Was it the anti-zombie?

wish I could say I'm satisfied ... but I want MORE ..

Dan Rather?

But they didn't fire the person who issued the death threat to lgf?

Why were they secretive about this, and why won’t they release the editor’s name?

Because Mohammed Abdul Ahmed-bin Hilali Hussien wants to maintain his priviacy.

He went to work for Rather's new venture and Dan worked this little deal out for him, Carter brokered it and Soros funded it.

Because that would be an insult to allah and require jihad!

Infidels!

Part of the deal of his going quietly without a lawsuit was not to release his name so he could get a job as a photo editor at AP?

/just throwing out theories here. We'll organize them on 3 x 5s later.

A most curious development. One wonders who is handling the PR for Reuters these days, Jamil Hussein? (Or maybe it is these Jamil Husseins).

all of Reuters’ statements and reports on the incident, they’ve never mentioned that a “top photo editor” was also fired.

I liked Jamil Hussein's by line

.......damage control

Jamil Hussein is really Nancy Pelosi in drag. Just check out the eyes...

A grim quagmire.

I always wondered were Mary Mapes had got to. I guess now we know.

It was a moment to savor for some blogs, including Little Green Footballs, which got credit for first calling attention to repeating patterns in Hajj’s smoky Beirut image. The bloggers had caused a firing and an apology from a big news agency, and Hajj supported their case that journalists make stuff up.

from PDN Online

Apparently they still don't get it. The bloggers did not cause a firing and an apology. Their (Reuters) own sloppiness in editing and the photographers actions caused a firing and the resulting need for an apology. The bloggers merely brought it to the publics attention.

Just generally, a group of reporters were recently asked why practically zilch is reported about what's going on in Sudan, apart from Darfur, and especially not the successes. Their reply was they are delighted to report on other stories, but their editors only wanted Darfur. How many reports are never allowed to break through the smothering of a class of Leftie editors? Editors who hold the power in the newsrooms and make very deliberate decisions to feed the public their version of reality, their politics only.
One can only hope that a good number of them are nearing retirement, fading dinosaurs of the sixties (like Dan Rather). It would be very useful for the public to get to know who are the ones making these decisions - and it probably wouldn't be too hard - how much news product is coming out of a handful of wire services, Reuters and AP, mostly? Can't be that big a list of editors.

I bet it was something like:
Mohammed Hammed Bobammed Bonanafana Fo Fahmed Me Mi Mo Mammed Mohammed

Michelle is back.

And she's watching.

Notice the Reuters counter is up today. Hi!

Seen in the want ads:

Looking for photo editor with above-average propoganda skills. An understanding of mainstream media deceptive techniques a must. Photoshop expertise an absolute requirement.

Send all resumes and salary requirements to Reuters News Services. attn: The Big Photo Kahuna.

Good evening, Lizards.

In all of Reuters’ statements and reports on the incident, they’ve never mentioned that a “top photo editor” was also fired. Why were they secretive about this, and why won’t they release the editor’s name?

Because they (al-reuters) are, and have been, prosecuting an anti-american agenda in Iraq.

/helloooo

#17 Outrider

The bloggers had caused a firing

So what they're saying is, "We would have gotten away with it too, if it hadn't been for those meddling kids."

The " smoking skyline redone with sponge " will go down as a modern classic.

Lizard Storm.

heh

Why were they secretive about this, and why won’t they release the editor’s name?

I think that it all boils down to the fact that they don't want to admit they screwed up, just like the al-p doesn't admit when they f up.

Well if they published the editors identity, how could (s)he get reajusted at the AFP or AP etc. and continue shenanigans uninterrupted?

The " smoking skyline redone with sponge " will go down as a modern classic.

Please....leave me out of this.

why won’t they release the editor’s name?

Their embarrased, thats why. This is a black eye for them and they want it to disappear.

Maximu§
3/11 ACR

The bloggers had caused a firing and an apology from a big, stwawng, tough news agency

Mwaaahahhahhaaaaahahaha.

The bigger they are the harder they fall.

AP and Reuters are extinct.

Why were they secretive about this, and why won’t they release the editor’s name?

Because he was involved in a multi-player trade with the Associated Press and the BBC?

Why were they secretive about this, and why won’t they release the editor’s name?

Yeah. Go ahead and bank that we won't find out. That strategy is working out reeeeeeeal well for you.

PUnks.

The answer is more obvious than you think.

When they pretended the problem was "only" Adnan Hajj, it was "isolated."

When they have to start firing editors, it throws everything that editor touched into doubt.

They don't want to release his name because probably 50% of their articles were "edited" by this guy.

#36 tfk

Been drinking the "lectric kool-aid" tonight, shipmate?

Its simple:destroy all evidence of a mistake ever having been made and get rid of anyone who can be linked to the "non-existant" mistake.

"In all of Reuters’ statements and reports on the incident, they’ve never mentioned that a “top photo editor” was also fired. Why were they secretive about this, and why won’t they release the editor’s name?"

His name is... Jamil Hussein.

First Dan Rather and now this?

Damn, Karl Rove is good!

#37 sailordude
Zombie = Heisenberg
Get it?

They won't release the name because they rehired the person to another position! Moving up the corporate ladder, no doubt....

#41 KT

Charle's operative is a nuclear physicist?

/I don't get it.

I think m1rth is right.

If they release his name, they know the blogs will be all over every thing he ever edited. They pulled all Hajj's photos but I doubt they can pull everything this guy okayed. And they can't say his editting was bad enough to warrant firing AND say the stuff he did is okay to leave out there, without harming their 'reputation' they are trying to re-establish.

"Two of Hajj’s photographs showed obvious signs of digital alterations."

The incompetence of Reuters is revealed once again. They misspelled the word blatant.

#35 m1rth:

You might be on to something - though as a photo editor, he or she would be responsible for the photos and captions associated with those photos. There is the potential for thousands of other images that have problems.

I speculated in these threads from the start that the photo-doctoring was done at the Reuter's office and not by Adnan Haj and thats why I think they kept the photo editor's firing quiet. The company line from the start was that the photoshopping was the work of Hajj. They went so far to "disappear" his entire archive from scrutiny but never gave us any evidence of other tampering by him. They threw Hajj under the bus to conceal an even worse scandal that the culprit was a guy in a suit in the office.

Has anyone in the media ever located Adnan Hajj and asked him how it really went down? The fact that he just fell off the face of the Earth makes it sure seem like a settlement with a gag order. Really, when in the history of the world has any Arab ever just quietly walked away after being so completely humiliated?

The LLL is always sensitive about admitting any error on their own behalf.

In their twisted little world of always being correct, to admit an error on one issue calls into question all of their other work and so to admit one thing is wrong is almost an admission that something else that they a pushing may also be suspect. Once this logical snowball starts to grow it calls into question their entire set of beliefs.

Remember the quotes over the last couple of days, that even though the videos of the radical preachers we hosted elsewhere and were taken by a documentary team working for the UK Channel 4, the mere fact that they were reported by LGF is sufficiently in error from the perspective of the LLL that they can dismiss the entire content of the words spoken by the preachers as if they were a lie generated by LGF.

Probably happens as they have such a strong tenure in academia where a similar process seems to occur.

#43 sailordude
That's ok enjoy some Helhotlz patterns instead.

#47
The fact that he just fell off the face of the Earth makes it sure seem like a settlement with a gag order. Really, when in the history of the world has any Arab ever just quietly walked away after being so completely humiliated?

Unless, of course, it's a fictitious name?

Will they fire the writers now that Reuters realize they have been infiltrated by Muslim traitors?

#47 mich-again

Has anyone in the media ever located Adnan Hajj and asked him how it really went down?

I was wondering that earlier today. ( I also want to know what Bahgdad Bob is doing these days, I miss him).
It would be interesting to hear Andan's side of the story, but he probably had to sign all kinds of non-disclosure agreements in return for a nice severance package.

Reuters = enemy of the US. That's why, Charles!

"Cocaine is a powerful drug."

--Rick James (famously, on Chappelle's Show)

"Grappa is a powerful liquor."

--Occasional Reader (trying hard to type without DOING ALL CAPS or anything like that)

Now, all you kids, don't try this at home. When the restaurant owner says, "here, you have to try this, I made it myself", call a responsible adult.

#36 taxfreekiller
Got put off cattle in December 1983. minus 20 degrees. Car heater burned out - sooo cold! Got to the farm, crawled inside the warm, cosy farmhouse and the in-laws perked right up! "So glad you're here, ya'll can help us feed the cattle!" With all the diesel fuel glopped up in the fuel lines, nothing bigger than the gas pickup was running. Pulled hay by hand out from under snow drifts, (from those big round bales no less!) threw it all in the truck bed, and we drove it out to the cattle, then shoved it off the back. Never been scared of cattle until I saw them chasing after us frantic for that hay. A week of that twice a day and began to do a little research. Buffalo ... now those are critters with a thick warm coat that know how to root for grass, even under snow. Didn't come up with any quantum thinking, tho.' Too darn cold.
Oh, what do Buffalo, as in Bison "flatulant out?" If cattle pass the methane wind, don't buffalo do too? And if so, what was the methane production in 1830 when immense Bison herds blanketed the central United States? Or is that an inconvenient piece of information?

Kilgore Trout

Like cake_lady said, maybe the guy changed his name. Or maybe there never was a Adnan Hajj. Or maybe it was a group effort.

But Reuters can rest assured it will all blow over soon enough. Media shenanigans don't surprise anyone anymore.

The troll calling itself 'HVT' now has the distinction of being the second idiot ever banned from LGF for sheer stupidity.

Wow, to think, I was an observer both times!

#57 Charles -

Who was the first?

HVT didn't post on this thread, did he?

I think Joe Wilson was first.

He did, and the post is now gone.

I'm willing to bet the "top editor"'s name starts with Muhammad or something like that.
/Not even sarcastic.

Whew. I thought I was losing my mind. Been running back and forth through threads looking for a comment I 'lost'.

Ahhh yes - Joe Wilson. Forgot about "him."

Well that explains why I couldn't find it, then!
Ah...we'll miss him/her/it...not.

#35 m1rth

BINGO! We have a weiner.

I like your thinking!

Why were they secretive about this, and why won’t they release the editor’s name?

Eggselent question.

SUPER OT

Chinese missile destroys satellite in space

[Link: www.telegraph.co.uk...]

#52 Killgore Trout

he probably had to sign all kinds of non-disclosure agreements in return for a nice severance package.

Makes you wonder just what kind of "severance" he got.

#67 Gordan the Fisherman

Um, are you sure your nic isn't supposed to be Gorton the Fisherman?

/nevermind me

Now the Krazy Koz Kiddies want to impeach Alberto Gonzales.

re my OT

Chinese links to Iran are also causing serious concern in Washington. Last month, Beijing signed a $16 billion contract with Teheran to purchase natural gas and develop oil fields.

China and Russia have repeatedly refused to back sanctions against Iran over its controversial nuclear power programme, which America believes could be used to build a nuclear bomb.

~~~~~~~~

yet we continue to ply them with maniufacturing dollars
38 billion from Wal Mart
how many more billion from all other US corps

and they spit in our collective faces

SHAME! ON YOU fooled again!

maybe he photoshopped an "X" and the Saudis didn't like it

#72 DesertSage

I refuse to climb into that cesspool. What's the condensed version of their whine?

Why were they secretive about this, and why won’t they release the editor’s name?

There must be some serious brainwashing or something going on at Reuters (secret torture chambers perhaps?). If the MSM can be reliably counted on to leak any embarrassing info about the Bush administration, how is it that not one person at Reuters has ever leaked any gossip about this entire affair.

It just goes against human nature.

/maybe they're all aliens? ;)

Saudi Arabia may be encouraging Sunni-Shiite strife

[Link: news.yahoo.com...]

/Ya think?!

SUPER OT
Chinese missile destroys satellite in space

Oh, shit!

#75 Killer Tomato

Here's the crux of it:

Specter: Now wait a minute, wait a minute. The Constitution says you can't take it away except in the case of invasion or rebellion. Doesn't that mean you have the right of habeas corpus?

Gonzales: I meant by that comment that the Constitution doesn't say that every individual in the United States or every citizen has or is assured the right of habeas corpus. It doesn't say that. It simply says that the right of habeas corpus shall not be suspended.

Article I, Section 9:

The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

The Kos Kiddies seem to have a problem with this...don't ask me why.

#57 Charles

Following in the footsteps of The Late Great Joe Wilson.
And I missed it all.

#78

Yeah sure. So what?

#79 DesertSage
#75 Killer Tomato

It also seems to call it the privledge, not right of h/c. What the difference means in real world is beyond me at this hour.

81 DAK

So I should have referred to the original post at #69.

Here's the story.

#81 dak 1/18/2007 08:21PM PST
#78

Yeah sure. So what?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

No big deal, right DAK?
Wait till your cable goes down!

I mean the Chinese are more inerested in Capitalism nowaday than in the Great Leap Forward and other Commie Bullshit.

They don't worry me. Crapping out a satellite is relatively easy, once you have the means to orbit anything. The point is that when you can orbit, you can nuke anyhow. Nothing there since the sixties concerning the Chinese.

They are more dangerous to America contributing to the Democratic election coffers than anything else they can come up with.

#36 taxfreekiller

All their lies are "quantum in nature", they use the built-in randomness of quantum theory to send the lie out and that locks the lie in, and it being random and quantum in nature, any attempt to break-in and observe the lie , DUE TO QUANTUM THEORY, the lie changes when observed. The lie's and fake photo's are sent this way by themselfs to one another and if one even as skilled as Zombie tries to detect the lies, they change,even a chance eavesdropping attempt will irreversibly damage the quantum string of lies and fraud. You must remember the central rule of quantum physics:
Observing the impossibly small lies necessarily alters each lie. If someone overhears the lie as it is told that changes the quantum state of the lie as it transfers via the AP, MSM channels.

Wow. I'm impress.

#69 So? 1/18/2007 08:05PM PST

SUPER OT

Chinese missile destroys satellite in space

see post for link

I missed a BDTS?

Crap.

87 dak

They are flexing their muscles up there and down here, saying here we come. Who's feeding this giant? We are!

Simple. Period.

#86 So?

Wait till your cable goes down!

The cable sats are in geosynchronous orbit over the U.S.

/that's way beyond the 4000 mile range of the KT-2 missile that China fired

In reality I am a lot less worried about about the Chinese than other folks.

They are a practical kind. Why kill the goose with that kind of financial return? Everything in Wall Mart is made in China. They can't afford to screw with the US anymore than we can afford to screw with China.

We have had the capability to scrag satellite for ages. Now they do.

I don't like the Chinese record on human rights, but at leat they haven't blowed up any skyscrapers anywhere lately, and are not constantly screaming about Jihad and shit.

Why not let Mexico manufacture all the goods the Chinese are now producing for the US? Mexicans would gladly stay at home, improve their standard of living and Mexico would be no threat aka selling missiles to N. Korea, Iran, Syria, etc.

dak & sihlus

If they can take out our satellites they can take out Russia's, Frances, India's UK's Australia's - every one else's. Not exactly a way to win friends and influence people to your cause.

Oh and thanks for all the new 20,000 mph space debris, Chi-coms - Nice job. That should get the Green set fired up.

Besides, the U.S. Air Borne Laser appears to be set to address the same purpose.

#92 Killian Bundy 1/18/2007 08:35PM PST
#86 So?
Wait till your cable goes down!

The cable sats are in geosynchronous orbit over the U.S.

~~~~~~~

Killian it was a joke...but not my #94 post

#94 So?

Sounds like a plan to me. And with the labor market down, wages should go up without the minimum wage.

The Chinese are just advertizing that they have this new Throw-weight capability. And they used it to put a few astronauts up there this year.

Dunno what they will call them.

Americans= Astronauts

Russians= Cosmonauts

Chinese= Dim Sum aunauts?

They just caught up with our sixties capabilities. Relax.

#96 So?

Killian it was a joke

Sorry.

/no one [expletive deleted] with my cable!

#93 dak 1/18/2007 08:36PM PST

Yes but they have sold missile technology to N. Korea, perhaps nuclear technology...and missiles and rocket launchers to many Jihadi countries in the mid-east.

They may do business with Israel on some level, but they are no lovers of Israel.

And the deal with oil deals with Iran....see where that can lead...

it's not Alice in WonderLand stuff. Your Wal Mart dollars are feeding all this BS.

I worry more about Iran and Pakistan getting that throw weight capability than China.

China is practical, more so than the old Soviets. And they are not expansionist.

The crackpot Islamist running Pakistan and Iran worry me a lot more now that they have nukes and are working on IRBMs.

DesertSage

I can't tell what the original question was, so it's hard to understand why their panties are bunched. From that exchange, it appears that Specter is looking for an opinion or interpretation, and Gonzales is stating a fact. The concept of HC 'predates' the Constitution - it isn't specified in the Constitution.
Maybe they have a problem with understanding English. Or the Constitution. (Or maybe it just depends on what the meaning of the word is, is.)

Reuters might as well change their name to "Mad Magazine" as far as I am concerned.

I mean, if they want to exhibit fake photos, and still claim that they care about the world, so be it.

But I will never believe or respect them again.

#100

Yes, that is the point of the whole story. The Chinese selling this shit to the wackos. The Chincoms do finance their military with foreign sales.

An interesting fact though, is that they live a lot closer to those wackos than we do....

I think the Chinese ASAT test is by far the most important news story that's come out today (even though it actually happened a week ago).

The British Empire reached its zenith in the 19th Century because it had the most powerful navy and controlled the oceans. The United States became a superpower in the second half of the 20th Century largely through airpower.

Whoever controls Earth orbit will be the dominant power in the 21st Century. I think the Chinese understand this, and we had better damn well take it seriously.

What if the next Pearl Harbor happens in Earth orbit? A surprise attack on our communications, weather, and military satellites would set the U.S. economy back 40 years overnight.

101 Dak

You're worried about Iran, but which country was against sanctions regarding the Iraniannuclear program?

That's right...CHINA!

#79 DesertSage:

Gonzales: I meant by that comment that the Constitution doesn't say that every individual in the United States or every citizen has or is assured the right of habeas corpus. It doesn't say that. It simply says that the right of habeas corpus shall not be suspended.

The Kos Kiddies seem to have a problem with this...don't ask me why.

I understand what's bothering them.

Gonzales has just asserted that this clause in the Constitution can be what the mathematicians call "vacuously satisfied"--i.e. if you don't have the right of habeas corpus to begin with, then Congress can't suspend what you don't already have and hence the Constitution is satisfied.

By that logic, the Constitutional provision is fulfilled even if no Americans have the right of habeas corpus to begin with--an interpretation which would allow the Attorney General to assume that no American has an automatic right to habeas corpus.

I would have to go back to the Federalist Papers, but I'm sure that wasn't an originalist interpretation: I'm sure our Founding Fathers meant for us to have the right of habeas corpus unless Congress suspends it.

The Bush Administration, rather than arguing their case before the public as to why habeas corpus might need to be suspended in certain cases, is apparently looking for clever little loopholes in the Constitution and in the legal code that would let them do it anyway. I think that is both craven and self-defeating.

The American public doesn't like being condescended to.

And Bush has to prepare for the possibility that a Democrat could win the Presidency in 2008. He can't pretend that the Republican Party owns the War on Terror anymore. Or that the Republican Party will be running the country indefinitely.

#106

Yes the Chinese are selling tech to the Iranians and North Koreans. I wonder if they will be smart enough to realize that this tech can also be used by islamist crackpots on their borders to screw with them.

#105

Relax dude. this is the thinking that got the space race going in the sixties. We won that one with the Apollo landings on the moon.

on the topic of China, anyone else here think it was incredibly stupid of Israel to have developed the j10 for the chinese, how long until they sell it back to the Iranians along with the Harpy drones.

I asked John Loftus in person, he said he didnt have a problem with it, i did. Seemed like a bad idea to me.

#109 dak

We haven't landed on the moon lately.

#110 pegcity

the j10 for the chinese

It's the equivalent of the F-16.

/not a credible threat to us

#105

Take a look at the numbers of satellites in orbit right now... figure you have to take out about two or three dozens.

A lot of them on diffrerent orbits.

It would take years for the USA to do it. With full blast balls to the wall launches, even the US would take years to blind an opponent.

What do you figure the Chinese could do? A launch every 2-3 weeks out of their only spaceport?

You worry about that.

I worry about how may crackpot Al-Sadr can put on a flight bound for Cleveland tonight with a stolen AMEX.

#111

been done when I was 6. NASA sez they go back in 10 years.

the point is that nobody else can do it at will except the US.

#113 dak

The Japanese didn't have the capability to attack Pearl Harbor in 1930 either.

#115

Yes they did. They kicked the Russians' butts when the US was even weaker than they were. They just didn't have the motive.

Look, the Chinese have had ICBMs aimed at the USA for decades now. But they are good businessmen, they have no reason to screw with the US, not when they can buy the Democrats like they did with Clinton.

They are not fuked up wackos like the Islamists.

We've had nukes aimed at their gonads since the sixties too. Situation Normal.

I see so much vitriol against Fox News coming from the Left. Shortly after CBS screwed up on the fake docs., a reporter from Fox News did screw up, and Fox News publicly apologized for it and made no excuses. That's called professionalism.

I do watch Fox News fairly often: usually Bill O'Reilly or Special Report with Brit Hume(the panel discussion part that is.). I think I will watch the Line Up in the future. Look if one wants the real news, one needs to go to print, but frankly I don't care what Lefties think of Fox News. Just because they aren't on the Leftist plantation, too bad.

#111 rickl 1/18/2007 09:00PM PST

#109 dak

We haven't landed on the moon lately.

Maybe some people here will think that I'm nuts for stating this:

We should try to reach for Mars via manned missions.

Okay, I'm now waiting for the barrage of criticism: bring it on!

Hey look, I gotta go to bed, I work for a living. The only worry I have about Chinese is the amount of MSG on that menu come sunday Dim Sung.

Chinese are open for business, show some cash and things will get moving right along, I guarantee it.

Ideology takes a back seat before payola very pronto with those hombres.

It's not the chinese laundry guy in Chinatown that calls for slaughter of the infidel and sons of pigs & apes Jews on Friday afternoon...

Not in downtown Michigan.

#118

Go see the NASA web site. There's a project for that. Only we gotta go to the moon first.

#120 dak

#118

Go see the NASA web site. There's a project for that. Only we gotta go to the moon first.

Thanks for the tip. We have sent missions to the moon. I'm not sure what you mean. Put a base on the moon first?

#118 Aegius

We should try to reach for Mars via manned missions.

I agree with you; I'd like to see that.

It just drives me up the wall that we could go to the moon back in the 70's but we can't do it today. The infrastructure is gone. There are no more Apollo spacecraft; there are no more Lunar Modules; there are no more Saturn Vs. Now they only exist in museums.

This is a tragedy that nearly brings me to tears.

Here is the link from the nasa.gov website on the manned mission to mars:
Manned mission to Mars

I honestly thought people would think that I was nuts for stating it. Look, I am not a conspiracy theorist and try to find info. before making opinions about future technology. We had a few weaks ago a guy stated that anti-matter/matter conversion would be the future of space travel. The trouble is that it takes too much energy to create anti-matter to do so.

#122 rickl

#118 Aegius
We should try to reach for Mars via manned missions.

I agree with you; I'd like to see that.

It just drives me up the wall that we could go to the moon back in the 70's but we can't do it today. The infrastructure is gone. There are no more Apollo spacecraft; there are no more Lunar Modules; there are no more Saturn Vs. Now they only exist in museums.

This is a tragedy that nearly brings me to tears.

I ADMIT that I'm NOT an engineer. That stated, "Hasn't technology improved enormously such that we can send astronauts to the moon more efficiently in 2007 than we could in the 1970's? I'm puzzled here.

#124 Aegius

Sure, but we'd have to rebuild the whole infrastructure. Kind of like reinventing the wheel.

We had working, proven spacecraft back in the 70's. We, as a nation, basically quit and threw it all away. Wouldn't it have been better to have gradually improved and refined them over time on an evolutionary basis, rather than have to design and build new spacecraft from scratch?

The Russians have been flying variants of the Soyuz spacecraft since 1967. Today it's much cheaper, more reliable, and yes, safer than our Space Shuttle.

#124 Aegius

"Hasn't technology improved enormously such that we can send astronauts to the moon more efficiently in 2007 than we could in the 1970's? I'm puzzled here.

My point is that, no, we can't send astronauts to the moon in 2007. It's impossible.

Maybe some years in the future, but we can't do it now.

#125 rickl 1/18/2007 09:46PM PST

#124 Aegius

Sure, but we'd have to rebuild the whole infrastructure. Kind of like reinventing the wheel.

We had working, proven spacecraft back in the 70's. We, as a nation, basically quit and threw it all away. Wouldn't it have been better to have gradually improved and refined them over time on an evolutionary basis, rather than have to design and build new spacecraft from scratch?

The Russians have been flying variants of the Soyuz spacecraft since 1967. Today it's much cheaper, more reliable, and yes, safer than our Space Shuttle.

Well, that's what happens when the gov. is handling it. Waste doesn't matter. In private enterprise it does.

Still if I was an investor, I wouldn't invest in space travel as I would fail to see how I would gain a good return. Look at history and one sees how sending people to distant territories has been highly risky as an investment from Scotland sending a failed expedition to Panama, the early Pilgrims barely surviving in New England and early in the Australian colony in New South Wales, they had a serious crisis of food shortage. Here we are talking about the moon or Mars, where the soil isn't suitable for agriculture, there is a lack of a good atmosphere and mining conditions may be even more difficult.

Eventually I do want private enterprise to take over space travel, but that is quite a distance of time away and I acknowledge it.

#127 Aegius

I agree. I'd like to see more private efforts in space exploration. It's hard for me to see any immediate economic incentive for a private mission to Mars. Maybe asteroid mining would bring more tangible financial returns. That probably means that raw material prices on Earth would have to rise considerably to make it worthwhile.

The space race in the 60's had more to do with national pride than any real economic incentive.

Can you imagine if the government controlled aviation in the early days? We'd probably still be looking forward to the first transatlantic flight.

As for the Chinese, I have some thoughts:
1: Whenever the Chinese have left China, they have become successful. They are a smart, hardworking people, and the only reason that China is not as strong as America has to do with a political system that squanders the human resource.
2: China doesn't want to destroy America. America does too much business with them, and owes them too much money. The worse thing that can happen to China is a devaluation of the US dollar.

As for the space race:
1: Sure the tools will have to be rebuilt if we want to return to the moon, but the knowledge has not been lost. It would be easy enough to go back within the next couple of years.
2: Space would be an excellent investment, except for one thing: free enterprise is not allowed, the US was a signatory on a treaty that basically said only governments can go into space. Proctor & Gamble (for instance) might be able to create the resources to build their own satellite, but they could not do it without government involvement - and capitalism is not allowed on the final frontier. (This was true in the 80's, when I was a little bit more interested in the subject, but things might have changed...most of what I'm telling you came from a report by a science fiction writer, commisioned by the Reagan governement: "How to Save The World, And Make A Few Bucks" by Larry Niven - if memory serves)

As for the photo editor thing:
1: I am dying to hear from Hajj
2: What was the source on the editor being fired? Can we trust the source? If it was Reuters, probably not. Maybe no-one was fired, they just said so...and that is why the editor is never named.

#129 Johnny 100 Pesos

As for the Chinese, I have some thoughts:
1: Whenever the Chinese have left China, they have become successful. They are a smart, hardworking people, and the only reason that China is not as strong as America has to do with a political system that squanders the human resource.
2: China doesn't want to destroy America. America does too much business with them, and owes them too much money. The worse thing that can happen to China is a devaluation of the US dollar.

Maybe not, but they would certainly want to neutralize us when they invade Taiwan. And that is a "when", not an "if".

And, no, the Chinese really don't give a damn about the dollar. If the dollar should collapse (and they are the ones most likely to cause it), they will go elsewhere, just like everyone else.

Spiny, the chinese economy is based on how much money America owes them. They might survive a collapse of the dollar, but it would be a far greater disaster for them than it would be for America. Although your point about Taiwan is well taken.

What a situation: China's economy is totally dependant on the strength of it's idelogical enemy. I wonder how the US government will turn that to it's disadvantage?

/sarc

#10 Silhouette

Part of the deal of his going quietly without a lawsuit was not to release his name so he could get a job as a photo editor at AP?

Sounds right to me. I have participated in the "firing" of folks who got caught with their hand in the cookie jar. We call them "requested resignations". Part of the deal is their separation fromthe employer is kept very quiet and we do not confirm or deny any details.

Having not read the entire thread, someone else probably pointed this out earlier

Schlesinger also posted a new set of detailed guidelines for acceptable uses of Adobe Photoshop software. Rules were already in place to prohibit the severe distortions to Hajj's photos – adding extra smoke in one case, and an extra projectile being dropped by a jet in another.

Didn't Charles even find duplicate buildings, and other such stuff in that photo?

#94 So
Your suggestion not only has merit - it has history. This is exactly what NAFTA was SUPPOSED to accomplish, then
CHINA HAPPENED.
Looks like the next "happening" place will be VIETNAM.

-S-

They know what they are doing, faking it, and just want to continue doing it.

They probably won't release his name because it would hurt his reputation at his new job with The New York Times.

I still say that no-one was fired, that was why no name was produced. It was mis-information designed to appease critics (us). Or do we still believe anything Reuters says?

In all of Reuters’ statements and reports on the incident, they’ve never mentioned that a “top photo editor” was also fired. Why were they secretive about this, and why won’t they release the editor’s name?

Because the editor's name was Adnan Hajj! He was the "top photo editor."

Bwahahahaha!