thehoodcompany

 The United States either is, or isn't, going to use the website to introduce neurological capabilities. What happens? 1. The United States uses the website to introduce neurological capabilities. Edward Snowden is explained. Laws address the facts. International cooperation reassures the planet of protection from interference in domestic activity. The tactic of intentional derangement is prohibited. 2. The United States doesn't use the website to introduce neurological capabilities. Edward Snowden remains autonomous. Neurological capabilities determine justice. International competition reassures the planet of protection from interference in domestic activity. The tactic of intentional derangement is policy. 

The United States is explicating a neurology through an innovation. You are studying a neurology and an innovation. Is the United States explicating a neurology through an innovation because the neurology matters, or because the innovation matters? Which? How would the neurology affect the United States? If the United States is responsible for explicating the neurology, the neurology is anodyne--harmless. Why would the United States explicate a neurology anyway? If the neurology were bad for the United States, why explicate it? On the other hand, if the explication is of an innovation, the website will publicize the innovation. The neurology was introduced by the United States. Therefore, the neurology is neutral or better to the United States--otherwise the United States would not introduce it. Therefore, the innovation is what the United States is broadcasting--the innovation matters.

The ideal resolution to the neurological expertise of the United States is the publication of the facts--that is to say the publication of the website you are reading. Objections are as stated: 1.  Publicizing the website dismantles national security. National security entails destruction. The website ignores destruction. The lethal and technological capacities of the United States remain unknown--I'm alive, I'm not a nuclear missile. 2.  Publicizing the website disables another experiment. Experiments like this rely on neurology eclipsing whatever else people are--every study will advance unusually now and then. The United States wickedly aborted an idea--neurology, the lure of neurology, invalidated the benefit of the country. 3. Publicizing the website is extreme. Again: pertinent capacities are irrelevant and therefore unknowable, and neurology eclipsing everything is disastrous demonstrably, invidious theoretically, and repudiable immediately. The gratitude to the United S