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.

rshowalt - 10:25am Jul 16, 2002 EST (#3096 of 3103)

Talked to my shrink yesterday -- and he'd talked to the CIA. Now, if the CIA would only acknowledge in writing or in a clearly traceable way that I could use, what they've told me, and him -- a lot might be sorted out.

I'm working carefully, and with honorable conduct and the national interest in mind. Some facts about the past, that matter for the present and the future, ought to be clarified. They can be, by "connecting the dots." There are a lot of checkable "dots" on this thread - including parts, now removed, from Sept 2000 on.

I've said before that the payoffs to getting me debriefed would be substantial - very much in the national interest- and stand by that.

A key posting about checkable facts: MD2116 rshow55 5/9/02 9:34am

mazza9 - 10:43am Jul 16, 2002 EST (#3097 of 3103)
Louis Mazza

To WRcooper:

Main Entry: para·noia

Pronunciation: "par-&-'noi-&

Function: noun

Etymology: New Latin, from Greek, madness, from paranous demented, from para- + nous mind

Date: circa 1811

1 : a psychosis characterized by systematized delusions of persecution or grandeur usually without hallucinations

2 : a tendency on the part of an individual or group toward excessive or irrational suspiciousness and distrustfulness of others

Merriam Webster nailed these two

Rshow55 and Lchic. A Pair of Noids if I ever saw one!

I don't think this soap opera will ever cease!

LouMazza

lchic - 11:42am Jul 16, 2002 EST (#3098 of 3103)

That phone book of renown!

http://www.cinet.net/~mhundt/fonebook.jpg

wrcooper - 06:26pm Jul 16, 2002 EST (#3099 of 3103)

mazza9 7/16/02 10:43am

I don't know if Bob is paranoid. I do think his hypergraphia is probably symptomatic of an epileptic condition to which he admitted several years ago in a previous forum. He has written hundreds of thousands of words, much of which is repetitious to an extreme. Obsessive-compulsive writing of this nature can be symptomatic of epilepsy. I will hazard no opinion about Bob's mental health otherwise. I always thought of him as basically a good guy who's struggling with a serious psychological issue that manifests itself in his grindingly repeitious and overbearing post writing. I wish him well.

mazza9 - 06:30pm Jul 16, 2002 EST (#3100 of 3103)
Louis Mazza

wrcooper:

I must agree with you since, according to his organ grinder monkey lchic, I'm you.

Go figger!

rshow55 - 09:11pm Jul 16, 2002 EST (#3101 of 3103)

Interesting that wrcooper and mazza9 posted four minutes apart. Yes, I think both monikers are George Johnson, who must be getting very well paid. If it gets to be important enough, I suspect that can be checked.

Perhaps I'm wrong. Maybe so . . . but the connection to George Johnson, champion of the nuclear establishment, fits a lot. The idea that gisterme is Condoleezza Rice (at least some of the time, and part of her team other times) fits a lot, too. And with so many extensive postings from gisterme , that's checkable, too.

I had a good day. Talked to a responsible human being - - face to face. It went well. Took some steps, I felt, toward getting my security situation clarified. If I've got no connection to classified material -- how convenient it would be to have that put in writing.

Attribution of insanity is one way -- among a number - - of saying "don't listen to him" - - and Mazza-Cooper-Johnson are reduced to that.

(I'll be willing to issue an apology to Johnson and others -- if you contact lchic or me, and arrange a conference phone call (better yet, a video conference) that convincingly establishes your separate identities. The conversation should be recorded. It should occur after enough notice so that questions could be asked. It should be OK to post the recording on the internet.)

My medical condition - (which is mostly quite normal, and not characteristic of epilepsy) is a thing that can be checked -- in a lot of ways. "Cooper", you don't happen to have references to those old postings, do you? So they could be put into context? I happen to think that "epileptic" brain damage is resonant brain damage -- and that we'd do better with things like reading disability if we knew that. Because it is commoner than we think, and different in some ways. Something to check. That can be checked. And I suspect, the way things are going, will be.

Some things bear repeating. 3089 rshow55 7/16/02 8:13am asked whether there were

. "Any specific examples of badly written, muddy, or uncheckable ones? Please point some out, by number, so that I can look at them, and so that others can, too."

No argument from Johnson et al at that specific level. Just an attribution of insanity.

I especially asked about his posting: MD2000 rshow55 5/4/02 10:39am , and asked "Mazza - cooper - johnson - do you dispute it?"

No, they didn't -- so they attributed insanity, instead.

I am repetitive about some things. For example, I repeat references to Eisenhower's Farewell Address:

MD3029 rshow55 7/13/02 12:10pm ... MD3030 rshow55 7/13/02 12:15pm

Some things bear repeating. The concerns set out in Eisenhower's FAREWELL ADDRESS of January 17, 1961 http://www.geocities.com/~newgeneration/ikefw.htm are concerns that ought to be repeated, again and again. Americans don't want to hear those concerns. But they should.

mazza9 - 09:12pm Jul 16, 2002 EST (#3102 of 3103)
Louis Mazza

Tinfoil hat time. I'm me and don't you get confused.

(1 following message)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense