[amsat-bb] Who Let THIS Info Out?

[David Swanson]

Since we've also just established you are willing to lie repeatedly even in
the face of evidence to the contrary, to address ITAR, you're simply wrong.
The last organization that tried your carve out (DefDist, who you
referenced btw) ended up in Prison. Sure, he 'beat' the US State Department
on his 1 little point, but 30+ State Attorney generals then went after him,
and trumped up charges completely unrelated to his ITAR fight, came out of
left field and got him. There is no "winning" when you make something
political - one way or another city hall will always get even. Since I'm
sure you'll just dig in with your typical "NUH UH" BS if you so righteously
believe you can get away with open sourcing everything, then why not take
ORI there and prove AMSAT wrong.... You of course won't, because you
wouldn't be able to walk away after 2 years and claim success while never
seeing something thru. You'd rather goad AMSAT into picking the fight,
claim how you 'invented' something and then move on to your next pot to
stir while AMSAT is left holding the bag.

In case this last lie wasn't enough, how about your claim that ARISS walked
away? Lie. How about the lie that people have been blocked from seeing the
BoD minutes? Lie. How about the lie about Brennen being pressured this
year? I mean seriously dude, do you actually know how to tell the truth? So
why in the world would we trust anything you have to say about ITAR?

-Dave, KG5CCI

On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 4:32 PM Bruce Perens <bruce at perens.com> wrote:

> I made "numerous legal threats"? I don't think so.
>
> Given what a tremendous whopper that one is, I can't attach any
> credibility to the rest of your statement, except for one thing:
>
> It is true that Michelle and Patrick, and for that matter I, feel that
> AMSAT's NDAs prevent it from being able to achieve a workable ITAR strategy.
>
> You simply can't use the ITAR 120.11 and EAR 734.7 carve-outs AND have
> secret or proprietary portions of any technology listed under the United
> States Munitions List. Once there is secret or proprietary technology, all
> of the nasty restrictions of ITAR are unavoidable.
>
> It is possible to deal with secrets outside of the technology, such as
> launch schedules, and it is possible to compartmentalize some
> ITAR-protected information, for example technology specific to the launch
> which is not necessary for broader cooperations  such as designing and
> constructing a satellite.
>
> Thus it is necessary for AMSAT to examine all existing NDAs, separate
> itself from ones that are no longer necessary, and carefully
> compartmentalize any which need to stand for the moment. Michelle and
> Patrick attempted to initiate this process, but have been blocked.
>
> Thanks
>
> Bruce
>
>
>