Can anyone else figure out what or who Jon Goff is talking about here? Because I sure can't:

NASA figures that making our nation look like petty hypocrates regarding freedom of speech is a better plan. Inflammatory cartoons about another relgion? No problem. Publically calling for nuking another country off the map? No worries. Wearing the flag of your native land on a spacesuit that you bought for a spaceflight that you paid several million dollars of your own hard earned cash? Sorry, no can do boss.

It's been sad seeing friends who have told me ithat they'd rather just see Iran and most of the rest of the Middle East nuked off the face of the map, all the sudden trying to turn Ansari's flight into some sort of political event. Let someone who actually cares about the Iranian people as an end, rather than merely a means, say what she wants to say. It'll probably do far more lasting good for the people of Iran (and the rest of us too) than all of the words that the spacenut side of Right Blogostan would prefer to put in her mouth.

First of all, there's an implication that the same people are advocating different policies under different circumstances (otherwise the talk about "hypocrisy" would make no sense). But NASA didn't publish, or approve the publication of any cartoons of which I'm aware, or publicly call for nuking any countries off the map. In fact, I'm unaware of anyone doing that, other than Jacques Chirac, but maybe I just missed it.

I'm also unaware that anyone who did publish the cartoons, or defended the right of the publishers to do so, has cheered, or even noticed NASA actions with regard to the Ansari flag issue.

(And I'm not sure what Jon's point is with regard to the cartoons--he calls them offensive, but that's only because some Muslims consciously decided to be offended when the cameras were around. What was much more offensive, as is the case with the Pope's recent speech, was all of the violence and death threats over cartoons. Is it only pictures of Allah that offend Jon, or is he also outraged by crucifixi in urine and pictures of the virgin painted with elephant dung?)

So who is it that Jon is kvetching about here? (I'm also curious to know which of his friends would like to see Iran and most of the Middle East being nuked off the map.)

Here's a suggestion. Don't blog when angry. You don't make much sense.

[Update on Saturday evening]

Jon, who is an extremely standup guy, has second thoughts, as I expected he would. I should be so reconsiderate.

I do think, though, that he should leave the original words up for posterity, with accompanying retraction. I correct stuff that I put up, but I don't delete it. Simply removing it (albeit with apology) seems a little too Orwellian to me...

Having faith, as I do, in the notion that most anything can go tits-up at any time, I am fairly certain that the mullahs will get their hands on nukes. And, being religious fanatics and not really used to having such power, they will miscalculate (an awful lot of dreadful things occur under the heading "Miscalculate"). And that some civilised nation will do the world a favor, should it come to pass, and wipe out Iran as a nuclear threat. And that's just my optimistic scenario.

I hope it's not necessary to use atom bombs on anybody. But I do fall asleep each night visualizing a world without Islam.

He may not have been talking about anybody specific here, Rand, just western society in general (maybe Jacque Chirac and Tom Tancredo are calling for nukes to be used in the event of a nuclear terrorist attack, but they're obviously not alone).

Myself, I don't care if her mission patch had a picture of Ronald McDonald and Grimace gettin' it on: the Russians and Americans really should have no say about it. Let her wear whatever mission patch she chooses. It is after all her personal mission, and she isn't representing either Russia or the USA when she goes to the ISS. She's representing herself, and so should be allowed to represent herself in her mission patch.

In an ideal world, she would be allowed to broadcast from the space station, saying "Hey Muslims! Hey Iranians! Look what we can achieve when we aren't chained down by our religion!"

Unfortunately, in our current world, she has to be careful that some Muslim fanatic doesn't cut off her head because her hair is uncovered.

Jon-boy is SUCH a liberal tool. Needs to drop the ideology and think for himself. Coherently.

Rand,
You're right that I turned on the vitriol hose in this instance while being simultaneously annoyed by too many things (and I hit the post button without rereading everything to make sure what I said makes sense). In hindsight, the clearest way of interpretting what I wrote wasn't what I had intended, so I took it down.

I guess I was just getting annoyed with all the hints, hopes, and speculations, that Ansari was going to use her trip as a way to denounce the mullahs and try and stir the Iranian people up against their oppressors (or something along those veins). I have no love for the mullahs, and wish the Iranian people enjoyed the same freedoms that we do. I just think that the approach Ansari herself seems to be taking of friendship, inspiration, and unity would be a lot more effective at advancing that goal than cheap political stunts like flying a pre-mullah flag, etc.

I guess it's just that when someone is so obviously going out of her way to be apolitical about this, that I wish people weren't so intent on trying to imply something blatantly political about what she's doing.

Does that make any better sense than my first attempt?

~Jon

Phil,
I will admit my post wasn't as coherent as I had intended. But a liberal? Where do you get that from? Or do you just define liberals as anyone who disagrees with your foreign policy?

I can empathize a little with Rand's complaint a couple of months back about being called a Republican. It must be annoying when simplistic people take your view on one issue and try and extrapolate from that how you stand on everything else.

~Jon

It must be annoying when simplistic people take your view on one issue and try and extrapolate from that how you stand on everything else.

While I don't necessarily enjoy your annoyance, I'm happy to see that you now understand mine.