would suspect that now is not the time to say whos' device is more evil than anyone else's. Now is the time to value life and look towards solutions

Posted by: 出会い at August 7, 2008 09:15 AM

He buys a large of weapons and medicine with fiesta online money.

Posted by: fiesta online money at August 4, 2008 11:33 PM

In the Beach City is such fearfulness, I am owning many Archlord money in my pocket.

Posted by: Archlord money at August 4, 2008 11:32 PM

But barely two months into the July-awarded concept exploration contracts, Lisa Porter, NASA's new associate administrator for aeronautics, told the teams on Aug. 30 that there no longer was funding for a demonstrator. Team members are trying to devise cheaper alternatives for the next phase of research, but turmoil continues in the agency's aeronautics plans.

Posted by: wowpowerleveling at May 26, 2008 12:23 AM

nice to meet you

Posted by: cheap wow gold at April 13, 2008 08:38 PM

wow gold
wow gold
wow gold
wow gold
wow power leveling
wow powerleveling
wow power leveling
wow power leveling
wow powerleveling
wow powerleveling
wow power leveling
wow power leveling
wow powerleveling
wow powerleveling
翻译公司
rolex
翻译公司
rolex replica
wow gold
wow gold
World of Warcraft Gold
World of Warcraft Gold
wow powerleveling
wow powerleveling
wow power leveling
wow power leveling

powerleveling
powerleveling
powerleveling
powerleveling
power leveling
power leveling
powerleveling
powerleveling
power leveling
power leveling
wow powerleveling
wow powerleveling
wow power leveling
wow power leveling
rs Gold
rs Gold
Runescape Gold
Runescape Gold
rs powerleveling
rs powerleveling
Runescape powerleveling
Runescape powerleveling

lotro gold
lotro gold
LOTRO US Gold
LOTRO US Gold
LOTRO EU Gold
LOTRO EU Gold
buy lotro gold
buy lotro gold
cheap lotro gold
cheap lotro gold
LOTRO Powerleveling
LOTRO Powerleveling
LOTRO Power leveling
LOTRO Power leveling
SilkRoad Gold
SilkRoad Gold
SilkRoad Powerleveling
SilkRoad Powerleveling
SilkRoad Power leveling
SilkRoad Power leveling
SR Gold
SR Gold
SR Powerleveling
SR Powerleveling
SR Power leveling
SR Power leveling

Posted by: 121 at November 6, 2007 03:16 AM

Once again, you bring up a very good point that encourages thought. It is true that some university professors lament the training of foreign nationals due to the export of technology that our country needs, i.e., more highly trained engineers. This encourages the transport of industry overseas, and is not good for our economy.

On the other hand, there is still the issue of the use of that technology to harm the U.S., and this was the primary point of my post. The danger here is that we will not know just how many highly-trained engineers we have sent overseas to work to harm us or our interests until it is too late to do anything about it.

Finally, the point is that there is no real difference between directly giving our technology away (for instance, simply walking into the Chinese embassy and handing over design details of nuclear weapons) and training PhDs in U.S. universities, except time. Given the right time, the technology can be turned against us by engineers we trained.

I have posted on the Iranian nuclear program, IAEA, and the heavy water reactor. Still following.

Thanks.

Posted by: Herschel Smith at December 1, 2006 11:21 AM

I appreciate the explanation. I think there's a serious difference between what you described in detail and the impression given by the phrase "on the State Department “watch” list as being state sponsors of terrorism." For one thing, if being on that list means that nationals from that country receive extra scrutiny before receiving their visas, then one could certainly argue that a person from that country who has passed the extra scrutiny and come up clean is no greater a risk - perhaps less of a risk - than someone from a lower-risk country who has passed less scrutiny. Or, another way to look at it, the two descriptions of the situation imply vastly different things in terms of how likely a particular student is to reflect the threat that's perceived in that country's population in general.

On another subject, I think it's also dangerous to conflate security threats with economic threats. The question of whether the number of foreign engineers we train is a threat to the future health of our economy is an important one to ask, but it's completely distinct from the question of whether the foreign engineers we're training are going to use that training to build WMDs back home. Yes, in the long term a crippled and dependent economy would be a serious security threat, but that doesn't mean that the two issues are the same.

I've enjoyed this exchange too. In fact, maybe I'm the one who should have done his homework more carefully.

Posted by: Haninah at December 1, 2006 10:39 AM

Haninah,

After 9/11, the U.S. State Department developed a list of countries for which additional reviews would be required for persons from those countries requesting visas to the U.S. This was their "watch" list. The list included countries which were of concern due to their ties to terror or potential ties to terror, whether officially or simply because of cultural issues.

So rather than what I said in the post (State Department “watch” list as being state sponsors of terrorism), I probably should have said something more like "State Department 'watch' list as being states that the U.S. is concerned about due to ties to terror or potential ties to terror whether officially or simply because of cultural issues ... ," it just doesn't role off the tongue as easily. I have my readers for 2-3 minutes, and try to make the prose as readable as possible. I apologize for the confusion I caused you.

At the time of writing of the study for the Cornell University conference in said subject, April 2003, there were 26 countries on this list of states for which there is concern. I suggest that you go back to my original post (linked in the post you read), and open the two PDF documents, one a study from MIT and the other sponsored by Cornell. They may provide a little background to the problem I am discussing.

In fact, if I know nothing at all about the things on which I post, I do happen to know a little something about this subject due to the circles I hang in and my profession. While I do not want to divulge too many details of my work, I have talked face-to-face with an MIT professor who lamented the sad state of affairs to me, concerning the training of many, many foreign nationals, and the loss of U.S. students to the workplace due to the money that could be made by undergraduate degreed engineers.

Finally ... and again, I don't want to divulge too many details ... I have personal experience with some of the things on which I posted. I am a code user for a number of different computer codes, some from LANL. I had to go through an extensive background check in order to receive these codes, but the code author believes this to be ridiculous since anyone with an advanced degree can do the work to write one like it himself.

He is right. But still, we should not willy-nilly give nuclear technology from LANL away to foreign nationals. But ... we are indeed doing that, with our PhD programs. In fact, if you go to the reports I cited, you will find that Iranian students comprised the largest percentage of graduate students candidating for PhDs in these sensitive areas.

In spite of your apparent disbelief, I assure you; this is a big deal, and it is really happening. University professors know all about it. Few others do, hence the title of the post: "Our Dirty Little Secret: Technology Proliferation."

Thank you for this warm conversation, and I am sorry to have hijacked this discussion thread for so long.

Posted by: Herschel Smith at November 30, 2006 11:37 PM

Is there a separate "'watch' list [for] state sponsors of terrorism," apart from the official "state sponsors of terrorism" list, that I don't know of? If there is, I'd appreciate a link.

Haninah

Posted by: Haninah at November 30, 2006 04:52 PM

I think the bone of contention here is the word "watch."

Posted by: Herschel Smith at November 30, 2006 02:40 PM

IEDs' secret sauce

Mr. Murdock's first paragraph bemoans Hezbollah's use of ball bearings inside Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs). Good for him.

Mr. Murdock says that "among Islamofascists, they ( ball bearings) do exactly what Islamofascists do best: Destroy, destroy, destroy." Quite right.

What Mr. Murdock does not say is that, at least since Messrs. Misznay and Schardin in
WWII, this is not unusual. We know ball bearings are effective. In fact, the best known and most commonly copied device using ball bearings is probably an anti-personnel weapon known as the U.S. Armed Forces Claymore landmine. If imitation is the highest form of flattery look no further than the former Soviet Union, Serbia, France, South Africa and Israel for copies.

I would suspect that now is not the time to say whos' device is more evil than anyone else's. Now is the time to value life and look towards solutions.

Posted by: J.P. Campbell at November 30, 2006 11:54 AM

"Approximately 10% of the degrees awarded in these areas were awarded to students from 26 countries that are on the State Department “watch” list as being state sponsors of terrorism, including Iran, Turkey, Pakistan, Malaysia, Egypt and Jordan."

Herschel Smith's got to do his homework. There are only five states on the State Sponsors of Terrorist list (Cuba, Iran, NORK, Sudan and Syria, with Libya recently getting its controversial all-clear), so it's hard to imagine how 26 of them could be sending their grad students to the US to bone up on WMDs 101. See http://www.state.gov/s/ct/c14151.htm

Posted by: Haninah at November 30, 2006 11:13 AM