Subj:  Answers
Date:  10/7/97 12:37:45 AM
From:  RonDMoore       

The moratorium on answers regarding "A Time to Stand" is now over.  Proceed
at your own risk.

<<A friend and I were talking about the upcoming "Mirror Universe" episode,
and we wondered if the "other" Bashir had the same genetic enhancement that
ours had. It seems unlikely since the humans in that universe probably
wouldn't have access to the technology, but if that's true, does that add to
the argument that Julian's parents jumped the gun by altering their son?  Or
is he what Julian would have been without it?>>

We've had several discussions on this very point, but we aren't planning to
feature Mirror Bashir in the near future, so we haven't made any firm
decision on his genetic background and/or abilities.

<<Well both of my scripts came back without an invite to pitch but neither of
them had REJECTED written all over the cover. I was just wondering if that as
some kind of good sign or something.>>

This is an error on someone's part.  You can call Lolita at the production
offices to get an official answer, but chances are you weren't invited to
pitch.  I apologize on behalf of our overworked and stressed out staff.

<<Is there someone there in the bowels of Paramount charged with keeping a
history on all these series or do you all just sort of have a feel of where
you've been and what you want to do.>>

There are quite a few people on the production staffs of both shows who are
well versed in Trek lore and try to keep us honest, starting with the Okudas
and Pearce Research & Associates (run by Joan Pearce, who used to help with
the continuity of TOS).

<<How does one get a copy of the writers' guides and "pitch letter" referred
to herein?>>

The submission guidelines are included with the material sent out with the
release forms for spec scripts -- call 213-956-8301 for details.  The pitch
letter is only sent out to people who have been formally invited to pitch.

<<What made it so important to include Sisko's father?  As a writer, and
especially one of Deep Space Nine's writers, what made his father so vital to
those episodes that a grandfather couldn't have filled it? >>

The relationship between father and son and grandfather and grandson is
fundamentally different.  The grandfather's perspective (typically) is more
distant, less involved in the day to day rearing of the boy than the father.
 We wanted to Sisko to interact with his Dad, the man who'd been there all
those years, not the somewhat more remote and much older grandfather.

<< everyone in the house is asking each other, "Why don't they eject the
core? Why didn't they change the shield frequencies?">>

Maybe on opening night and maybe at a theater filled with Trek fans, but I
daresay not *everyone* had these problems.   Not even most people.  Criticize
the tech if you must, but don't kid yourself into believing that *everyone*
cares about core ejections and shield nutations.

<<Chowchilla is a long way from Hollywood.  Glad to see you made it.  Did you
intend to get into Star Trek as a profesion when you sent in that first
script?  What advice might you give to someone that may want to do the same?
 David Child a.k.a. Reddi Redskin 1984 & 1985>>

At long last, someone from good ol' C.U.H.S!  I was hoping to get into
writing as a career when I sent in that first spec, although I did have
(faint) hopes of someday ending up on staff.  Writing is a tough profession
to break into.  The best advice I give is not to be discouraged, and keep
writing, no matter what.

<<I was wondering why, suddenly, Bashir's so ding-danged open about his
genetic enhancement. Seemed to be an abrupt turnaround. >>

Once the secret was out, it seemed pointless to have him continue to hide his
abilities.

<<Also, was it just me, or was there a wee bit--make that a lot--of tension
between Garak and the doctor? >>

It was there, but more a reflection of the situation they were in than a
result of something going on between them personally.
--------
Subj:  Answers
Date:  10/7/97 1:26:39 AM
From:  RonDMoore       

<<I would imagine there are times when writting that you are able to tie in
bits and pieces of other eppisodes and other series into the current project
you are working on.  As a fan it is a lot of fun when I catch these sometimes
subtle references to other eppisodes from other series.  Unless you are
writting specificaly about another series/eppisode that directly ties in to
the story line (the Tribbbles for example) do you try to make an attempt to
interject them just for fun?>>

I usually do it for the fun of it, hoping that someone out there will get the
reference.  

<<Do you write the Rules of Aquisition as they need to apply to the script or
is it a community effort?>>

We look up the established Rules first before creating any new ones and even
then there's usually a lot of discussion before we settle on the final rule.

<<Why were the Jem Hadar sitting in Quark's bar just before the scene between
Kira and Odo?  Since they weren't there to eat, drink or for entertainment?
 Possibly were they there to guard Odo?>>

They were there to observe everything and everyone.  They were probably
running constant battle simulations in their heads or studying the layout of
Quark's in case there was a firefight there or something.

<<Not "Star Trek" related, Mind you, but I thought you all might like a piece
of history since the topic is big ships...  My father served in WWII and, due
to a very strange meteorological phenomenon of the Pacific, his destroyer saw
the Japanese fleet reflected in the sky on a clear sunlit day from several
hundred miles distant.  They established their identity, that there were no
oher ships in that region of ours, triangulated their exact position,
extrapolated their course, realized it was Pearl Harbor and radioed a warning
since A: they couldn't take on a fleet that far away and B: they were alone
anyway..                  
They confimed receivership on the other end but::::      That warning was
ignored.
So, for those of you wondering if Pearl Harbor was a set up to bring us into
war... there's your proof.>>

Well....... not to contradict your father or anything.... but... there's no
mention of this incident in any of the written histories of the attack that
I'm aware of.  In fact, I don't recall there being any US warships anywhere
near the Japanese fleet on Dec. 7.  If there had been such a report, it
would've been relayed to Adm Halsey (aboard the Enterprise, BTW) who was
trying desperately to locate and destroy the attacking carrier force once he
learned of the attack.  The only specific warning recieved prior to the
attack came from: 1) the Army radar station on Oahu's northern shore which
sighted the incoming planes and reported them to a superior officer.  That
officer wrongly assumed they were a flight of incoming B-17s and told them to
"forget about it."  2) a US destroyer (either Monaghan or Ward, I forget
which) that destroyed a Japanese midget sub in the waters just outside Pearl
a couple of hours before the attack.  This warning was not acted on because
it was not believed at the time.

As to the notion that the US government knew of the attack beforehand and
deliberately allowed it to proceed as a way of drawing us into the war, I've
never bought it and the vast majority of historians have rejected it as well.
 The decoded Japanese message traffic did not say, "We're attacking Pearl
Harbor on Dec. 7."  The information was spread throughout many different
cables and radio intercepts and was open to a lot of interpretation.  Some of
the analysis was faulty, and some was downright stupid.  

Advocates of this conspiracy theory often point to the fact that no carriers
were in port that day as some kind of clue, but nothing could be further from
the truth.  In reality, the battleship was considered the queen of the seas
right up until the Pearl Harbor attack.  US and Japanese strategic thought
still centered around the idea of a decisive battle fought between big-gunned
ships to determine the course of the war. (cont.)
--------
Subj:  Answers
Date:  10/7/97 1:26:42 AM
From:  RonDMoore       

(cont.)

Even Adm Yammato, the architect of the attack himself, still believed in the
climatic battleship confrontation (inthe Battle of Midway, he stayed aboard
the battleship Yamato, believing that the battlewagons would still land the
telling blows).  Carrier warfare came into its own only after Pearl Harbor
had dramatically showed the superiority of naval aviation over unprotected
surface vessels.  So it makes very little sense for FDR or anyone else to
allow the entire US battle fleet to be destroyed and save the carrriers when
they had no idea that the carriers would turn out to be the key to the
Pacific War.  If they did have an advance warning, wouldn't it make
infinitely more sense to be ready to deal a crushing blow to the enemy fleet
and thus start the war off with a US victory rather than risk an invasion of
the Hawaii Islands?  Would they really take the chance that the Japanese
might destroy the oil farms and repair facilities at Pearl and force the US
Fleet back to the West Coast?  (The fact that the Japanese did not hit those
facilities was a major mistake.)

It's also cynical to the point of being loathsome to believe that FDR would
knowingly allow an attack to proceed without lifting a finger.  I don't
believe that and I have very little respect for those who do.  Disagree with
his politics all you want, but the man was a patriot and loved his country as
much as you or I, and to accuse him of this kind of foul treachery without
any proof whatsoever is despicable in my opinion.  

<<The American government sacrificed servicemen to "save a nickel on a gallon
of gas" in the GulfWar.  The technological advancements (not including the
A-bomb) and completion of economic recovery provided by WWII were much more
valuable to the US than cheap gas.  Therefore, sure,it would have.>>

Speaking of opinions I despise.... nothing like taking hammer and tongs to
our leaders because it's fashionable to knock the government.  Yep, it's all
cynicism and bile these days.  Never mind the facts, never mind anything
exept our new-found propensity to believe anything as long as it reflects
badly on the government.  (And hey, why not throw in a slam on the Gulf War
while we're at it?  Bush couldn't have actually believed any of the things he
said.  He's just another cynical man saying cynical things for a nickel of
gas.)   

To hell with that and to hell with you for saying it.  

<<did Starfleet let the public in on the news that one of the greatest
explorers/military leaders in history did NOT die on the Enterprise B, but
was in the Nexus for a few decades and then died on a distant planet, saving
billions of souls he never met? >>

I think Picard kept the information to himself.
--------