New York Times on the Web Forums Science
Technology has always found its greatest consumer in a nation's
war and defense efforts. Since the last attempts at a "Star Wars"
defense system, has technology changed considerably enough to make
the latest Missile Defense initiatives more successful? Can such an
application of science be successful? Is a militarized space
inevitable, necessary or impossible?
Read Debates, a
new Web-only feature culled from Readers' Opinions, published every
(1934 previous messages)
- 03:41pm May 1, 2002 EST (#1935
One thing that I'm trying to do, on this thread, just now, is
explain that there are problems with checking -- and that I
have a need to get some things established.
Maybe there are ways to make some progress.
It seems to me that this thread HAS represented progress.
I deeply appreciated MD1910 manjumicha2001
"I have noticed for some time that you are
experimmenting with a unique way of public discourse, made
possible by the web-hyperlinks. Such methodology is extremely
effective and powerful in tackling complex issues which are often
impossible to be properly discussed due to various oratorical
smoke screens and "purposful clouding" of issues that often goes
on in typical mass medium of public discourse today (i.e. print or
audio-visual media). I also have noted, however,your methods do
demand devoted attention of the fellow participants and good faith
attempt to follow your "thoughts"....and being lazy as we all are
(and some even acting not in good faith), you can be pretty lonely
at times, I think."
It has been lonely, and awkward - for me, and for others as well.
But the "unique way of public discourse, made possible by
web-hyperlinks" is effective - and I believe that, with checking,
that could be proved from this thread. I believe that it has
been effective. I've been working, with lunarchic , to
protype-demonstrate a pattern for negotiation, and for getting facts
to closure, suitable for staffed organizations.
No one has to believe me, but I'm "passing off" the statement -
which you may choose to regard as a fiction -- that this is
something Bill Casey longed for, and something I promised I'd try to
get done, if I could figure out an effective way to do it. "How to
talk with the Russians" was a big problem in his mind. How to
communicate effectively between staffed organizations was another.
I've done my best.
I think that this thread has been effective - - and think
that could be checked.
I believe that the techniques prototyped, demonstrated, and
suggesed here, if reasonably used and developed, could save millions
or billions of lives, billions or trillions of dollars, and let
ordinary people figure out how to make their world much better.
If I could get some workable clarifications from the federal
government, so that I could go on with my life - I could do a lot
that I believe would be in the world and the national interest. Some
things have to happen face to face. I've been working to get
debriefed, in not-very-deniable communication with the TIMES, since
1996, and have been in desperate need of help with that since I
"crossed a Rubicon" in September 2000.
4/10/02 2:26pm ... MD1236 rshow55
- 03:51pm May 1, 2002 EST (#1936
It is worth my pointing out that, if only I didn't care about
nuclear dangers, or negotiating techniques -- if only I'd felt able
to just focus on math and neuroscience -- there were some
accomodations made for me at the University of Wisconsin that
(deniably, but probably) involved the Bush administration.
But I've felt that this thread has actually been effective and
important enought to work on it. Have I been wrong about that?
That's something that could be checked.
I think, on the basis of indirect evidence that could be checked,
that this thread
has either interacted directly with Bill Clinton,
or a very good "stand-in" for him, useful in a "war gaming" sense;
has either interacted directly with a team in
contact with Vladimir Putin, or with a very good "stand in" for
it, useful in a "war-gaming" sense;
has either interacted directly with a team
including Condoleezza Rice, or a very good "stand-in" for it,
useful for war gaming;
. think it is probable that this thread had
made communication possible between the Russians and the Americans
that may have been painful, but that has made the world a safer
Just inferences. They could be checked.
For all the work, and lengthy text -- I'm proud of what we've
collectively done on this thread, and the patterns that it has shown
If I could get some things about my past clarified workably -- my
life would be much better -- and I think I could make more
- 04:05pm May 1, 2002 EST (#1937
The awkwardness of some of those accomodations at the University
of Wisconsin, and some related problems, have reinforced my sense of
how important it really is for me to get some basic things
The alternatives, in the real world of human organization -- are
impractically awkward rshow55
5/1/02 12:01pm . . . for reasons that would be a lot more
decorous and humane to discuss face to face than on this thread.
The UW can't tie itself in knots, and neither can I. Even a
fiction, if it were bureaucratically workable, would be better than
the current situation.
If I had an official affidavit, suitable for real use or framing,
saying that my claims of connection to the government was a total
fabrication - a literary device - - the fact is that I could work
with that. Though I might contest it. But such a release would
permit stable accomodations.
- 04:25pm May 1, 2002 EST (#1938
There would, however, be a number of awkwardnesses with my
record, going back 35 years, that would make considerably better
sense, in a great deal of detail, on the basis of the other "story."
I was stripped of all my credentials, set up doing a research
project, according to some detailed promises - - I did what I was
told -- kept my ends of the bargains made -- kept faith the best way
There is also a matter of a bankrupcy for 16.4 million dollars -
- connected to some interesting stories, and a good deal that can be
New York Times on the Web Forums Science