September 28, 2009
Posted by Richard Cochrane on 28th September 2009
· Another Obama Appointee Axed.
· A, Q, Khan Spills Beans on Nuke Programs.
· Blaspheming School Stages Christian Killers Drill
· Lunar Base: No We Can’t
· Bed Panning
Iran’s test of a intermediate range (1,200 miles) missile over the weekend is an obvious provocation, and thumbs its nose at Obama’s threats.
Obama loyalist and appointee Yosi Sergant, National Endowment for the Arts communications director, has resigned effective immediately joining a growing list of embarrassing Obama appointees to be axed. Yosi’s sin was blatantly organizing an NEA sponsored conference call urging NEA client artists to “pick something, whether its health care, education, the environment, you know, theres four key areas that the corporation (NEA) has identified as the areas of service.” Yosi mixed the NEA’s work – hitherto essentially non-partisan politics — with the administration’s political agenda. It might have gone undetected except for Andrew Breitbart’s new conservative site, Big Government that landed on it like a bird on a June bug.
It was Yosi Sergant, who helped make artist Shepard Fairey’s “Hope” image ubiquitous as an organizer of Obama campaign support from artists, and that got him a $200,000 a year slice of the vast Obama patronage pie.
Texas Senator John Cornyn, among critics, complained that the call politicized subjected the agency to “political manipulation, though the NEA initially defended the call. NEA Chairman Rocco Landesman later said the call “inappropriate” and that Sergant had acted “unilaterally” in helping to organize it. In any case Yosi’s political head was soon sent bouncing down Pennsy;lvania Avenue late Friday in an effort to avoid another embarrassing news splash splattering defecant all over Obama and the White House..
“This call was completely unrelated to NEAs grantmaking, which is highly regarded for its independence and integrity,” NEA top dog Landesman absurdly claimed.
The White House sought to downplay the story, and it has gotten cooperation from mainstream media that has paid it scant attention, despite heavy coverage on the right. But it did issue new guidelines aimed at preventing politics from mixing with agency business.
A PEW Foundation funded study finds that one-third of Mexicans would leave their country and come to the USA if they could.
Pakistan’s ‘father of the Islamic bomb’, nuclear scientist A.Q. Khan, has disclosed new details of the exchange of nuclear secrets and materials between China, Iran, Pakistan and North Korea.
Khan, who remains under house arrest in Pakistan, managed to send a letter to a British journalist at the Sunday Times who published its claims on Pakistan’s nuclear deals that have led to the ongoing proliferation crisis.
”We put up a centrifuge plant at Hanzhong (250km southwest of Xian),” Khan wrote. “The Chinese gave us drawings of the nuclear weapon, gave us 50kg of enriched uranium, gave us 10 tons of UF6 (natural) and 5 tons of UF6 (3%).”
On Iran, Khan wrote: ”Probably with the blessings of BB [Benazir Bhutto]…General Imtiaz [Benazir’s defense adviser, now dead] asked me to give a set of drawings and some components to the Iranians. The names and addresses of suppliers were also given to the Iranians.”
Of course the disclosure deflates Iran’s continuing claims that it does not have a nuclear weapons program.
As for North Korea
, he added: ”(A now-retired general) took $3 million through me from the N. Koreans and asked me to give some drawings and machines.” Simon Henderson’s Sunday Times article describes how the letter instructed his daughter to provide it to Henderson, with whom he had casual journalist contact in the past. The article attempts to refute widespread allegations that Khan trafficked in nuclear secrets for personal gain, citing evidence of his impoverished state in 2006.
Then there’s Gadhafi living in a tent. After residents complained, he had to dismantle the tent he was living in in New York. Say what you want about Gadhafi, but don’t you wish your relatives would stay in a tent on the front lawn when they come?
School officials in Burlington, N.J., the same bunch involved in blasphemy by changing the lyrics of a children’s song substituting the name Barrack Hussein Obama for Jesus Christ and then had school children sing new lyrics during Black History Month have topped themselves for foolishness and stupidity.
Saturday Associated Press characterized the singing incident as an effort to indoctrinate school children to idolize Obama but did not mention a bizarre drill staged by those same school officials just last week. It seems Burlington school officials staged a mock “hostage situation” purposefully portraying the attackers as Christians, including one who was upset that his daughter was expelled for praying before class.
School Supt. Chris Manno praised the exercise to test the response of the school and police, explaining, “You perform as you practice. We need to practice under conditions as real as possible in order to evaluate our procedures and plans so that they’re as effective as possible.”
Lifesite News reported that Christian students in the school were offended when the student body was told the alleged gunmen were “members of a right-wing fundamentalist group called the ‘New Crusaders’ who don’t believe in separation of church and state.”
The Burlington County Times said the mock gunmen pretended to shoot several students in the hallways before taking 10 students hostage in the district’s media center.
Organizers of the drill said the “Christian” gunmen had gone to the school “seeking justice because the daughter of one had been expelled for praying before class.”
But there’s not much of reality to that scenario, according to Bob Pawson, spokesman for the Scriptures in School Project. Instead, it was just an excuse to denigrate Christians, he said.
“So what allegedly real condition was imagineered? A grotesque scenario saturated with Christian-bashing prejudice and bigotry; a scenario which could never possibly occur,” he said.
It doesn’t even meet the logic test, he said. “As all Burlington school officials know full well: It is perfectly legal for any student or staff member to pray in a public school. They know that no student can ever be expelled for praying before class. Hence, the contrived reason for the mock attack is bogus.”
County officials said the drill was the first live test of its sort in their area, but Pawson said it was more a test of New Jersey Christians, trying to determine their response “to such a blatant example of anti-Christian animosity.”
In a belated statement released on the school’s website, officials said there were “concerns” that had been shared regarding the test.
“Any perceived insensitivities to our religious community as a result of the emergency exercise are regrettable,” the school said.
“Our schools have respected and supported staff members’ and students’ right to pray. Students and staff have held morning prayer vigils. There are various prayer groups within the High School as well as an established Bible club,” the school said.
The U.S. Supreme Court nearly 40 years ago concluded that students do not give up their constitutional rights “to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate,” and the U.S. Department of Education explicitly supports that freedom, penalizing any school that disallows constitutionally protected religious speech.
“A public apology is in order,” Pawson said. “The citizens of Burlington County could rightly demand the resignation or termination of school officials who dreamed up and approved this reprehensible scenario.”
In a commentary on Newsbusters.org, a writer lamented the situation.
“This is the root of liberal bias. It starts in the schools and spreads throughout from the children to the town councils and eventually to local newspapers such as the Burlington County Times where staff writer David Levinsky blends the fantasy of the mock scenario with the reality of school shootings through America,” the writer said.
“The real story is that it has become acceptable to discriminate against Christians with bigoted characterizations that portray them as gun wielding psycho killers,” the writer said.
The local newspaper had reported the drill was that of a situation that has “played out” numerous times across America. “Two Burlington Township police detectives portrayed the gunmen. Investigators described them as members of a right-wing fundamentalist group…”
Said Terry Trippany, editor at Webloggin, on a personal blog, “If the police had portrayed the real life scenario of gay terrorists or abortion rights activists upset for any contrived reason you would read about it in every major paper across the United States; and rightfully so because IT WOULD BE RIDICULOUSLY STUPID.”
An author at StopTheAclu.com said, “This is the stupid local bureaucrat version of the Sum of All Fears. What would have made the ‘drill more realistic’ would have been to cut the crap and portray the child-killing terrorists as Islamists.”
The local newspaper reported that, “Burlington Township Public Safety Director William Corter said the drill was the first live exercise testing the police and school response plans to a hostage crisis. ‘This should really show how well we work together and respond,’ Corter said. ‘If mistakes are made, we want to know how they should be corrected. The things we do right, we still want to see how we can make them better.’”
Someone needs to test the Burlington, New Jersey water supply for strange substances before this collection decides to become the first nuclear armed school district.
Dalton Chiscolm is unhappy about Bank of America’s customer service — really, really unhappy — in August he sued the bank and its board, demanding “1,784 billion, trillion dollars” be deposited into his account the next day. He also demanded an additional $200,164,000, court papers show. A judge has ordered Dalton to appear and explain the basis of his sxtrillion claim or have it dismissed. Te lawyer who filed it should be hanged.
Back to the Future: Lesson of the Luddites.
Back in the days of optimism and dedication to “bear any burden; pay any price” America’s world leadership, before its present planned decline into selfishness and isolationism the idea of permanent bases on the Moon and Mars would have set the nation tingling. JFK’s challenge to land on the Moon and safely retujrn to Earth in a decade galvanized America and launched it on decades long quests.
India hailed the discovery. But, Obama diminishes “Space” exploration that has been back benched along with most of democracies co-advenrturers now abandoned to the ash heap in favor of a policy of apology, self-defeat and a petty White House led campaign for mediocrity or worse.
Is this week’s revelation that water ice is more prevalent on the moon than scientists expected a “game-changer” for future spaceflight, as some experts think? Actually, the rules of the game for going beyond Earth orbit haven’t changed - but the latest findings could bring new attention to options in the old playbooks.
The publication of three studies in Science about ice on the moon, plus yet another study about buried water ice on Mars, comes at an interesting time. More than five years after the White House set a goal of sending humans back to the moon by 2020, an independent panel chaired by retired aerospace executive Norman Augustine is wrapping up a full report that takes a second look at all the options for human spaceflight.
At the same time, NASA is on the verge of taking two significant steps in its renewed moon effort: On Oct. 9, the LCROSS probe is due to slam into a crater near the lunar south pole, a dark pit that could contain usable reservoirs of ice. Later next month, the space agency will go ahead with a test launch of its prototype Ares I-X moon rocket.
For all these reasons, the back-to-the-moon plan - which was turning into a case of “been there, done that 40 years ago” - is starting to look sexy again – but is still without a latter day JFK.
“If we have water, we have the core elements needed to support life,” Rick Tumlinson, co-founder of the Space Frontier Foundation, said in a statement issued after the latest moon-ice reports. “H2O is a magic formula: We can drink it, raise crops with it, or even break it down for oxygen to breathe. We can even recombine the hydrogen and oxygen to make rocket propellant. Confirming the widespread existence of moonwater means we have a nearby oasis in space around which we can build the true human communities beyond Earth. There will be flowers on the moon in our lifetimes.”
Second thoughts?
You might think the latest research is sparking second thoughts among the members of the Augustine panel, formally known as the Review of Human Space Flight Plans Committee. But that’s not necessarily so: It turns out that panel members were given a confidential briefing on the research while they were working on their report.
“The research we heard about was at a very early stage of development,” Charles Kennel, a panel member and chairman of the National Academies Space Studies Board, said. “It certainly has exciting implications, if true, but it is way too early to base any planning for human spaceflight on it, in my view.”
Another member of the panel, XCOR Aerospace CEO Jeff Greason, said the findings were “incredibly important.” At the very least, the options for exploiting that lunar ice needed to be investigated further, he said.
“The real question has been, it’s hard to know how serious to get about planning for the economic exploitation of lunar resources,” he told me, ”because No. 1, we haven’t done it, and No. 2, nobody’s sure there’s enough to worry about. Now the preponderance of evidence is that there’s enough to worry about.”
The moon is not literally an oasis, of course. The most optimistic estimates put the water content of lunar soil at one part per 1,000 - which is drier the Sahara Desert. According to Brown University’s Carle Pieters, the lead researcher behind one of the Science studies, you’d need to process a baseball diamond’s worth of dirt to get a drink of water.
But if you could turn the processing of lunar dirt over to robots, like a space-age Sorcerer’s Apprentice, eventually the machines would build up enough water for drinking and irrigation, enough oxygen for breathing, and enough hydrogen for fuel. If nothing else, the moon could serve as a low-gravity fueling station for deep-space journeys headed for elsewhere.
“I would hope that an outgrowth of whatever direction national policymakers take NASA in would include developing a transportation system such that reaching the lunar surface is economically sensible,” said Greason, who emphasized he was speaking merely for himself rather than the committee.
Moon first, or Mars first?
You might think the “Moon First” option - the option that NASA is now basically pursuing - should remain the favored path. But that’s not necessarily so, either: Greason emphasized that the panel didn’t see the choices facing NASA as sticking with the International Space Station vs. landing on the moon vs. landing on Mars vs. going to other places in space.
“When we started, we were thinking about it like that,” he said, “and the menu of things was pretty much, there’s ISS, there’s the moon, there are lower-gravity bodies, Lagrange points, near-Earth asteroids, the Martian moons, and then there’s Mars. What do we do? As we worked on the problem, it became clear that ISS had value, that it was likely going to be an enterprise that it made sense to carry on at least for a little while.
“Now it’s not a ‘versus,’” he said. ”It’s ‘we’re going to do ISS, and then what? Why are we doing this?’ It’s our view that the organizing theme is that we’re embarking upon the work of becoming a multiplanet species. Mars is a key destination for that, but we’re not ready to do it right now.”
There’ll always be a moon vs. Mars rivalry, because both destinations have their pluses and minuses. Robert Zubrin, a rocket scientist who is president of the Mars Society, said “there are discoveries waiting to be made” on both worlds. But he argues that the Red Planet should be the main focus because it offers so many more resources - and so many more possibilities for addressing the big questions about life’s origins and humanity’s future.
Zubrin said the options being presented to the White House are fundamentally flawed because they don’t set an ambitious goal for the next decade - the kind of goal that President John Kennedy set back in 1961. “We could be on Mars by the end of the next decade,” Zubrin said.
This week’s revelations about the discovery of nearly pure water ice close to the surface at Mars’ northern midlatitudes reinforces Zubrin’s opinion. “It makes a settlement on Mars sustainable, because you don’t have to bring resources from Earth,” he said.
Tumlinson, however, sees things differently. The moon is close enough to make the perfect test bed for the technologies required for Martian settlement, he says. And knowing that there more water ice than expected on the moon could make for an easier sell.
“The next planetary destination obviously should be the moon,” he said. “The moon is a harsher mistress than Mars. If we can learn to make it there, we’ll make it anywhere.”
First, take one small step
The news about ice on the moon, and on Mars, highlight the need for technologies aimed at water extraction and purification - technologies that would be useful virtually anywhere we could land in the solar system (even Mercury!), and perhaps useful here on Earth as well.
One unorthodox extraction technique calls for “nuking” the moon with microwaves from lunar orbit, which would turn embedded ice into water vapor. The water would be collected when it refreezes at the surface. Let me say that “nuking” is a dangerous idea especially for the bewilderingly stupid, who in fact demanded the new name of MRI (Magnetic Resonance Imaging) because its original name was Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (Imaging) and scientific Luddites wouldn’t touch the lifesaving medical gadget until the filty word was excised.
NASA is working on other methods for pulling resources out of lunar soil, and next month, teams will vie for prizes in a contest for moon-digging robots.
Schemes for processing materials from the moon have been kicking around for decades, as illustrated by this concept from 1978. Maybe it’s time to blend those 30-year-old dreams with some 21st-century innovation. Developing new technologies for water extraction would fit right in with a step-by-step “flexible path” to deep space - an option that got a sympathetic hearing from Greason and his fellow panel members.
“The whole question of ‘do we do this, or that, or the other thing’ is a false choice,” he said. “The only question is, ‘What order do you do these things in?’”
There’s one other question, however: “What can we afford to do?” The key decision facing the Obama administration has to do with how much NASA’s budget could be boosted to fund future exploration. Just today, the Government Accountability Office released a report saying that NASA’s current plan for future spaceflight was underfunded and lacked a “solid business case.”
The Augustine panel estimated the annual cost of a solid exploration program at $3 billion per year. If sufficient funding can’t be found for NASA’s ambitious goals in space, America “should accept the disappointment of setting lesser goals,” the panel said.
Is it realistic to expect a $3 billion boost in the space budget? Can NASA make a strong business case for going beyond Earth orbit? Maybe that’s where this week’s revelations could make a difference. But don’t expect the money to flow easily, particularly if the space effort takes a business-as-usual approach.
On Thursday, The Orlando Sentinel quoted an unnamed NASA official as saying that some of the agency’s top managers were “unfortunately caught up in the fantasy” that the space agency would get the extra $3 billion. Administration officials were said to consider that kind of increase ”highly unlikely.”
What do you think? Are this week’s revelations about water a big deal? Can a people that once inspired the world leap past current moral cowardess to find a new generation with such old values and aspiration or will we be dragged under by today’s political Luddites?
Luddites [luhd-ahyt] oun a member of any of various bands of workers in England (1811–16) organized to destroy manufacturing machinery, under the belief that its use diminished employment.
Origin: 1805–15; after Ned Ludd, 18th-century Leicestershire worker who originated the idea.
Sister Mary Ann, who worked for a home health agency, was making her rounds. She was visiting homebound patients when she ran out of gas.
As luck would have it, a gas station was just a block away. She walked to the station to borrow a gas can and buy some gas. The attendant told her that the only gas can he owned had been loaned out, but she could wait until it was returned
Since Sister Mary Ann was on the way to see a patient, she decided not to wait and walked back to her car. She looked for something in her car that she could fill with gas and spotted the bedpan she was taking to the patient. Always resourceful, Sister Mary Ann carried the bedpan to the station, filled it with gasoline, and carried the full bedpan back to her car.
As she was pouring the gas into her tank, two Baptists watched from across the street. One of them turned to the other and said, “If it starts, I’m becoming Catholic.”
Posted in Conservatively Speaking | 1 Comment »