myths of apollo-soyuz

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 16:09:35 -0500, Jim Oberg wrote
(in article ):

----- Original Message -----
From: "Eric Chomko"
Well you know what they say about winning and treason. Can you even name a
war that the loser wasn't the bad guy? Vietnam?


You've got to be kidding. Does this explain why leftists wanted
the US to lose in Vietnam, and want it to lose in Iraq -- as
some sort of post hoc validation of their moral inversions?

The 'good guys' lost lots of wars, prominent among them
the Russian Civil War and the Chinese civil war. And the
Tibetan uprisings.


"Good guys" lose lots of things - don't limit it to wars: the "Prague
Spring" of 1968 and Tiananmen Square of 1989 come to mind as well of
examples of the "good guys" being crushed under the heel of the "bad
guys."

Heck, don't limit it to conflict or uprising at all. I think the
homeowners in "Kelo v. New London" are the good guys, too, but the U.S.
Supreme Court didn't seem to care. :-/


--
"Fame may be fleeting but obscurity is forever."
~Anonymous
www.angryherb.net

Herb Schaltegger wrote:

"Good guys" lose lots of things - don't limit it to wars: the "Prague
Spring" of 1968 and Tiananmen Square of 1989 come to mind as well of
examples of the "good guys" being crushed under the heel of the "bad
guys."



In the case of Tiananmen Square the intention of the uprising _was_ to
have the government try to put it down via military force- the student
protesters thought that the People's Revolutionary Army would refuse the
orders to attack Chinese citizens, and that the populace in the
countryside would march on Beijing and overthrow the government.
The protesters got a excellent education in the difference between what
you assume people are going to do and what they will actually do when it
comes down to taking orders from above.
After The Great Leap Forward, there seems to be implicit understanding
between the people, military forces, and government of China.
The People will take orders and keep their mouths shut as long as the
government leaves them basically alone and things keep improving, even
if at a snail's pace.
The Army will do what it's told to do to prevent the country from
falling into chaos of any sort, even if that means killing people by the
hundreds or thousands.
The Government will try to assure economic and political progress at a
rate that is visible, yet will not tolerate any sort of radical change
or usurpation of its power.
If the protesters had won at Tiananmen Square, the government of China
would have descended into chaos and a huge power struggle as various
member of the failed government would have tried to seize power for
themselves, which could have possibly led to a military coup to seize
power which would be followed by a power struggle within the military
itself (that happened to some extent in the Tiananmen protest anyway) to
achieve power.
The ideologically motivated student protesters would not have been
satisfied with whatever came out of it, and would probably start a
protest against whatever finally emerged, particularly now that they had
seen the political power they could wield.
They would then probably be exterminated by whomever was in power.
The end result would have been a complete mess with possibly millions
dead from either violence or the breakdown of the country's
infrastructure and means to transport food and supplies from the
countryside to the cities and vice versa (this wouldn't be as bad as if
the same thing happened in the U.S. due to China's far more primitive
state of technology and decentralized population, but it would still be
a completely chaotic situation- and a completely chaotic situation in a
country possessing ICBMs.)
This I suspect was why the U.S. took a completely hands-off approach to
the situation, and really didn't mind when the protesters got run over
by tanks- there were a lot worse ways the thing could have ended up,
both for China itself and the world at large.
Remember the "Million Man March" on Washington D.C.? Imagine what would
have happened to the nation if the marchers had started putting up
statues of Karl Marx, and demanding the overthrow of the United States
government.
That would probably have been when the tanks showed up. And I doubt that
the majority of the people in the U.S. would have had much of a problem
with the tanks showing up.

Pat

"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
...
If the protesters had won at Tiananmen Square, the government of China
would have descended into chaos and a huge power struggle as various
member of the failed government would have tried to seize power for
themselves, which could have possibly led to a military coup to seize
power which would be followed by a power struggle within the military
itself (that happened to some extent in the Tiananmen protest anyway) to
achieve power.

Which would put thousands of Americans out of work when stocks at the local
Dollar Tree dried up.

Scott Hedrick wrote:

Which would put thousands of Americans out of work when stocks at the local
Dollar Tree dried up.



Our town of 15,000 is presently building its third dollar store; who
would have though that in the twenty-first century, the five-and-dime
would be called Woorwolth's.
Actually, the stores are fun to look at if for no other reason than the
failed food items* and strangely labeled toys one will find there-
plastic bag containing toy aircraft carrier- label on bag: "BATTLESHIP!"
:-)

*Organic rice crackers with ginger- and around 1/4 teaspoon of salt in
each cracker.
Strange varieties of Cheez-its never seen before or since- "Buffalo
Chicken Wing Flavored Cheez-its!" "Escargot Flavored Cheez-its!"
"Limburger Cheese Flavored Cheez-its!"

Pat

Sorry folks. It seems the Russian/American perpetrated cold-war(s) was
just that and nothing more. Thus having conditional physics and skewed
science as essentially based upon space-toilet lies upon lies and of
mutated history that's not getting fixed until long after the fat lady
sings and a few of them Apollo cows come home.

Others have been and certainly I'm more than sufficiently dead right
about our NOT walking upon the moon, whereas perhaps at most we'd
managed to orbit the highly ractive moon, even though going for that
much wasn't an imaging requirement of such efforts being manned.
Otherwise, why the 'Chapel Bell' S-Band--microwave transponders?

However, it seems none of the Russian robotic and thus AI fly-by-rocket
landers survived their encounter with the extremely thick dust
(nonclumping none the less) before summarily sinking out of sight and
thus becoming technecially DOA. Thus none of those supposed
retro-reflectors got deployed and, it still wouldn't have mattered
unless those were being targetted via 0.05 milliradian laser shots of
extremely high energy and of a spectrum other than IR, such as 400~450
nm would have made perfect sense, especially if those RRs had been
specifically 400~450 nm band-pass coated.

A simple and extremely energy efficient 1=B0 strobe as a visual
transponder would have been at least offering a million times more
photons that could have been easily detected by amateurs, at not 10%
the mass nor cost of the given retro-reflector. Such a simple xenon
strobe transponder (PV powered none the less) could have remained as an
interactive unit that science could have remotely and quite efficiently
triggered, as quite possibly detected by the naked eye as viewing upon
an earthshine illuminated moon.

Haven't you folks taken to noticing how one of your own kind of warm
and fuzzy and certainly all-knowing wizard/lord Jay Windley (U of Utah
which probably represents that he's Mormon and thus 100% anti-ET and
thus anti-God to boot), of how his perverted apollohoax.com dog-wagging
scumbag worth of being pro-perpetrated cold-war and thus anti-humanity
and otherwise simply chuck full of infomercialism of his having
delivered his sick form of mainstream disinformation-R-us is nowhere in
sight, and as to how his Kodak corporate partners in crimes against
humanity has otherwise remained as so entirely nondisclosure as to
explaining why their photo-chemical blue and certainly near-UV
sensitive film wasn't the least bit capable of recording any of those
unfiltered near-blue or any other secondary/recoil photons, not to
mention those of hard-X-ray and TBI dosage?

Contributed from "The Rocket Scientist";
http://www.members.shaw.ca/rlongpre01/moon.html

I've always enjoyed 'THE ONION' out-take on those supposed moon
landings that were not only accomplished with our entirely unproven
fly-by-rocket lander but otherwise of entirely starless adventures to
boot, without ever once having to deal with the nearby likes of an
extremely vibrant Venus nor the horrific intensity of even the Sirius
star system as being so near-blue and/or near-UV, so much so that only
an extremely highly filtered camera lens wouldn't have recorded such
upon the likes of their Kodak film that was otherwise extremely
sensitive to those spectrums that get nicely filtered by our
atmosphere, of which the moon only has crystal clear a touch of an
argon and somewhat lesser amount of co2 atmosphere.
~

Life upon Venus offers a Township, Bridge and ET/UFO Park-n-Ride
Tarmac:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-town.htm
The Russian/China LSE-CM/ISS (Lunar Space Elevator) at ME-L1
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/lunar-space-elevator.htm
Venus ETs, plus another updated topic list; Brad Guth / GASA-IEIS
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-topics.htm

The meaning of all this is besides if not in spite of our NOT walking
upon the moon;
There has nearly always been other significant life that's perfectly
capable of their having been situated upon Venus (at least on behalf of

accommodating ETs), and otherwise of that little issue about our moon
that's actually perfectly good for so many things once the LSE-CM/ISS
is up and running and of sufficient robotics having been efficiently
and safely deployed, as for those items functioning on behalf of
science, clean energy and for the very salvation of humanity. Unlike
what we've been told over and over by all of those folks supposedly
having 'the right stuff', there's nothing the least bit insignificant
nor without good if not of essential cause and rewards pertaining to
our moon, and unlike those opposing absolutely anything and everything
that represents change, I simply can't but hardly think of anything but

positive thoughts about our moon as well as for Venus as being yet
another perfectly good thing for the greater salvation of Earth and
humanity. How can anything pertaining to our moon or that of Venus
become such a taboo/nondisclosure negative that which topic/authors
deserve getting stalked, bashed and/or banished?

Jim Oberg ) wrote:
: ----- Original Message -----
: From: "Eric Chomko"
: Well you know what they say about winning and treason. Can you even name a
: war that the loser wasn't the bad guy? Vietnam?


: You've got to be kidding. Does this explain why leftists wanted
: the US to lose in Vietnam, and want it to lose in Iraq -- as
: some sort of post hoc validation of their moral inversions?

No, what it explains is that we aren't ALWAYS right as is what your
article suggests.

: The 'good guys' lost lots of wars, prominent among them
: the Russian Civil War and the Chinese civil war. And the
: Tibetan uprisings.

So the czar was a good guy, or was he simply our ally? And with Mao, was
Cash My Check a good guy or a puppet that took us to the cleaners?
Heck, I want Taiwan to be free but I also understand that Chiang Kai-shek
was no saint.

Eric

Herb Schaltegger ) wrote:
: On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 16:09:35 -0500, Jim Oberg wrote
: (in article ):

: ----- Original Message -----
: From: "Eric Chomko"
: Well you know what they say about winning and treason. Can you even name a
: war that the loser wasn't the bad guy? Vietnam?
:
:
: You've got to be kidding. Does this explain why leftists wanted
: the US to lose in Vietnam, and want it to lose in Iraq -- as
: some sort of post hoc validation of their moral inversions?
:
: The 'good guys' lost lots of wars, prominent among them
: the Russian Civil War and the Chinese civil war. And the
: Tibetan uprisings.
:

: "Good guys" lose lots of things - don't limit it to wars: the "Prague
: Spring" of 1968 and Tiananmen Square of 1989 come to mind as well of
: examples of the "good guys" being crushed under the heel of the "bad
: guys."

: Heck, don't limit it to conflict or uprising at all. I think the
: homeowners in "Kelo v. New London" are the good guys, too, but the U.S.
: Supreme Court didn't seem to care. :-/

Yes, and the latest in the US, the right vs. the left, red state vs. blue
state and conservative vs. liberal.

: --
: "Fame may be fleeting but obscurity is forever."
: ~Anonymous
: www.angryherb.net

Pat Flannery ) wrote:


: Herb Schaltegger wrote:

: "Good guys" lose lots of things - don't limit it to wars: the "Prague
: Spring" of 1968 and Tiananmen Square of 1989 come to mind as well of
: examples of the "good guys" being crushed under the heel of the "bad
: guys."
:
:

: In the case of Tiananmen Square the intention of the uprising _was_ to
: have the government try to put it down via military force- the student
: protesters thought that the People's Revolutionary Army would refuse the
: orders to attack Chinese citizens, and that the populace in the
: countryside would march on Beijing and overthrow the government.
: The protesters got a excellent education in the difference between what
: you assume people are going to do and what they will actually do when it
: comes down to taking orders from above.
: After The Great Leap Forward, there seems to be implicit understanding
: between the people, military forces, and government of China.
: The People will take orders and keep their mouths shut as long as the
: government leaves them basically alone and things keep improving, even
: if at a snail's pace.
: The Army will do what it's told to do to prevent the country from
: falling into chaos of any sort, even if that means killing people by the
: hundreds or thousands.
: The Government will try to assure economic and political progress at a
: rate that is visible, yet will not tolerate any sort of radical change
: or usurpation of its power.
: If the protesters had won at Tiananmen Square, the government of China
: would have descended into chaos and a huge power struggle as various
: member of the failed government would have tried to seize power for
: themselves, which could have possibly led to a military coup to seize
: power which would be followed by a power struggle within the military
: itself (that happened to some extent in the Tiananmen protest anyway) to
: achieve power.
: The ideologically motivated student protesters would not have been
: satisfied with whatever came out of it, and would probably start a
: protest against whatever finally emerged, particularly now that they had
: seen the political power they could wield.
: They would then probably be exterminated by whomever was in power.
: The end result would have been a complete mess with possibly millions
: dead from either violence or the breakdown of the country's
: infrastructure and means to transport food and supplies from the
: countryside to the cities and vice versa (this wouldn't be as bad as if
: the same thing happened in the U.S. due to China's far more primitive
: state of technology and decentralized population, but it would still be
: a completely chaotic situation- and a completely chaotic situation in a
: country possessing ICBMs.)
: This I suspect was why the U.S. took a completely hands-off approach to
: the situation, and really didn't mind when the protesters got run over
: by tanks- there were a lot worse ways the thing could have ended up,
: both for China itself and the world at large.
: Remember the "Million Man March" on Washington D.C.? Imagine what would
: have happened to the nation if the marchers had started putting up
: statues of Karl Marx, and demanding the overthrow of the United States
: government.
: That would probably have been when the tanks showed up. And I doubt that
: the majority of the people in the U.S. would have had much of a problem
: with the tanks showing up.

All that said, this is Tory-speak, or basically "keep the status quo,
because the powers-at-be have our best interest in mind". Question is, is
anything like the American Revolution capable of ocurring on earth in this
day and age?

Eric

: Pat


:

Scott Hedrick ) wrote:

: "Pat Flannery" wrote in message
: ...
: If the protesters had won at Tiananmen Square, the government of China
: would have descended into chaos and a huge power struggle as various
: member of the failed government would have tried to seize power for
: themselves, which could have possibly led to a military coup to seize
: power which would be followed by a power struggle within the military
: itself (that happened to some extent in the Tiananmen protest anyway) to
: achieve power.

: Which would put thousands of Americans out of work when stocks at the local
: Dollar Tree dried up.


Let um go work at Walmart...

Eric Chomko wrote:

So the czar was a good guy, or was he simply our ally? And with Mao, was
Cash My Check a good guy or a puppet that took us to the cleaners?



Like Kim Jong Il in "Team America"?

Pat