Posted on 03/26/2006 5:45:08 AM PST by nuconvert
Iranian set to become first Muslim woman in orbit
25/03/2006
An Iranian entrepreneur Anoushe is set to become the first Muslim woman to travel in space.
Ansari, founder and president of the US-based Telecom Technologies Company will be part of the crew of the Russian Soyuz space mission scheduled for 2007.
"Exploring space has been my dream since childhood which I am about to realise," says Ansari 38, adding that to be "the first Middle Eastern woman to travel in space is a great honour."
In 2005 Telecom Technologies sponsored the award of a 10 million dollar prize to the first private organisation to build and fly a space ship that can carry three passengers 100 km into space, return safely to Earth and repeat the launch with the same ship within two weeks.
In 2001 Ansari who emigrated to the United States when she was 17 was listed in Fortune magazine's "40 under 40" in 2001, and has been recognised by Working Woman magazine as the winner of the 2000 National Entrepreneurial Excellence award.
Hope she isn't made to suffer for it by the Muslim men.
She's a very successful businesswoman who has been living in the U.S. for 20yrs. I doubt she's worried about what some muslim men might think of her.
Too bad they are such enemies to the U.S.
Iran's insistence on doing what they want to do (develop nuke power), especially without our permission (How dare they?), just won't cut the mustard. So many other nations in the world are allowed to have nuke power (North Korea, China, Pakistan, India, Russia, Israel, most European countries), even without U.S. "permission," but not Iran....and we say so.
Good for Anoushe.
"Iran's insistence on doing what they want to do (develop nuke power), especially without our permission (How dare they?),..."
Maybe I'm misunderstanding your attitude, but it seems to me that you don't understand the dangers of this Iranian regime having nukes. The other countries you mentioned aren't run by religious zealots who want to take over the world. BIIIIGG Difference.
So then what's her name? Anoushe? Ansari? Anoushe Ansari? Ansari Anoushe?
(anything to do with the Ansari X-Prize, btw?)
"The ANSARI X PRIZE is a $10,000,000 prize to jumpstart the space tourism industry through competition among the most talented entrepreneurs and rocket experts in the world.
The name “Ansari” stands for Iranian Ansari family from Dallas, Texas. Anousheh Ansari is a co-founder of venture capital firm Prodea, Inc. She was listed in the Fortune magazine's 40 Under 40 in 2001, recognized by Working Woman magazine as the winner of the 2000 National Entrepreneurial Excellence award and was chosen as the winner of the 1999 Ernst and Young Entrepreneur of the Year, Southwest Region, for the Technology and Communications category."
http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:T--AJaLAVC0J:www.parssky.net/news/archive/news.asp%3FNewsID%3D466+Anoushe+ansari&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=3
Pakistan isn't run by zealots? India? North Korea? China's communist record on human rights is so wonderful? As I remember the words from the Communist Manifesto taking over the world is their goal.
Besides, the Iranians don't want to take over the world. They aren't THAT stupid. North Korea's Kim Jong-Ill might want to, but then, he isn't in the middle east, so it's okay for them to have nukes. Well, we don't like it, but we aren't going to the U.N. over it.
I don't understand the "danger" FOR US with Iran have nukes because they CAN'T reach the U.S. with their nukes. That is supposed to be the "bottom" line about OUR safety. That was why the U.S. got so very nervous when Castro was getting nukes from the USSR. That was understandable. We WERE in eminent danger from Cuba, via the USSR weaponry.
That's why those crazy countries with nukes like India, China, Pakistan and North Korea's nukes don't really bother us. They can't reach us. Neither could Iran.
http://www.siliconiran.com/company_profiles/top_officers/officers/anousheh_ansari.shtml
One of these days Ansari..ONE OF THESE DAYS..TO THE MOON!
I thought Alice Kramden was the first women in orbit. :)
"You're going to the moon, Alice. Bang....Zoom!!"
"Besides, the Iranians don't want to take over the world. They aren't THAT stupid"
Excuse me. This regime has been saying for years what they would do with a nuclear weapon and what their intentions are. If you have any doubts, and surprisingly you seem to, please do a search and read some articles here by Michael Ledeen, Ken Timmerman, Jerome Corsi, Amir Taheri, Michael Rubin, and a humdred others. (not to mention Condi RIce and Pres. Bush)
"I don't understand the "danger" FOR US with Iran have nukes because they CAN'T reach the U.S. with their nukes."
Wow. Again, try doing some reading. There's a reason that this regime is referred to as "The Terror Masters" by Ledeen. They will supply other terrorists with whatever necessary to achieve their goals.
Remember Sept 11th at all? Think terrorists can't reach us?
Yes, I agree, but the source of the story is Arab, so there's the "muslim" slant.
Great writing and simple story lines
Ah, so it's all a conspeeeracy!
Thanks for the links. I hope this industry gets off the ground soon.
Wow. Again, try doing some reading. There's a reason that this regime is referred to as "The Terror Masters" by Ledeen. They will supply other terrorists with whatever necessary to achieve their goals.
Remember Sept 11th at all? Think terrorists can't reach us?
You are emoting again, without thinking. ARABS attacked us on 9/11, not Iranians. They are all Muslims, of course, and you obviously paint the entire religion with the same terrorist paintbrush. If that is so, then you should disallow Pakistan and India THEIR nukes as there are MILLIONS of Muslims there too. Your thinking isn't very clear or straight on this.
Iranians have sponsored terrorist attacks, as have Lybia, Pakistan and many countries between. Even Saudis have too, but Iran seems to be your particular bogey man, and no one else. Again, unclear thinking.
Think! Where did Usama bin Laden (NOT an Iranian) go for refuge? NOT Iran, Saudi Arabia or even Iraq. He went to Afghanistan and is now probably in the area of Pakistan. Where is your outrage at two countries who continue to give refuge to a man who sponsored the death of 3000 Americans?
I can understand the muddled thinking regarding the middle east, Muslims, Arabs, terrorists, friends/enemies, and such. It is rather complicated.
We started the muddled thinking with backing Sadaam Hussein in 1980 against the Iranians because the Iranians had U.S. hostages. We armed a monster who fought NINE long years on US taxpayers back against an enemy that EVERYONE in the middle east KNEW they couldn't defeat.
Iran has three times the population and ten times the educated/trained personnel.
Besides, EVERYONE in the middle east, Arabs and nonArabs, said it was a HUGE mistake for the U.S. to back the Butcher of Baghdad. I was there at the time and heard it with my own ears. Hussein earned that name, since his power grab in the early 70's.
And, they were correct. After nine long years, IRAQ sued for peace. They gained not ONE inch of Iranian land, lost tens of thousands of their young men. They spent a friggin' ton of precious oil money which would never be used to help the Iraqis. The Iranians were JUBILANT because they not only forced Hussein to wave the white flag, but they brought the U.S. to its knees as well. For, since Hussein was backed by the US, the US lost its bid to force Iran to ITS knees. That is how the rest of the world saw it.
Then, one year later, the US puppet, Sadaam Hussein, mightily armed by the US, invaded Kuwait. So much for our backing the Butcher of Baghdad.
And here we are 26 years later, still muddled about Iran. Our thinking FINALLY is straight and clear about Iraq. Hussein DID prove to be the monster EVERYONE knew he was 26 long years ago.
Clear thinking is needed:
*UBL has to be caught.
*Pakistan has to be brought to heel. They haven't been ANY help to us. They PLAY at it, nothing more. If they REALLY, really wanted to catch him, they would have done so already. Pakistan has the military, police and intel to do it. They just don't want to.
*North Korea HAS to be dealt with too. Bribing and threatening have done ZERO good.
*Terrorists all over the world have to continue to be contained. Not just the Iranian terrorists, but ALL the terrorists. There are far more than those in Iran. (We haven't been attacked again since Dubya took over matters. The 2001 attack was TWO YEARS in the planning. That was under the Commander-in-Brief's watch.)
*We should let the Russians and Europeans deal with Iran. They want to and have kept the lid on the Iranians so far. We have an enemy to get. Remember UBL? HE is the monster of 2001, not Iran.
*We have to stay the course in Iraq until the job is done.
Those are the perogatives, not Iran's getting nuclear power. That's not a "slam dunk" at all. If you think so, then you don't know much about the middle east, Iranians or people. That's just my opinion, of course, about your THINKING process, not you personally.
It's good to get priorities straight. You MIGHT have to give up hating Iran just because. Their current governmental policies ARE hateful, but not so much so as to lose sight of the REAL prize: UBL's capture. Once he's captured the Al-Qaida network suffers an irreparable blow.
UBL killed 3000 of our fellow citizens on 9/11, not the Iranians, not their work at nuke power, not anyone else....UBL and Al-Qaida...given safe haven still, five years later in PAKISTAN and AFGHANISTAN, not Iran.
Loved that show.
Jackie Gleason talked about that. Kramden was a big mouth ("I've got a BIIIIIG mouth!!") but he always ended the show with a hug and a kiss with Alice. ("Baby, you're the greatest!")
Lol.
I wish all of FR would read this. I'm sure it would get laughs as far as what you accuse me of. You've got to be the only person who thinks I'm against all muslims and all Iranians.
When I finish laughing, I'll reply.
btw - are you on Rafsanjani's payroll? lol.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.