Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: [Phys-l] ACS embargo



Thank you.

I am proud too.

bc, hasn't seen, but knows he has an FBI file.

p.s. I was refused Peace Corps for political reasons, w/ a resulting unknown pain.

Dan MacIsaac wrote:

On Apr 10, 2007, at 1:09 AM, Bernard Cleyet wrote:


I find it not surprising that the AIP refused to embargo, and that the
ACS embargoes.




The American Chemical Society (ACS) <http://www.acs.org/> has once again
pioneered, under its "zealot" interpretation of "embargo" by

cut

Actually I was present at some APS/AIP discussions related to this while sitting on a relevant committee. The physics community seems to relish standing up to the govt. An important consideration is that JUST receiving manuscripts by Iranian (or Cuban, N. Korean or Libyan) authors, reviewing them, marking them up for publication, laying them out, then publishing (all activities adding value) as well as redistributing back to the countries of origin can ALL be possibly construed as "trading with the enemy" in violation of US law. Many foreign researchers work for foreign univs and their govts. I believe the AIP/APS decision was actually to ignore AIP/APS legal counsel.

If you belong to the AIP/APS/AAPT (in 2006 both AJP and TPT published ms. from Iranian authors) then possibly you should be aware that your associations are possibly deliberately breaking US law, and I strongly believe that you should be proud of them for doing so.

The physics community _possibly_ learned about the necessity of standing up to the govt during the cold war (maybe; with many exceptions, tragedy and much pain). Physics had the fortunate examples of Sakharov and Einstein (amongst others) in peace activism, and the APS regularly makes several different awards explicitly promoting social agenda and policies (Sakharov received one). Note that the Nobel prizes themselves were founded by a chemical "merchant of death" (c.f. Wikipedia on Nobel Prize) with at least one award explicitly promoting social agenda.

I can entirely see why ACS has chosen the route they have. The ACS decision is not due to zealotry on the part of the ACS, but zealotry on the part of the US govt. How you vote has serious consequences.

The above are my personal opinions and interpretations only; though I like to share them :^).

Dan MacIsaac, Associate Professor of Physics, SUNY-Buffalo State College
222SciBldg BSC, 1300 Elmwood Ave, Buffalo NY 14222 USA 716-878-3802
<macisadl@buffalostate.edu> <http://PhysicsEd.BuffaloState.edu>

_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l