Friday, September 30, 2005
On Sept. 30, the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) will decide on new management for Los Alamos National Laboratory, possibly replacing the University of California (UC), which has managed the labs for 62 years.
Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), located in New Mexico, famously began during WWII for the Manhattan Project, the secretive operation to build an atomic bomb. At its conception in 1942, UC Berkeley physics professor J. Robert Oppenheimer led the lab, and in 1943 UC began managing Los Alamos.[...]
California, including the University of California, little knows, or cares, what is going on at LANL. Why should they? They have their own problems, big ones. Which is exactly why they should get the hell out of our fair state. Or perhaps we should manage LLNL as a quid pro quo.
tour of Oak Ridge were able to easily penetrate ORNL's Y-12 security:
"Grumpy Old Men at Oak Ridge" -
A PDF memo from POGO about the incident is linked to the article.
Of course, if this had been Los Alamos...
As for the Lee affair, the famous espionage case came after years of rabid right wing attacks on Clinton and US foreigh policy re Taiwan/PRC. Clinton & co. were anxious to shake off the attack dogs and there was a need for a 'convenient' spy. Instead of 'wag the dog' it was 'lets find a spy and turn up the heat to get it off us'. Responsiblity for what ensued lays much more with DOE, FBI and the New York Times than it does with UC. Lee's termination even came straight from DOE not LANL HR. That set the stage for the past 5 years of over-the-top scrutiny and overblown publicity. What's behind it? Just an accident? Has Sandia or LM ever been placed under similar microscope and criticism?