In 2018, the United States declared the Moon of strategic interest and refocused NASA on returning to the Moon sustainably under the agency’s Artemis program. The following year, NASA awarded Intuitive Machines its first task order to land a suite of payloads on the surface of the Moon. Over the next four years, Intuitive Machines built an entire space program[…]
They used SpaceX to get most of the way there, everything else was on IM, but the whole thing was tasked and funded by NASA.
I think you’re right. I watched the landing live stream seems like they were having lots of trouble reaching it after it landed. The mission success seemed forced.
80% chance of landing leaves 20% chance of failure. That’s a big number. They probably didn’t want to advertise a big failure so they waited until the success. Possibly a NASA condition since they put $180MM on it.
Low confidence generally means questionable or implausible information was used, the information is too fragmented or poorly corroborated to make solid analytic inferences, or significant concerns or problems with sources existed.
According to the Wall Street Journal, the intelligence report, released last week, assessed with “low confidence” that a handful of staff had participated in the attack, indicating that it considered the accusations to be credible though it could not independently confirm their veracity.
The Wall Street Journal lying about how analysts rate intelligence to help Israeli propaganda? Why I never!
For those having trouble putting 2 and 2 together, this means our intelligence analysts are calling bullshit on Israel’s claims.
Relevant section from the WSJ article for anyone interested:
In the new report, which was completed last week, the U.S.’s National Intelligence Council, a group of veteran intelligence analysts, said it assessed with “low confidence” that a handful of Unrwa staffers participated in the Oct. 7 attack, those familiar with the findings said.
A low-confidence assessment indicates that the U.S. intelligence community believes the claims are plausible but cannot make a stronger assertion because it doesn’t have its own independent confirmation. The U.S. concluded the claims are “credible,” a U.S. official said.
U.S. officials said that American spy agencies haven’t traditionally focused on gathering intelligence on Gaza, and that Israel hadn’t shared the raw intelligence behind its assessments with the U.S., limiting their ability to reach clearer conclusions.
And that’s where the article is lying. “Low Confidence” is the rating that’s essentially the trash bin. If they believed the claims were plausible they’d at least rate it moderate.
The official that says it’s credible is Jake Sullivan, he said it publicly right after Israel made their claims.
I cannot overstate how trash the WSJ is on international politics. It’s heavily biased at the least.
The most fucked up part about this is that many countries – the US included – cut funding for UNRWA after this bullshit, and apparently even the UNRWA itself just took the accusations at face value and fired some of the accused
I mean, even if it did have the 12 accused employees that were members of Hamas, I don’t see how that is a reason to defund the agency. UNRWA has thousands of employees. It sounds like an isolated thing?
I can guarantee you that there are more than 12 actual Nazis and members of the KKK in US police forces and its military, but it’s not like the whole organization gets defunded.
God, imagine making almost 300k a year and complaining thst it’s not enough. All the while actively making millions of people’s lives demonstrably worse, at that
He also receives gifts worth literally millions of dollars per year. We’re talking super yacht cruises, travelling via private jets, drinking $1000 bottles of wine. And he claims all those gifts don’t affect his impartiality in any way, even when he’s ruling over cases that directly affect his billionaire “friends”.
He won’t take it. Taking the offer would basically confirm everything bad that’s been said about him. It would also be admitting publicly that he will do literally anything for the right bribe. Thomas only likes to admit that behind closes doors.
Oliver makes the point that Thomas really does agree with the views of his billionaire owners, since he held those views even before he became a supreme court justice.
So he’ll stay with the job where he can accept bribes while harming society as much as possible, rather than get paid and not get to do that.
True, we all know he won’t take it, especially considering that his benefactors would gladly match it for him to stay in his seat.
But it was a solid end to an episode outlining how scummy he is with his bribes. The episode wouldn’t get as much traction as it would be seen as barely more than another call-out.
And in the one-in-a-milliom chance that he accepts, we still win.
Well with all the bribes Thomas is probably on the take for, yeah, it would be.
If Thomas were only getting the legit government salary, Oliver’s offer would be over three times as much per year. Not to mention he gets that… sweet RV cringes /s
I’m not a US citizen so please could you explain this line of reasoning to me?
Trump was the person that recognised Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, despite absolutely no need to. I haven’t heard of anything that suggests he wouldn’t support Israel wholeheartedly.
So in a choice that is Biden Vs Trump. Why is Biden the worse choice?
Now don’t get me wrong, as a Brit I know how much of a curse FPTP is - but it’s a pipe dream to think a 3rd party candidate hae a chance of winning in this situation, surely?
So what’s the logic of these kinds of posts? If you don’t vote for Biden, won’t you just end up with something worse?
The person you are trying to reach right now does not think more than half a move ahead. Save your energy for someone that is not already politically involved, it will be better for everyone, including this turd.
Yesterday when I saw your reply it and the other one criticising the person I replied to were at a positive vote score, and my comment itself had about 20 to 30 positive votes.
Now your comment and mine have dropped by about 20 votes each, without any further lemming comment.
The thing is that voting for Biden does nothing but help along the US's slide into fascism. Democrats need to know they can't have their cake and eat it too, and that their good cop bad cop act won't work, before they'll actually do anything. Biden is right of Reagan on a ton of issues (including Israel), so clearly just voting for the lesser evil isn't working.
There has to be a line somewhere after which the status quo can't continue, and genocide is handily past that line.
What the fuck are you on about? There are literally two options in the upcoming election and any suggestion to the contrary is just fooling yourself.
There’s Biden and then there is “Dictator for a day” Trump. Even if Biden is the “slide into fascism” that you claim with no evidence presented to support, how is the choice between maybe fascism and absolutely fascism even a choice?
theguardian.com
Newest