Mar 10, 2008

Complex Transformation “Hearings” Schedule

Dear colleagues and friends –

Here is the schedule of New Mexico hearings.
  • March 10, Monday (TODAY), 6 pm - 10 pm: Socorro: Macey Center (at New Mexico Tech), 801 Leroy Place;
  • March 11, Tuesday, 11 am - 3 pm and 6 pm - 10 pm: Albuquerque: Albuquerque Convention Center, 401 2nd Street NW;
  • March 12, Wednesday, 6 pm - 10 pm: Los Alamos: Hilltop House, 400 Trinity Drive at Central;
  • March 13, Thursday, Los Alamos, 11 am - 3 pm: Hilltop House; and
  • March 13, Thursday, Santa Fe, 6 pm - 10 pm: Genoveva Chavez Community Center, 3221 Rodeo Road.
An additional hearing has been scheduled as a result of requests apparently spearheaded by the Embudo Valley Environmental Monitoring Group:
  • March 27, Thursday, Espanola, 6 pm - 10 pm: Española Misión y Convento, 1 Calle de las Españolas.
(The schedule of “hearings,” minus this addition, is here [pdf]).

Looking forward to seeing many of you there!

We urge everyone to join us in doing everything we personally can do to gain public commitments from elected officials and candidates to prevent all (not some) plutonium warhead core ("pit") production at LANL and to prevent the construction of a new plutonium pit factory complex. Communicate, publicly if possible, directly with the individuals involved and with their staffs, who may attend. Go to their donors and get commitments there. Go to the news media and editors. We urge all parties to do we can do to make sure there is a steep political price to be paid for the silence and enabling behavior we have seen up to now.

We are now seeing signs of desperation from Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) about the fate of these projects, and for good reason. It is therefore very important in the present critical context to firmly communicate with our elected officials and candidates and make their actions and inactions the central theme of all of our various forms of involvement.

What LANL wants to do is illegal, immoral, grossly uneconomic, militarily ridiculous, and has already begun to appear in the world press, further harming the reputation of the U.S. and no doubt stimulating nuclear weapons programs elsewhere. Not to put too fine a point on the matter, corporate and employee self-interest are the primary forces moving these projects forward. We have succeeded multiple times in stopping these plans before and we can do so again if we are firm. We urge you not to waste your testimony by counting on anyone or anything else but the New Mexico congressional delegation to make your hopes into realities. Let's help them do so, as concretely as we can.

Greg Mello

53 comments:

Anonymous said...

Oh please...
He's at it again. Mello has always believed he has the inside track on intelligence and morality when it comes to Los Alamos. Now, here's another appeal for everyone else to get out and do what he thinks is best.

I love the language:

"make sure there is a steep political price to be paid for the silence and enabling behavior we have seen up to now. "
No threats there.

"We are now seeing signs of desperation from Los Alamos National Laboratory "
Anybody feel desperate, anxious, or toqued (other than the normal Mickey Mouse)? Activists seem to love portraying their targets as cockroaches running from the light. Who writes his stuff? It's so 60's.

"What LANL wants to do is illegal, immoral, grossly uneconomic, militarily ridiculous, and has already begun to appear in the world press, further harming the reputation of the U.S. and no doubt stimulating nuclear weapons programs elsewhere."
Pure opinion, pure personal opinion worded to sound like the rallying cry he's never learned to make. He sure likes to paint in broad strokes from deepinaheartaManana'land.
No, LANL is not singularly responsible for the idea of Complex Transformation. It came from the beltway; take it it to them. They tell us what to do, not the other way around. Save the poor attempt at character assasination for the elected officials.

"Not to put too fine a point on the matter, corporate and employee self-interest are the primary forces moving these projects forward. "
For the last 60+years for the employees, pal. It's called a regular paycheck. Check into it. Corporate interests...don't get me started.

"We have succeeded multiple times in stopping these plans before and we can do so again ..."
Oh yeah, what a crock, keep believing you're having an impact, other than on the pocketbooks of your contributors; as well as believing your own press releases. A couple EIS issues do not a movement make.

"We urge you not to waste your testimony (as in the usual bad street theater) by counting on anyone or anything else but the New Mexico congressional delegation to make your hopes into realities."
The blind leading the blind.

Now, it's fun being catty in cases like this and is, I'm sure, quite the same for the editor at the SF Reporter who thinks it's cute every time they get to take a stab at LANL.
The subject is Complex Transformation and I don't care about it one way ot the other. Matter of fact I'm surprised it took this long to happen.
But I have never encountered a group of activists so disingenuous and behind the times as I have with the bunch in Santa Fe.
You idiots, if you want to make change, take it to Washington. Whether the work gets done here or somewhere else it'll still be done because NO president or elected official will want to take the blame for encouraging poor national security.
Portraying the Lab as acting alone and having the final say in national policy shows your absolute ignorance-big time. Maybe the flowery language is great to use on the younger kids you suck in to do your leg work (like the ones security dealt with with at Diamond and Jemez last week) but it's gotten real old with us.

Protest all you want, it's you're right. But you're all so damn obvious about what you don't know. If being a pain-in-the-ass is your objective, move on. You accomplished that a long time ago.
At least be realistic and honest about your bad BS.

Anonymous said...

I do not think that it is appropriate to post Greg Mello's crap on this blog. It is fine to permit him to comment but posting his anti-LANL diatribes is wrong.

Anonymous said...

What is so complex about these transformations?

Anonymous said...

At least he signs his name....

Anonymous said...

3:10 Write a lot of blab, but it's obvious hthat he is not a player, and maybe afraid of the light, notice no name?

Anonymous said...

3:10 can at least spell and write legible sentences. He is a player. Why don't you leave your name
5:57?

Oh?

Thought so.

Anonymous said...

You idiots, if you want to make change, take it to Washington. Whether the work gets done here or somewhere else it'll still be done because NO president or elected official will want to take the blame for encouraging poor national security.
=======

Right on point. Mello is so self-
absorbed that he "thinks" [ verb
used loosely ] that he has had an
effect.

Additionally, the decision as to
what LANL does or does not do is
a political decision made in DC.

It is the Congress and Administration
that determines nuclear policy; not
LANL.

Also if Mello would dispense with the
gratuitous, self-indulgent moralizing;
it would be a refreshing change.

Anonymous said...

Iraq is costing $12B per month per today's Santa Fe New Mexican. In contrast, the entire NNSA nuclear weapons budget is ~$6B per year. So if we just leave Iraq a couple of weeks early (or call a truce for a month!) we can afford the transformation.

The $12B/month is killing people monthly. The $6B/yr may indirectly be killing a few per year from pollution/exposure/accidents combined.

So, I don't get the "uneconomic" or "militarily ridiculous" part...

Anonymous said...

5:09 pm: "I do not think that it is appropriate to post Greg Mello's crap on this blog."

Of course Mello has a right to his opinions, and if you believe in free speech you should not object to their being published here. But also, everyone else has a right to trash him and his opinions, here and elsewhere. I would just hope that 1) the trashing is done by thoughtful people who have done their homework, and 2) it is copied to the local media, such at the New Mexican (and not just as on-line coments to stories, which almost no one reads). If you believe strongly enough, and are knowledgeable enough to counter his crap, make it obvious and broaden your audience. Go for it - or else the panderers and obscurers win!

Anonymous said...

"Protest all you want, it's you're right."
3:10

"3:10 can at least spell and write legible sentences. He is a player. "

Doh. 3:10 doesn't know how to use contractions. If he's a player, he plays with...

Meanwhile, 3/10/08 6:36 PM meticulously avoids contractions, avoids the "loose"/"lose" and the "affect"/"effect" traps. What a player. He probably even pronounces "nuclear" properly. He must have the moral high road, since he uses both his grammar and spell checkers(sarcasm).

Moral of story: Better spelling/grammar does not equal better argument, just better spell/grammar checking tools.

Anonymous said...

8:18 pm: "Better spelling/grammar does not equal better argument, just better spell/grammar checking tools."

No, it just means you are better at spelling and grammar, which means you are better educated, and thus better at constructing a rational argument. How are lousy language skills idicative of good arguments??

Pinky and The Brain said...

Idicative?

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

Anonymous said...

"No, it just means you are better at spelling and grammar, which means you are better educated, and thus better at constructing a rational argument. "

There are plenty of very well educated people who can't spell worth a darn.

Your argument is full of holes. So is your spelling. Does that mean there is a correlation? Um, no, it ain't necessarily so.

Anonymous said...

3/10/08 8:18 PM and 11:15 PM,

As is the case with most idiots like you, your comments have nothing to do with the topic at hand. Your ideas about spelling, contractions, etc. are irrelevant. Who cares? Nobody but a fool. The quality of an argument is readily apparent in the reading.

========================

Mello is a bitter person driven by some insane agenda to obstruct LANL and, he hopes, to close it down. It is unfortunate that Mello has to be given a headline forum here. It is kind of like giving a serial killer prime time on TV. He feeds off publicity. Nevertheless, it helps to know your enemy, so in that sense I am glad Pinky posted this.

The best thing we can do is to use Mello's own tactics to turn the tables on him. Write your representatives and ask them to ignore the demagogue called Mello. Tell the DOE that Mello is packing the audience. Ask them not to bend.

Anonymous said...

The best thing we can do is to use Mello's own tactics to turn the tables on him. Write your representatives and ask them to ignore the demagogue called Mello. Tell the DOE that Mello is packing the audience. Ask them not to bend.

---

While I understand the sentiment expressed, another approach is to ignore Mello, and write a thoughtful, factual, and well- reasoned email to your congresspeople and to NNSA expressing your beliefs. It is important for people in charge to know that many people do support this plan. In addition, the anti- nuclear activists will be flooding them with emails, so it is doubly vital to express your opinion.

Anonymous said...

"What LANL wants to do is illegal,..."

This is the type of hyperbole we get
in lieu of rational argument.

How can it be "illegal" for LANL to
carry out the wishes of the US Congress?

It always gets me how those that disagree
with a policy will brand it as "illegal".
For Heaven's sake, Greg; if you disagree
with a policy - say you don't agree with
it. But to call it "illegal"?

That is not helpful to rational discourse.
It merely inflames the less educated
that some sort of malfeasance is being
perpetrated; which is clearly not the
case.

Anonymous said...

12:51 a.m. said "Mello is a bitter person driven by some insane agenda to obstruct LANL and, he hopes, to close it down. "

Right you are, 12:51 -- even when Mello comments on non-weapons-related work at LANL, he is abusive and reveals his complete anti-LANL stance. He knows perfectly well that concepts such as Complex Transformation come from Washington, not here, but chooses to demonize the good people here who are trying to do the right thing while being responsive to Washington's dictates.

Anonymous said...

> Of course Mello has a right to his
> opinions,

Can't he get his own blog?


> and if you believe in free speech
> you should ...

Right. Screaming, "Free Speech!" as a cattle prod. That's so what the First Amendment is about.

But whatever. It's Pinky's blog. He can publish Mr. Mello if he wants to, I suppose.

Anonymous said...

"It is kind of like giving a serial killer prime time on TV."

Talk about desperation! That comment smacks of it. The LANL dinosaurs are certainly active on this post. Too bad neither the public nor Congress are going to back them up. Even large portions of the DOD are lukewarm on nukes.

LANL is on a dieing path. The lab needs to join the modern world and begin doing more pressing types of research for US national security. Building useless pits is not the answer.

Anonymous said...

"Can't he get his own blog?"

I thought he did billboards. I-25 is his blog.

Anonymous said...

Okay,
Nobody calls me a dinosaur for knowing that this country, without nukes, is easy pickins for everybody else who wants what we've built without doing the work. There's that, and they just like to see people suffer because that's the kind of guys they are.

I've had it with you clowns who think you know more than anybody else. The public and Congress will ALWAYS back up the common sense known as national security. If you want to begin to try to make a comment to the contrary you're showing the same "pie-in-the-sky" mentality that Mello and his bunch have.

It's not the way you think it is out there dummy. Don't call us "desperate" or think you have some kind of edge on global intelligence. Sitting in some SF coffee shop trash-talking LANL and everything else that isn't to your personal liking doesn't make you an expert by any stretch.

You better get used to the fact that whether this Lab does pits or doilies, it's not going anywhere.

...and that just tickles the living crap outa me because it ruins your day, every day.

Anonymous said...

LANL is on a dieing path.
========

My Lord - the word is spelled "dying".

I feel like I'm grading a bunch of
2nd graders here.

As per the 2nd grader level of thinking;
again it is Congress NOT LANL that
determines the mission.

The comment about Congress not supporting
the mission also appears to be baseless.

I see nothing on the horizon as to any
movement in Congress to abandon the
nuclear deterrent.

Anonymous said...

3/11/08 3:01 PM...wish i'd said that. Well done!

As for Greg Mello's post,...I don't mind if he posts here...he's not swayed my thinking so far.

Anonymous said...

3:01 pm: Kudos!

You are correct - Mello and the rest of his ilk have no logic, facts, or supportable philosophy to stand on. Only their hatred for all things Bush and the US in general. I'd send them to Ahmadenijad, Musharaf, Haniyeh, and Putin to plead their case that we should all just get along. Let's see if they like these guys any better face-to-face than they like Cheney.

Yep, LANL, and it's mission, are not going anywhere. So, people like Mello need not fear they will lose the only purpose they have in their lives.

Anonymous said...

"Okay,
Nobody calls me a dinosaur for knowing that this country, without nukes, is easy pickins for..."

We've got nukes built from tested designs. What we don't have is people who can build any more of them. The people we do have don't even want to try. Replacing our tested stockpile with their faith based RRWs is wrong for America and our allies. If Greg can help stop this nonsense then I say more power to him.

Anonymous said...

The ill-thought idea of "Reaffirm a U.S. committment to complete nuclear disarmament." [Garwin], and "Getting to Zero" [Nuclear weapons], from the "Reykjavik Revisited: Steps Toward A World Free Of Nuclear Weapons," October 24-25, 2007, Hoover Institution, Stanford University, Toward a Nuclear-Free World, by George P. Shultz, William J. Perry, Henry A. Kissinger, Sam Nunn, January 15, 2008, Wall Street Journal (2nd year), and Greg Mello: "I have never said LANL ´should´make nuclear weapons, only that LANL ´could´do so. Nobody ´should´make nuclear weapons, in my view.", from LANL: The Rest of the Story, 3/10/08 2:41 PM, and similar remarks at www.lasg.org, and www.youtube.com.

This ("zeroing out" nuclear weapons in U.S., and naively believe that the enemy will follow), is a highly dangerous, idealistic, and naive path, that eventually could lead to the consequence that U.S. lose its status as a superpower, not a route to embark.

Anonymous said...

3/11/08 10:20 PM:
"We've got nukes built from tested designs. What we don't have is people who can build any more of them. The people we do have don't even want to try. Replacing our tested stockpile with their faith based RRWs is wrong for America and our allies...."

What a joke. The beauty of this will escape you, but anyone who claims to have the knowledge you describe obviously does not.

Anonymous said...

This ("zeroing out" nuclear weapons in U.S., and naively believe that the enemy will follow), is a highly dangerous, idealistic, and naive path, that eventually could lead to the consequence that U.S. lose its status as a superpower, not a route to embark.
====================

Correct. We only have to look at history
to see that "follow the leader" diplomacy
doesn't work.

In 1978, President Carter and the then
Congress wanted to stem the spread of
reprocessing / recycling of spent fuel
from nuclear reactors. They "reasoned"
that if the US would forgo reprocessing,
then other nations like Great Britain,
France, and Japan would also forgo
reprocessing. So reprocessing was
outlawed in the USA.

Well, it has been 3 decades since; and
Great Britain, France, and Japan all
reprocess / recycle their spent nuclear
reactor fuel.

The nations of the world make their own
decisions, for their own reasons; and
don't follow the USA like a bunch of
lemmings.

Anonymous said...

We've got nukes built from tested designs. What we don't have is people who can build any more of them. The people we do have don't even want to try. Replacing our tested stockpile with their faith based RRWs is wrong for America and our allies. If Greg can help stop this nonsense then I say more power to him.
=========

We have old nukes that are aging just like
an old airliner sitting in an aircraft
boneyard.

New weapons designed from science-based
computer simulations are not "faith based".

That's why it's called "Science-Based
Stockpile Stewardship".

Why do the nuclear abolistionists try
to justify their position by saying
what they advocate is good for the
nation's nuclear stockpile.

Their statements drip with hypocrisy,
and one can easily see right through
these phonies.

Anonymous said...

The Lab is the horse and buggy industry of the new century. Mello is like the industrialist of the 1900's who said the area of horse and buggies was bygone. The horse and buggy workers of the nuclear industry simply don't want to hear such nonsense. The world may be burning up and running out of energy, but somehow making more weapons of mass destruction is what we really need.

Anonymous said...

"I do not think that it is appropriate to post Greg Mello's crap on this blog. It is fine to permit him to comment but posting his anti-LANL diatribes is wrong.
--3/10/08 5:09 PM

Yes, this is true. We need to run this blog like Pravda was run by the old Soviet Union. We need to screen out and censor those whose views are offensive to our interests as comrades.

Anonymous said...

"We have old nukes that are aging just like an old airliner sitting in an aircraft boneyard

Yes, like an airliner that has actually flown once.

"New weapons designed from science-based computer simulations are not "faith based".

Show me the test, I have no faith in your simulations.

That's why it's called "Science-Based Stockpile Stewardship".

And I suppose the Reliable Replacement Warhead is reliable because it always works?

Why do the nuclear abolistionists (sic) try to justify their position by saying what they advocate is good for the nation's nuclear stockpile.

Who said I'm an abolitionist? I want to keep the tested stockpile. You want to replace it "trust me" warheads.

Their statements drip with hypocrisy,
and one can easily see right through these phonies."


When you're done calling me names go look in the mirror.

Anonymous said...

Now, listen up! It's going to be pits and plutonium for LANL and if you people don't like it you can get out of Dodge. End of discussion.

Anonymous said...

3/12/08 10:37 AM

Amen.

Anonymous said...

Show me the test, I have no faith in your simulations.
=============

You evidently are ignorant of the fact
that the old stockpile weapons were
actually certified by simulation. You
see those weapons could have yields in
excess of what the Threshold Test Ban
would allow a test to be conducted at.

The tests actually certified the codes
that did the simulations; and then the
simulation codes certified the weapon.

Well the new simulation codes have
been compared against the old test
data and are just as good, if not better
at simulating weapons as the old codes.

Anonymous said...

"Well the new simulation codes have
been compared against the old test
data and are just as good, if not better at simulating weapons as the old codes."

You mean just as good, if not better at simulating tested weapons.

I'm sure the simulations of DAHRT were impressive too. Imagine if it had never been tested. We'd be sitting here confident that it would work if we ever needed it.

Anonymous said...

It's do-or-die time for the "pit whores" in LANS management. Many of them seem to be posting here of late. It's all part of the recent PR push that LANS management has rolled out for the media. I wonder what type of backup plans they have prepared for when their pit factory concept finally dies.

Anonymous said...

8:14 pm: "I wonder what type of backup plans they have prepared for when their pit factory concept finally dies."

It's not *their* (i.e., LANL's) concept, it is DOE/NNSA's concept. LANL historically never wanted to be a manufacturing facility, regardless of the more recent statements of the new LANL management, which contrary to previous managers, will not stand up the the feds. The question is really whether DOE/NNSA will try to save any part of LANL when congress shoots down the pit manufacturing mission. My guess is yes, along the lines of SRNL, with about 1500 employees.

Anonymous said...

"...The comment about Congress not supporting the mission also appears to be baseless..."

Eh? What planet are you on?

NNSA, at Congress's direction, destroyed the independence of scientific stockpile assessment by destroying the independence of the scientists assessing the stockpile.
This is powermongering, not mission support.

Now that the leaders of both labs have no independent employer, but work under the thumb of the NNSA contract, can you believe them?

Do you believe the assessments of Stalin's or Musharef's judges?

A fundamental requirement of assessment is independence. It no longer exists, thanks to Congress.
This ain't mission support, baby.

That is Dingell's turd in the Congressional punchbowl.

Anonymous said...

"...Well the new simulation codes have been compared against the old testdata and are just as good, if not betterat simulating weapons as the old codes..."

Now just take a few out back and make 'em go bang, and I'll believe ya.

Since you no longer are independent of NNSA, your judgement is suspect. (This is the real cost of dropping UC)

Missouri Mythbuster

Anonymous said...

Don't worry about it. D'Agostino is a lame duck. He's done as much damage as one man should do.

O'bama will replace him with another second-rate and we'll do it all again.

This time without the independent judgement that being employed by a University allowed.

So when the strings are pulled, the "yes men" are sure to chortle "Yes".

Anonymous said...

8:14 pm: "I wonder what type of backup plans they have prepared for when their pit factory concept finally dies."

There are no backup plans unless you want to count the LANS executive Golden Parachutes as a backup plan.

I agree with 10:40 pm that Tom D'Agostino is a goner. The next Administration, be it Republican or Democrat, is going to clean house over at NNSA and install top managers who actually know how to cut a deal with Congress. The current NNSA crew is completely worthless in this regard. Don't worry about Tom, though. I'm sure he's got a very nice VP job lined up with either Bechtel or BWXT.

BTW, has anyone noticed that LANS has put Mara and Martz out on the media circuit to help sell the pit factory, yet Anastasio is no where to be seen? Where is the guy? He's missing in action (as usual). Is he planning on bailing out once he's finished his LANS 2 year term of service come June 1st?

Anonymous said...

"Now that the leaders of both labs have no independent employer, but work under the thumb of the NNSA contract, can you believe them?"
(3/12/08 10:24 PM)

"Since you no longer are independent of NNSA, your judgement is suspect."
(3/12/08 10:33 PM)

"This time without the independent judgement that being employed by a University allowed."
(3/12/08 10:40 PM)

============

Excuse me. Where does this nonsense come from? What exactly is an "independent employer"? Please explain how UC provided "independent judgement."

UC was under contract to NNSA to provide management services for the Lab in behalf of NNSA, just like LANS is now, but at a much lower cost. DOE / NNSA always managed the programs and funding themselves. UC is non-profit, so they came under different tax laws. Only employees of UC who worked at the Lab, in the Director's line organization, were involved in the annual weapons certification, not the University itself. For one, that would violate the "need to know" for classified information. This is exactly the thing that employees of LANS do now. The name of the management contractor makes no difference.

It sounds like the three of you are the same person. Could this person be Greg Mello, or one of his minions? Regardless, this seems to be another case of the great unwashed making things up and trying to make the Lab look bad.

It didn't work. Make something else up. Maybe that will take.

Anonymous said...

I'm not any of the three (or one) you quote, but I know from our earlier discussions that your judgment is not sound. I think they are correct and you sound like an apologist for this madness. Shall we start guessing who you are?

No, I'm not Greg Mello or Chris Mechels.

Anonymous said...

"BTW, has anyone noticed that LANS has put Mara and Martz out on the media circuit to help sell the pit factory, yet Anastasio is no where to be seen? Where is the guy?"

Mike has a question he doesn't want to answer. He'll remain in the shadows until he slinks away quietly.

Anonymous said...

Mr. "============" (aka 11:37 PM) is either from LANS upper management or a retired upper manager.

He needs to pull his big head out of his huge asshole and see what is really going on at LANL. And, yeah, 11:37 PM, that's an ad hominem attack. You fully deserve it.

Anonymous said...

7:50 am: "Mike has a question he doesn't want to answer. He'll remain in the shadows until he slinks away quietly."

Very interesting, 7:50 am; I've heard a similar rumor. It appears Mikey may have overstepped his authority on a few occasions. Want to elaborate?

Anonymous said...

Mikey is short term, for sure. He wants to get back to Cali. The real question you should start asking is who is being groomed to replace him?

How does the name Director Wallace sound to everyone?

Anonymous said...

June 1 will be the transfer date out of here for a large number of LANS parent-company bigshots who came here to "rescue" LANL from UC and Nanos. Choose as many of the ADs and Deputy ADs as you like, from Bechtel, BWXT, and a host of others, includig UC (lots of existing-LANL folks who helped Bechtel write the contract bid). Many of them will vote on LANS' success with their feet. The then-existing Division Leaders and Deputy Division Leaders, who swore fealty to LANS in order to keep their jobs will then be "uncovered" and will have to face the new LANS hierarchy to keep their jobs. It will be fun to watch, unless you were a LANS sell-out. That summer in San Francisco must seem sweet now...

Anonymous said...

3/12/08 11:37 PM here. Believe it or not, I am not the only poster who uses "========" to separate quotes from rebuttal. I think that works. Don't you? The other "========"s in this thread were not me. Feel free to guess who I am.

I gave factual reasons why three people I quoted were wrong about the independence of UC. Their posts were so similar that they seemed to be the same person. I still think they are. I also accused these three (?) people of making things up, which they did.

I also called them the "great unwashed." I think that aptly describes the character of the mindless Lab haters who post here. People who fabricate things just to make others look bad are low life.

In return, I have been called a LANS upper manager (which I guess is supposed to be an insult) and an apologist for "this madness" (whatever that means). I have been accused of having a big head that is in my huge asshole.

Wow. Very nice debating skills. I got a real chuckle out of that last one.

What does this trash talk have to do with the independence of UC, the subject of my post? I guess my previous statement about the great unwashed has been proven true.

G'night.

Anonymous said...

DOE and Congress decided that the independence of M&O Contractors was not always convenient, for very different reasons, and significantly changed the relationship between the contractor and DOE more than a decade ago. The last totally independent DOE contractor was AT&T at Sandia. A great system that worked extraordinarily well in serving the US and science for 50 years was thrown out because there was insufficient "accountability." Self inflicted wound based on collosal screwups by Rockwell and Dupont. Contractors (LANS and LANL are my third) now have far less room to deviate from "toeing the line." It is a huge trade-off. After 20 years in the system, I'd take the old "unaccountable" contractors any day. UC simply had its own agenda, primarily unaccountability, as opposed to true independence.

Anonymous said...

G'night John-Boy.

terry said...

"How does the name Director Wallace sound to everyone?"

It sounds great, thank you. I'm getting a stiffy in my fat pants already.