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 Thursday.
(17632 previous messages)
wrcooper
- 10:36pm Nov 13, 2003 EST (#
17633 of 17637)
R Showalter:
I'm naive?
If I'm naieve, you're deluded, pal. The government hasn't
placed you under any repressive regime. You're not under
"house arrest," as you've maintained. You're free to come and
go as you please, and you're free to say anything you want,
except for what you've taken a specific oath under the secrecy
laws to protect. What information have you taken an oath to
protect, Bob? You should know the answer to that, because it
has to be in writing, and you should have a copy of it. Now,
supposing that way back when you took an oath not to reveal
certain information. Unless that information has been
officially declassified, you're still under an oath to keep it
confidential. Howver, if it is now in the public domain,
you're not. Check the law. So, assuming you did take a
confidentiality oath once upon a time, have you checked to see
what the status of your particular research was. Chances are,
by now it's been declassified. Whatever the truth is on that
account, however, the face that you're under oath to keep
certain information silent is not tantamoumt to house arrest
of persecution. Thousands and thousands of government
researchers are under security oaths who live lives outside of
government with no difficulty, pursuing rewarding careers in
math and science. You choose to maintain the illusion that
whatever your activities were in the past, they've somehow
thwarted your ability to work productively in the present.
That's hogwash, Bob, a fantasy, a paranoid delusion. Face up
to it.
Your idea that somehow the NYT owes you something or would
take a financial interest in promoting any personal scheme of
yours is absolutely NUTTY!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The NYT won't come
near you with a mile-long bamboo stick. To them you';re
nothing more than any of the dozens and dozens of wackos they
hear from every day, people promoting every manner of wild
scheme or trying to sell any manner of far-out story. You're
no different than any of them, Bob. People who come forward
claiming this or that without a shred of evidence to back them
up. People have begged you on this forum to provide some sort
of verifiable, documentable, clear presentation of your basic
grievances, and you've never done so in years of participation
on these boards. In the meanwhile, you've concocted the most
outrageous ideas about the paricipation of high-level
government officials and journalists and have accused the NYT
of duplicity and nefarious practices in its "handling" of you,
as if the NYT even knows or cares the slightest whit about
you.
It's all in your head, Bob, and as far as the NYT is
concerned, it's qall about to come to an end, because the
forum moderators are not going to allow you to export this
nonsense to other forums. Bank on that.
Move on, Bob. Get a life.
wrcooper
- 10:38pm Nov 13, 2003 EST (#
17634 of 17637)
Showalter:
Whatever the truth is on that account,
however, the face that you're under oath to keep certain
information silent is not tantamoumt to house arrest of
persecution.
should read
Whatever the truth is on that account,
however, the fact that you're under oath to keep certain
information silent is not tantamount to house arrest or
persecution.
bluestar23
- 10:47pm Nov 13, 2003 EST (#
17635 of 17637)
"the forum moderators are not going to allow you to export
this nonsense to other forums. Bank on that."
Do you hear that, Showalter...? You're FINISHED with the
New York Times....within a few hours perhaps, this forum will
be shut, you go anywhere else, and try this, and I'll raise
Holy Hell myself; to say nothing of others....your posting
days are over....done in by your abuse of the Forum....
rshow55
- 10:51pm Nov 13, 2003 EST (#
17636 of 17637) 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.
I'm moving along. I'm impressed by such a careful piece of
writing from someone so "unconnected from The New York Times".
The NYT isn't without some responsibility for what's happened
to me. I think they know that. This thread hasn't been
typical. NYT behavior in 1999 and later wasn't typical.
I'll be happy to see this thread ended. But the record of
what happened on this thread remains interesting. People are
responsible for what they say and do. The use of monikers that
are "anonymous" - but well known within an organization -
involves new usages - and people have to think about the
responsibilities involved. If the big boss uses an "anonymous"
moniker, which everybody in the organization knows - and talks
with less responsibility than he would formally - is he still
speaking as the boss - responsible as the boss - when everyone
knows he's the boss?
Issues like that are becoming more important.
People are responsible for what they say and do. I know I
am. Other posters -employed by The New York Times are, too.
I've made a simple, reasonable request. I'll pursue it.
(1 following message)
New York Times on the Web Forums
Science
Missile Defense
|