New York Times Readers Opinions
The New York Times

Home
Job Market
Real Estate
Automobiles
News
International
National
Washington
Business
Technology
Science
Health
Sports
New York Region
Education
Weather
Obituaries
NYT Front Page
Corrections
Opinion
Editorials/Op-Ed
Readers' Opinions


Features
Arts
Books
Movies
Travel
Dining & Wine
Home & Garden
Fashion & Style
Crossword/Games
Cartoons
Magazine
Week in Review
Multimedia
College
Learning Network
Services
Archive
Classifieds
Book a Trip
Personals
Theater Tickets
Premium Products
NYT Store
NYT Mobile
E-Cards & More
About NYTDigital
Jobs at NYTDigital
Online Media Kit
Our Advertisers
Member_Center
Your Profile
E-Mail Preferences
News Tracker
Premium Account
Site Help
Privacy Policy
Newspaper
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 (8453 previous messages)

rshow55 - 06:19am Feb 1, 2003 EST (# 8454 of 8472) 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.

I understand from Cooper that he's a free-lance writer. The only cite to W.R. Cooper I found with a quick search is to

The Tyndale Bible Edited by William R. Cooper and W. R. Cooper University of Toronto Press June 2000, 338 pages, cloth

A while ago I made an assumption - that Cooper was either Johnson, or close enough to Johnson to make little or no difference. Perhaps there's no connection - but I have to wonder. Cooper posted this, which I quote in the Psychwarfare thread - http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7a163/331 #311

http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@93.icjtawhB2sv.0@.f28e622/5223

"This is George Johnson this time.

"You can examine me in light of Piaget all you want, but it's not going to change how I think, and it's not going to change the fact that your opinions represent a dangerous aberration that requires the strongest possible refutation.

"You will be checked and checked thoroughly.

"It is not for naught that we saw to it that you began posting here in the New York Times. This is a controlled venue. We know who you are and where you are.

"Don't call the CIA again. It won't do you any good. If you want to talk to us, just whisper into your pillow.

I now understand from Cooper that the posting above was a joke.

I'm interested in meeting the person who thinks of that posting as a joke - and I'm wondering what his relationship to George Johnson might be, to make him feel comfortable using Johnson's name in such a joke. If anybody used my name in such a "joke" - even if I liked the joke - I'd object - and I don't know anybody close enough that I'd be willing to make an exception of that. If I were a free-lance writer - or an aspiring one - I'd be afraid to use the name of a NYT writer in that way.

I've used Johnson's name for other reasons - going back a number of years - enough for a good sized lawsuit, it seems to me. Initiated by either one of us, I suppose. Though there ought to be better ways of working it out. The truth, for instance, would be worth a lot to me.

My wife and I are going down to Chicago to meet Cooper.

wrcooper - 10:13am Feb 1, 2003 EST (# 8455 of 8472)

Robert

That's not my book, and I also didn't write the post you quoted.

I'll see you at the museum.

W

wrcooper - 10:14am Feb 1, 2003 EST (# 8456 of 8472)

That wasn't my post in the "psychwarfare" group. I have never posted in the Guardian.

bbbuck - 12:27pm Feb 1, 2003 EST (# 8457 of 8472)

Wow!

Damn!

What a time for a museum visit.

lchic - 02:55pm Feb 1, 2003 EST (# 8458 of 8472)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

fraud and mismanagement | Shuttle

""And almost from the start, the space shuttle was plagued by design failures, cost overruns, delays, fraud and mismanagement in the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and its network of contractors and subcontractors. .... many of the worst problems were hidden from the public http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/02/national/02HIST.html

lchic - 02:59pm Feb 1, 2003 EST (# 8459 of 8472)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Wonder if Showalter and Cooper will 'meet' ... how to recognise .... will each carry a copy of the NYTimes under their arm, wear trilbies and dark shades .... seems the 'fly on the wall' is hibernating on a Chill-Chicago February day?

lchic - 03:02pm Feb 1, 2003 EST (# 8460 of 8472)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Which moniker on this board was advocating the concept of a

UNIVERSITY IN SPACE

has the moniker, wrt space shuttle break-up, changed his mind?

More Messages Recent Messages (12 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 2003 The New York Times Company | Privacy Policy | Contact Us