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
(2063 previous messages)
- 11:38am May 7, 2002 EST (#2064
these guys aren't so uplifted - wonder if faulty NUKE equipment is
also off-loaded :
- 02:06pm May 7, 2002 EST (#2065
People don't check things -- and with secrecy, and gatekeeping as
it is, often they can't. So things can be MUCH more dangerous than
people expect. For example, when military equipment doesn't get
checked - and details get forgotten. (Our nuclear arsenal is now
old.) The costs and risks of secrecy -- and the unwillingess
to check that it spawns, can be huge -- and have been.
Just fininshed a very fine book
Secrecy The American Experience by Daniel
Patrick Moynihan , with and introduction by Richard Gid Powers,
Yale Press, 1998.
Powers was also quoted in New Details Emerge From the Einstein
Files By DENNIS OVERBYE http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/07/science/physical/07EINS.html
For a while I've been struggling with the following questions -
" How, given the rules of security laws, and my
particular circumstances, am I to live my life? How can I practice
any ordinary profession, or talk extensively to anyone - in the
ordinary, day-to-day manner people do?
" How can I do these ordinary things - without
putting both myself and others at risk?
I've felt boxed, given the awkward sitation I've been been in for
years, and complicated (thinking I had no choice, and was doing my
duty) by postings on these threads.
That set of questions has involved awkwardnesses on these NYT
threads, and I believe for NYT staff, since 1997, and especially
And some awkwardnesses for the University of Wisconsin, too.
Reading Moynihan's book, I'm more hopeful than I've been. And I
learned a great deal about how weak the statuatory base of secrecy
In mathematical circles, things like the following are sometimes
Godel's proof shows that you can't prove anything.
But if you could prove anything . . . you could
Of course, life isn't that simple. All the same, I've felt, for a
long time, that if I could solve ambiguities about my security
situation -- I could solve all the other problems before me in a
And that a number of things very much in the national interest
An interesting fact in Moynihan's book. As of the time it was
written, there was only one case where a person was convicted for
giving classified information to the press -- a guy gave a picture
of an unfinished Russian aircraft carrier to Janes .
Maybe I've been much too afraid. But maybe not.
Still, I notice that somebody may care what I say. When I made an
off-the-cuff comment in MD1233 rshow55
4/10/02 1:53pm it drew very prompt responses (the first within
15 minutes) from gisterme.
I've been very afraid to do ordinary things -- and people
associated with me have been afraid, as well. Maybe the fear hasn't
been necessary? Perhaps I've just been intimidated for no reason?
It would be nice to get some clarification about that. Might be
- 08:52pm May 7, 2002 EST (#2066
Mohamed Al Fayed, the owner of Harrods and Punch magazine, is to
sue the Sunday Telegraph after he was named in a story about a
uranium smuggling ring.
He described the article, published last Sunday, as "a
scandalous, outrageous, fraudulent and blatantly false attack on
"My spokesman made it clear to the Sunday Telegraph that I knew
nothing of this matter or any of the people involved and that the
allegations against me were wholly spurious," Mr Fayed said in a
press statement today.
"Yet the newspaper still gave prominence to the story using my
picture in front of a stockpile of uranium and suggesting that I did
know something of the supposed scandal.
"I cannot understand how any newspaper could believe a story like
this without any substance and give it such prominence." http://media.guardian.co.uk/presspublishing/story/0,7495,711345,00.html
... linked with a shipment of uranium headed for Afghanistan from
Mr Fayed's spokesman claimed the story was picked up from a
French paper, Le Journal du Dimanche, which has published a
correction but "will face further legal action this week which could
result in substantial damages".
Where did the Fyad
fortune come from, how was it made, were 'arms' ever a feature?
- 08:56pm May 7, 2002 EST (#2067
Interesting how Sharon, of 1982 butchery fame, has skipped out of
Washington - fast. Seems those folks in Palestine, for whom he is
mentor and protector, still have strong feelings!
- 09:06pm May 7, 2002 EST (#2068
Media-Communications : Browsers :
Seems a lot of people have faith in both the BBC and The
New York Times on the Web Forums Science