert on Islamic culture. The two are not the same. And, considering my original point was about Islamic culture, experts on Islamic culture like Esposito and Rohan Gunaratna are the relevant experts for this argument.

We can't beat an enemy that we don't understand. The people who study Islamic cultures know Islamic cultures best. I have indicated some of these people already. Now I am reminded of the saying, "You can lead a horse to water..."

As for your statement about Sharia law, you vastly oversimplify a complex issue. You seem unaware that through most of the Muslim world, those injunctions remain unenforced, just as injunctions to stone people in the Bible are not enforced here. Also, those Americans who use the Bible to support capital punishment are doing a similar thing. Thus the situation regarding Sharia law is much more complex than you indicate. Perhaps you should read someone like John Esposito or Rohan Gunaratna.

As for your statement, "I don't recall any evidence of people killing because they felt slighted over acknowledgment of their contirbutions to the world-wide math/science community," I gave you one example already, although the "slight" is not just over math, it is a holistic felt loss of heritage. And your claim that people don't go to war because they feel that they have been slighted doesn't hold up in the light of history. In other words, I offered you an aspect of a complicated situation and you dumbed it down so that you could dismiss it.

Again, we can't beat an enemy that we don't understand. Educating ourselves about Islam helps to fight terror.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by Lotus

Actually Reagan asked for NASA outreach to the Russians during the Cold War. The idea of mixing space exploration and diplomacy is not as weird as you make it sound.

Good article here on NASA history with the USSR.

NASA - United States-Soviet Space Cooperation during the Cold War

But outreach to the USSR was never deemed by the head of NASA to be one of his top three priorities under Reagan. Any outreach was very low key and was only done if there was a direct benefit to the U.S.

To be blunt, folks who have issue with Bolden's statement understand there's no major funding for any Muslim outreach initiatives in the NASA budget. This is a PR blunder by Bolden and many feel it illustrates where Obama's philosophical priorities lie.