New York Times Readers Opinions
The New York Times
Job Market
Real Estate
New York Region
NYT Front Page
Readers' Opinions

Dining & Wine
Home & Garden
Fashion & Style
New York Today
Week in Review
Learning Network
Book a Trip
Theater Tickets
Premium Products
NYT Store
NYT Mobile
E-Cards & More
About NYTDigital
Jobs at NYTDigital
Online Media Kit
Our Advertisers
Your Profile
E-Mail Preferences
News Tracker
Premium Account
Site Help
Privacy Policy
Home Delivery
Customer Service
Electronic Edition
Media Kit
Community Affairs
Text Version
TipsGo to Advanced Search
Search Options divide
go to Member Center Log Out

 [F] 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.

Earliest Messages Previous Messages Recent Messages Outline (5657 previous messages)

rshow55 - 10:19am Nov 12, 2002 EST (# 5658 of 5671) Delete Message
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.


Attack On The Ad-Man

This trumpeter of nothingness, employed
To keep our reason dull and null and void.
This man of wind and froth and flux will sell
The wares of any who reward him well.

Praising whatever he is paid to praise,
He hunts for ever-newer, smarter ways
To make the gilt seen gold; the shoddy, silk;
To cheat us legally; to bluff and bilk
By methods which no jury can prevent
Because the law's not broken, only bent.

This mind for hire, this mental prostitute
Can tell the half-lie hardest to refute;
Knows how to hide an inconvenient fact
And when to leave a doubtful claim unbacked;
Manipulates the truth but not too much,
And if his patter needs the Human Touch,
Skillfully artless, artlessly naive,
Wears his convenient heart upon his sleeve.

He uses words that once were strong and fine,
Primal as sun and moon and bread and wine,
True, honourable, honoured, clear and keen,
And leaves them shabby, worn, diminished, mean.
He takes ideas and trains them to engage
In the long little wars big combines wage…
He keeps his logic loose, his feelings flimsy;
Turns eloquence to cant and wit to whimsy;
Trims language till it fits his clients, pattern
And style's a glossy tart or limping slattern.

He studies our defences, finds the cracks
And where the wall is weak or worn, attacks.
lie finds the fear that's deep, the wound that's tender,
And mastered, outmanouevered, we surrender.
We who have tried to choose accept his choice
And tired succumb to his untiring voice.
The dripping tap makes even granite soften
We trust the brand-name we have heard so often
And join the queue of sheep that flock to buy;
We fools who know our folly, you and I.

A.S.J. Tessimond.

- 02:03am Aug 13, 2002 BST (#4486 of 4486)

rshow55 - 10:21am Nov 12, 2002 EST (# 5659 of 5671) Delete Message
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.

We have to find ways to sort out the muddle, the fuzz - the lies and half lies - - so we can find better, safer solutions.

The ad man has been "attacking" so long, in so many ways - that everything that matters enough bears some thought about checking - for reasons of safety, and honor, too.

Problems of distortion are getting in the way of our prosperity and survival all over the world - and that includes the Islamic world, as well.

almarst2002 - 10:31am Nov 12, 2002 EST (# 5660 of 5671)

The future of Democratic party.

It was percieved the Clinton made a brilliant move to capture the political center by offering a vision of a pragmatic "New Democrat".

However, unlike its Repulican opponents who try the same while never loosing touch or betraying their core constituency and values, the New Democrats did just that - they betrayed their roots and causes.

Tha wast majority of this country feel litle other then contempt about both parties. But at least, the core small constituencies keep their alegence.

The Democtars lost thanks to the Clinton's "success". And the defining moment was bombing of Serbia and welfer reform. Unless denounced and condemmed, this will remain a tumb stones for Democratic Party.

rshow55 - 10:37am Nov 12, 2002 EST (# 5661 of 5671) Delete Message
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.

On September 25, 2000, I "got the word" that I was to go on the NYT MD forum and have a meeting with an important personage. In context, Clinton was a reasonable guess.

The interview went on for a very interesting day - and at the end of that day - I expected to be given some way to debrief, through some reasonable channel. A light colonel, equipped with a tape recorder, could have done a lot. rshow55 4/21/02 2:22pm

Here I still am.

My admiration for Clinton is real, in spots.

But it has its limits.

More Messages Recent Messages (10 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Your Preferences

 [F] New York Times on the Web Forums  / Science  / Missile Defense

Home | Back to Readers' Opinions Back to Top

Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company | Privacy Policy | Contact Us