New York Times on the Web Forums Science

Missile Defense

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 Thursday.

rshow55 - 02:27pm Jul 27, 2003 EST (# 13156 of 13267)
Can we do a better job of finding truth? YES. Click "rshow55" for some things Lchic and I have done and worked for on this thread.

12499-12500 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.Z9exbJU7wf8.2132546@.f28e622/14153

People can be wrong. They can decieve themselves and others - and they do. When it matters, things need to be checked - and we need to worry when barriers to checking prevent the needed clarifications - because people have to made decisions on the basis of what they believe to be true.

Iraq Flap Shakes Rice's Image: Controversy Stirs Questions of Reports Unread, Statements Contradicted by Dana Milbank and Mike Allen http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A51224-2003Jul26.html

Changed by Terror, a Nice Guy Converted New "Outrage" Drives Graham by Manuel Roig-Franzia http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A50965-2003Jul26.html

- - - - -

Organizations, organizations in interaction, and even reporters can have reasons - good, bad, and mixed, for keeping things from being checked. And resistance to the truth - even pretty basic truths - can be savage, as A Bad Trip Down Memory Lane by Bruce Grierson http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/27/magazine/27CLANCY.html makes clear.

Secrecy has costs and risks - many of them unforseeable.

'Support Any Friend': Long Twilight Struggle By ADAM GARFINKLE (NYT) Review http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/27/books/review/27GARFINT.html

FIRST CHAPTERS | July 27, 2003 'Support Any Friend' By WARREN BASS (NYT) Transcript http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/27/books/chapters/0727-1st-bass.html

The Main Enemy': Spy vs. Spy By JEFF STEIN (NYT) Review http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/27/books/review/27STEINT.html

FIRST CHAPTERS - 'The Main Enemy' By MILTON BEARDEN and JAMES RISEN (NYT) Transcript http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/27/books/chapters/0727-1st-beard.html

And people who have to keep secrets face special problems - and present others with special problems.

Those 16 Words Threaten the Threaten the Tenure of the Long-Serving CIA Chief James Risen http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/27/politics/27TENE.html

- - - - - - -

A Bad Trip Down Memory Lane by Bruce Grierson http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/27/magazine/27CLANCY.html is a fascinating piece - and a cautionary tale of reasons why journalists can't be expected to believe unsupported statements from people - even "sincere" people. I've made some statements that are only supported by my word, and context. And like Magruder's, more than Magruder's, they are doubted. As they should be.

12570 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.Z9exbJU7wf8.2132546@.f28e622/14227

I found myself asked by President Nixon to get involved in what I took to be serous Russian scaring. I refused to go along . . . .

Still, issues of checking are important - and that's made clear in the excerpts of

Unheeded Warnings: Why America slept before 9/11 http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/27/weekinreview/27WORD.html

rshow55 - 02:30pm Jul 27, 2003 EST (# 13157 of 13267)
Can we do a better job of finding truth? YES. Click "rshow55" for some things Lchic and I have done and worked for on this thread.

Gisterme asked why I haven't tried to get my problems resolved "on paper" and "by mail" - and in some important respect, I have. I've also asked, not necessarily to be believed, but to be checked.

It is a matter of record that I sent the following message to “Mr. XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXX” At C.I.A. , after having been asked by him to write him a letter. ( I wish I'd told him more over the phone - but a response in writing seemed best. I believed then, and still have no reason to doubt, that “Mr. XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXX” is the number 2 man at CIA - Risen will know. NYT columnists, whose discretion can be trusted were sent his name. The letter also refers to XXXXXXXXXXXXX of the University of Wisconsin - a person I've referred to in a recent email to a NYT editor, which I believe was read and responded to.

I didn't ask to be believed - I asked to be checked. In light of what has happened,

. Unheeded Warnings: Why America slept before 9/11 http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/27/weekinreview/27WORD.html

I think the interchange was interesting.

There were many ways I could have been checked - and it seems to me that an explicit decision to contain me was made instead. I did recieve a call, and my wife and another person recieved a call - where I was explicitly forbidden to come into Langley (told I would be arrested if I tried) - and asked to agree never to contact Mr. XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXX - again. Reluctantly, after a long hesitation, I agreed to that.

I think some of the context of the letter has renewed interest, and I repost it since gisterme says he'd never click back on this forum.

Some others, however, might want to click back to citations connected to Hadley, and problems he may have had with his memory, and with his communications. 13105-6 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.Z9exbJU7wf8.2132546@.f28e622/14784

I think I make requests in this letter that were reasonable then, and remain reasonable now. I'll try to ask for help "on paper" as gisterme suggests - but think this should be on the record.

(110 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense