Is NASA a US "Defence Agency"?

On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 21:24:33 -0500, in a place far, far away,
"Jonathan" made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:


"Rand Simberg" wrote in message
...

But the question is valid. It's becoming clearer every
day that the Vision was created to fill the needs of our
military in terms of the missile defense plans they have
for the future.

Only to morons.

You know I'm right.

No, all we know is that you are a moron.


Are you going to say I smell bad too?

This being the Internet, I can have no useful opinion on that matter,
at the current state of the technology. You may even be a dog.

My point is simply that the Vision is little different
from Apollo in the sense of a new military race.

And your point is nonsensical.

Apollo was with the Soviets, and now it's China.

There is no race with China.

Are you saying the cold war with the Soviets was NOT
a military race? Are you saying George Bush, and his
$1.5 TRILLION of new spending on all things war-like, is
not suffering from a case of 'military madness'?

Are you SAYING that the PRICE of TEA in CHINA is NOT a CRITICAL ISSUE?
(See, I can write loony and irrelevant things in all caps, too.)

What denial ridden world are you living in???

What fantasy land are you living in?

On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 20:19:29 -0500, "Jonathan"
wrote:


.... It's becoming clearer every
day that the Vision was created to fill the needs of our
military in terms of the missile defense plans they have
for the future.


How so? Unless there's a later-day Skylab involved, the Orion/Ares 1
stack is useless. The military's use of the shuttle left such a bad
taste in their mouth they switched to ELVs in the late '80s and never
looked back.

Major civilian and military space programs are usually announced as
such. The Shuttle's predecssors -- Mercuy, Gemini, Apollo, and Skylab
--- were all cicvilian programs with nomilitay purposes. It is true
both NASA and the DoD use the same contractos. But it is a very big
leap from there to say the VSE is really about missile defense. Evil
Keneval wouldn't make that leap.

Bare in mind that the "military industrial complex" does more than
military stuff. For instance, Boeing, a major defense contractor,
also makes the commercial jets that holiday travelers will be flying
on this week. But there's no way any rational person could take that
fact and argue that Thanksgiving is a military operation.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Michael Gallagher wrote:

Bare in mind that the "military industrial complex" does more than
military stuff. For instance, Boeing, a major defense contractor,
also makes the commercial jets that holiday travelers will be flying
on this week. But there's no way any rational person could take that
fact and argue that Thanksgiving is a military operation.

Let's see, every year I had to get my gun, go out and hunt the pathetic
pheasant down, root him out of his pathetic cave, and then kill him.

That sounds a lot like a military operation to me.

On Nov 13, 5:45 pm, (Rand Simberg)
wrote:
On 13 Nov 2007 22:55:00 +0200, in a place far, far away,
made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:



NASA must cooperate with the Department of Defense in the United States..
According to the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958, Section
305à (i):
"The National Aeronautics and Space Administration shall be considered
a Defense Agency of the United States for the purpose of Chapter 17,
Title 35 of the United States code"

Ken Johnston at:
http://www.enterprisemission.com/NPC-Russia.htm
I do not want any discussion about the slides there. I regard em as the
result of a bad adjusted copy device.

But this law statement surprised me. Is it still actual? If so NASA PAO
did a good job 40 years to present it as research agency.

There is no agency in the US that is allowed to not cooperate with the
Departement of Defense, if necessary. Your question is idiotic.

Perhaps naive.I'll leave it to you to stifle the free flow of
information through the lack of humility.

Clearly the manner you attempted to set the record straight was no
better than any implication that the original poster had intended.

On Nov 13, 10:14 pm, kT wrote:
Rand Simberg wrote:
Only to morons.

You know I'm right.

No, all we know is that you are a moron.

Such persuasive argument. Is your BLOG conversation this astute as well?

If Simberg's blog was worth a crap then he would not have so much time
to spend here. His blog is designed to stroke his own ego. Rand is a
slave to his ego as most around here already know.

On Nov 14, 10:04 pm, (Rand Simberg)
wrote:
On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 21:24:33 -0500, in a place far, far away,
"Jonathan" made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:







"Rand Simberg" wrote in message
...

But the question is valid. It's becoming clearer every
day that the Vision was created to fill the needs of our
military in terms of the missile defense plans they have
for the future.

Only to morons.

You know I'm right.

No, all we know is that you are a moron.

Are you going to say I smell bad too?

This being the Internet, I can have no useful opinion on that matter,
at the current state of the technology. You may even be a dog.

Wait now, accoring to the dog philosophy, if you can't eat it or screw
it, then **** on it. Well Rand consider yourself ****ed on, internet
notwithstanding.


My point is simply that the Vision is little different
from Apollo in the sense of a new military race.

And your point is nonsensical.

Saying that the VSE has no militray implications is nonsensical.


Apollo was with the Soviets, and now it's China.

There is no race with China.

....yet.

Are you saying the cold war with the Soviets was NOT
a military race? Are you saying George Bush, and his
$1.5 TRILLION of new spending on all things war-like, is
not suffering from a case of 'military madness'?

Are you SAYING that the PRICE of TEA in CHINA is NOT a CRITICAL ISSUE?
(See, I can write loony and irrelevant things in all caps, too.)

Not as much as the price of oil in the Middle East. Bush was suppose
to be the oil president. Little did we know that that meant paying
more for oil than we ever have.

What denial ridden world are you living in???

What fantasy land are you living in?

The one where you think dogs can use the internet? WOOF!

On Nov 16, 12:49 pm, Michael Gallagher wrote:
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 20:19:29 -0500, "Jonathan"
wrote:



.... It's becoming clearer every
day that the Vision was created to fill the needs of our
military in terms of the missile defense plans they have
for the future.

How so? Unless there's a later-day Skylab involved, the Orion/Ares 1
stack is useless. The military's use of the shuttle left such a bad
taste in their mouth they switched to ELVs in the late '80s and never
looked back.

Major civilian and military space programs are usually announced as
such. The Shuttle's predecssors -- Mercuy, Gemini, Apollo, and Skylab
--- were all cicvilian programs with nomilitay purposes. It is true
both NASA and the DoD use the same contractos. But it is a very big
leap from there to say the VSE is really about missile defense. Evil
Keneval wouldn't make that leap.

Bare in mind that the "military industrial complex" does more than
military stuff. For instance, Boeing, a major defense contractor,
also makes the commercial jets that holiday travelers will be flying
on this week. But there's no way any rational person could take that
fact and argue that Thanksgiving is a military operation.

Hah! Bush's aviation plan for the holiday season is to use military
airspace for commercial airliners. I guess if his focus is that people
want to be on time for the holidays as his main domestic issue, then
his foriegn policy is in a shambles.


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----http://www.newsfeeds.comThe #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

People seem to forget that King georgie Jr.'s Daddy had ALSO PROMISED
a "Return to the Moon"...he didn't even START the process while he was
in office..no plans...no 'directives'....etc.

So you can't blame "Clinton" for squashing that attempt....because
Daddy George NEVER made an HONEST attempt to set the plan into motion.

Same goes true for King Georgie Jr...He also wants to "Go Back to the
Moon"...he's made some proposals...but where's the money going???

That fark hole of Iraq where he lied to the people of the world....but
more importantly...lied to the soldiers he sent there to die. Look
what happened when He told the DIPLOMATS...those beaurocratic chicken
droppings who followed everything King Georgie Jr. said to do.....same
with the Military Leaders...those who stood against him...were fired.

There is NO 'Master Plan' to get us back to the Moon and onto Mars
before the other nations get there. Russia, China and India will be
getting there before we do.

And all either Russia or China has to do to thwart ANY attempt we may
want to do in that area is to tell the World back we want our US IOU'
paid in GOLD ... NOW.

That's over 2 TRILLION dollars we have outstanding in National
Debt...most of it we owe to China and Russia for financing the Iraq
War.

Go to the Moon? Gawd...we can't even cross the Tigres or Eurphrates
Rivers without spending 1 million a day for the one bridge
protection. We have MORE 'mercenaries' in Iraq than regular US
troops...look it up. THAT's were our money is going. And
OIL???,,,HAH...what did you expect electing two oil men....lower
prices for gas???

Now who's behind the internet spouting truth?....ROAR !!!

Bob...
http://commonsensecentral.net/

On Nov 13, 12:55 pm, wrote:
NASA must cooperate with the Department of Defense in the United States.
According to the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958, Section
305à (i):
"The National Aeronautics and Space Administration shall be considered
a Defense Agency of the United States for the purpose of Chapter 17,
Title 35 of the United States code"

Ken Johnston at:http://www.enterprisemission.com/NPC-Russia.htm
I do not want any discussion about the slides there. I regard em as the
result of a bad adjusted copy device.

But this law statement surprised me. Is it still actual? If so NASA PAO
did a good job 40 years to present it as research agency.

## CrossPoint v3.12d R ##


Our NASA is more like a faith-based multitasking puppet agency, doing
pretty much whatever their mostly semitic puppeteers would like them
to do. Besides, where's all the supposed warm and fuzzy Usenet love
and affection? Oviously such Yids of a feather don't even love one
another, much less of any outsider. Remember they'd put one of their
own kind on a stick for that sick faith-based PR stunt, and still
going strong wiothout a speck of remorse.

Interesting that if our moon and of its L1 is supposedly so gosh darn
taboo/nondisclosure rated, then perhaps Venus or that of Venus L2
isn't.

In addition to moon banishment and especially of anything getting
contributed by Japan or China, it also seems the ESA Venus Express/
VIRTIS mission team of such all-knowing wizards has either fallen off
the edge of Earth or at least out of favor within their very own ESA
home webpage.

ESA is still not sharing any byte worth of anything as getting
released from their robust PFS instrument, of which they claim has
been faulty/broken from nearly the very get go. (I rather doubt this
is entirely true, because they can't share as to the internal workings
of that PFS instrument, in that there's absolutely no technical
accounting or any other measure on behalf of those internal mechanics
other than going by their word, which simply doesn't make any sense)
http://www.esa.int/esa-mmg/mmg.pl?mi...Express&type=I
http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/are...cfm?fareaid=64

In spite of the Venus EXPRESS having supposedly lost all use of their
robust PFS, as representing nearly 90% worth of their mission's
science capability, whereas in spite of that handicap or intentional
banishment it's still offering darn good though much lower resolution
results of the IR mapping:
http://www.esa.int/esa-mmg/mmg.pl?b=...le=y &start=4
http://www.esa.int/esa-mmg/mmg.pl?b=...start=4&size=b

Notice how there's never one scientific word as to the specific
thermal temperatures of those IR obtained images, but instead a whole
lot of careful wordings that manage to divert as much attention as
possible away from the matter of fact that Venus has been losing
roughly 20.5 w/m2 (256 fold greater than Earth) away from its
geothermally toasty surface. Further notice how the all-knowing
wizards of Usenet or even those rusemasters of NASA's very own
uplink.space.com are entirely without an honest thought, clue or much
less having been asking any questions as to why there's still no
public information getting shared as to the wide differentials of
those surface and atmospheric temperatures of Venus. Even though the
remaining IR instruments of ESA's Venus Express are of extremely poor
resolution doesn't exclude those kinds of low resolution IR readings
from providing a sufficient degree of thermal mapping, as to the best
available extent that's possible, and yet we've seen almost nothing of
their supposed science in sharing IR specifics of such thermal issues
other than IR ratios which can be without a basic reference to a given
spectrum of temperature interpreted as to mean damn near anything.

Of course from the long shot of Venus L2 is where a modern day radar
and IR imaging pair of instruments as of the last decade could have
accomplished a whole lot better results, and if from within that nifty
and relatively cool halo station-keeping location sending in probes of
the rigid airship kind, that which would obviously cruise below those
thick acidic clouds and subsequently get those absolutely terrific
closeup look-see mappings of the Venus surface down to less than 0.1
meter/pixel, and of visual spectrum imaging down to as tight as a few
mm, which technically could have by now been doable.

There are still those extremely interesting pixels of previous radar
mapping of what looks entirely intelligent and/or artificially
rational, as though representing a community of substantial structures
and otherwise of extremely interesting natural terrain/geology
features (including an active fluid arch and of multiple reservoirs)
like none other. For those with an honestly serious mindset of
considering all such options, I have had exactly what you're looking
for as of nearly the past 8 years, and I also have the other proof
positive as to how those in charge have been doing all they can in
order to disqualify, exclude or rather banish any such notions that
Venus has been technically a viable planet for accommodating
intelligent other life.

This doesn't require that such be of an intelligent other life as
having locally evolved within that newish planetology of such a
geothermally forced environment, although technically even that's a
remote possibility for those of us residing outside of the mainstream
status quo of naysayville's bigots-R-us mindset.
--
Brad Guth

On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 12:06:59 -0600, kT wrote:

Let's see, every year I had to get my gun, go out and hunt the pathetic
pheasant down, root him out of his pathetic cave, and then kill him.

That sounds a lot like a military operation to me.

I'm sure the nation's hunters will be pleasantly surprised to know
they are under a government contract and are owed money. You'll be
set for life if you can represent the hunters in court. Assuming you
and your clients aren't laughed out of it.




----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----