New York Times on the Web Forums
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
(16183 previous messages)
- 08:31am Nov 2, 2003 EST (#
16184 of 16228)
lchic - 07:25am Nov 2, 2003 EST (# 16167 of 16168)
Another loyal defense of Showalter and his 'position' (If
it can ever be teased out of the cliches). That, as I said,
opens you up to criticism you don't like to share.
Doesn't Showalter advocate a shift away from
the Nazi Psycho techniques of repressing the people?
Most people have done it, and continue to DO it already --
he ain't that different from a Johnny come-lately.
But his repetition of the unproven, the unsubstantiated
over and over again does NOT suddenly turn them true: an
all-too-familiar propagandist approach.
Aren't the ideas of, for example: moving
towards world peace; shuffling engineers away from products
and processes that are used to destroy mankind towards
products that actual benefit all ... aren't these ideas and
thoughts slightly different from those of Hitler?
Yeah, but NO dfifferent from many others in the peace
movement for very long. Nothing original or new, except his
lack of specificity, focus and his (along with your) messianic
Showalter advocates peace and progress
through changes in mindsets and re=allocation of resources
towards styles of thinking and production/products/services
that Americans can be proud and happy to deliver.
Ask him to join the back of the long, long line of people
who have been not only been doing it but achieving significant
things for a long time before him -- ONLY with lot more
coherence and logic. Showalter, just a wannabe !
The question I'm interested in is 'WHY' the
thought processes, ideas, innventions, innovations and
processes discussed by Showalter are 'shot down' by the
current bunch of posters on this thread?
Mere cliches and platitudes. Nothing specific, nothing new,
nothing original. No rationale (eg: his poster ID and his
other obsessions you share). Too much wrapped up in his own
personal problems and paranoia to expect him to think
What does the loyal defense think: not hard to imagine !
Why are these posters HERE?
To put a cold needle to a hot-air balloon !
Why are others, let's call them readers,
by-standers rather than participants?
Because of his boring mindless re-hash, ad infinitum (as
WRCooper claims) ?
Btw, where are the regulars: gisterme, almarst,
freddie(barnyard)moore and others ? Looks like you're the ONLY
one left to defend him, something he doesn't seem able to do
I speak with Showalter on a daily basis and
this is the fourth year.
Good for you and him. All we see is an expected series well
coordinated in defense of each other. But does it make his
posts any coherent ? NOT that I can see.
I've triangulated and mentally mapped the
information and facts he speaks of .... and believe his
story to be true. I've researched and discussed with him
these matters in depth and at length - and not found his
story in any way wanting.
You may belief everything he says. BUT he hasn't provided
what's needed to convince others on any of his numerous claims
(What he has been working on or his achievements so far). Your
implicit faith in him and his story is admirable, but NOT
evidence -- nothing that can be independently verified.
Showalter, an outstanding achiever, was
super-selected and placed on the Cornell Program (set up by
Eisenhower to hot-house a national intellectual elite),
finding the challenges interesting he follows through with
the aims of the program. He's supertutored by
American-expert-NAMES in specific zones that will give him
insight and familiarity with methodolgies and tools to later
assist him in solving the problems handed on to him by
He's not alone. LOT more people are much more qualified.
That's the Nash-complex he now wants to assume.
The need to solv
(44 following messages)
New York Times on the Web Forums