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 - 09:23pm Jun 6, 2002 EST (#2473 of 2477)

Mr. XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXX, C.I.A.

Dear Mr. XXXXXXX,

Thank you for taking my call Monday. I'm sending you this by fax; sending an e-mail copy of the text to you over the open CIA email line, and posting the text, with names and positions deleted, on the New York Times - Science - Missile Defense forum ---- where citation links set out here can be accessed with the click of a mouse. I'm also sending a copy to XXXXXXXXXXXXX of the University of Wisconsin. In a meeting with XXXXXXXXXX on May20th, we discussed the following question - - a question that has been a cause of difficulties for me, and for the University of Wisconsin in its interactions with me, for some time.

Could things be arranged so that I could talk to ______, or some other professional, on technical matters, in a way so that I had reasonable confidence, and _________ had reasonable confidence, that, whatever other problems we might have, our conversation did not violate US national security laws? MD2327 rshow55 5/20/02 5:43pm

I'm asking to have a chance to "debrief" -- to explain to the government information that I believe may be of interest, along with some background involving that information. I know I won't necessarily be believed without checking, and don't expect to be. I understand that both your time, and government investigation resources in general, are limited, and other priorities are pressing. I'm prepared to look for ways to "debrief" that involve minimum time and expense to the government, and would like to discuss them. I do want to convey the information on a basis where it is clear and a matter of record that the information has been transmitted to a responsible person in the government. Perhaps the information is not of enough interest for the government to attend to. You know your priorities and usages, and I do not. Whatever you choose to do in that regard, it seems to me that if the government wishes to restrict any product of my mind in any way based on national security law - government officers should talk to me about what the restrictions are. XXXXXXXXXXXX has my permission to tell you anything he knows about me, including the contents of our meetings.

I wish my May 20th meeting with XXXXXXXXXXXX had been recorded, because it covered, perhaps in a more direct way than a letter can, the key reasons I'm asking to get my security problem adressed, in the context as it is. Perhaps a similar meeting with XXXXXXXXXXXXX, or some other trusted person or persons, that was recorded and submitted to your agency, could generate enough information to resolve the problems I have with the government that need to be resolved now. This might be especially reasonable if it is decided that there are no security law restrictions on my work, either because my contacts are now old, or for any other reason.

I'm off to a Cornell reunion. I'll try to call you by phone early next week, and will check in with XXXXXXXXXX about the same time.

Mr XXXXXXX, I hadn't known that you were at CIA until last week. Had I known, I would have contacted you long ago.

Sincerely yours,

M. Robert Showalter 608-829-3657
mrshowalter@thedawn.com

(background enclosure follows)

(4 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense