Today's topics:
#1) Letter from the Editor
#2) Correspondence with Loring Wirbel regarding NKS #2
#3) Correspondence with Carol Rosin speculating on who's a spy in the Nukes and Weapons in Space movement
#4) Correspondence with Carol Rosin: "You need a serious attitude adjustment"
#5) Carol Rosin's "rough draft" of her report, written May 5th, 2000
#6) Some additional correspondence with Carol Rosin (including Bruce Gagnon's latest newsletter)
#7) Letter to Senator Tom Harkin from the NKS editor
#8) Project Censored's 1999 list includes Karl Grossman and Bruce Gagnon
#9) A final letter (or two) to/about Carol Rosin (May 16th, 2000)
#10) A letter from Jack Shannon about Navy recruiters
#11) Subscription/distribution information
************************************************************
*** NKS #3 ITEM #1: LETTER FROM THE EDITOR:
************************************************************
***********
A BLANKET DENIAL:
********
In a phone conversation last Saturday (May 13th, 2000), Carol S. Rosin used the word "slander" as descriptive of what I am saying about her and will continue to say.
I denied that any part of this is slander, explaining that I am simply telling what I have seen with my own two eyes, and that I have described and continue to describe precisely what I myself have experienced as a participant in the anti-nukes-in-space movement, and that I have speculated on the cause of such sick behavior, as I am free to do. For those reasons alone there is no slander here. But furthermore, working for the United States government is not a crime, and I believe that is, ultimately, who she works for. So to accuse me of slander is absurd, but yet she has used that word. She denies any and all charges that she is a spy of any sort, working in concert with Bruce Gagnon to destroy the anti-nukes-in-space movement, and the anti-weapons-in-space movement, and any individual activists who pose a threat in any way to the sanctity of the "system" they have created, a system which assures that nothing gets changed, and that the environmental laws written to protect us 30 years ago (which were utterly useless even when they were originally written) are not properly updated to the environmental considerations of the new millennium. The result of these efforts (which Rosin denies) is that the strength of all activists who might gain a foothold in the media and the public's eye, is systematically destroyed, and the individual is morally crushed and controlled, so that they will not accomplish anything significant in their lives.
And it's all not only perfectly legal to do this, but those who practice this voodoo art of manipulation are utterly unaware that what they are doing is the least bit immoral! They have forgotten the meaning of democracy.
*********
BACK AT YOU! (OR SO I'M WARNED):
***********
Carol S. Rosin further claims that I will appear suspicious if I denounce her, and that people will assume I am a spy because, she assures me the world believes, she couldn't possibly be. She says her friends will vouch for her. Then I say let them come forward and do so. Her husband stated to me on the phone the she is the most honest person he has ever met. (FYI, he is a professional actor.) As I heard someone say recently, "We're all crazy and none of us know how to act." (I wish I could remember who said it; I have literally met 500+ people in the last 6 weeks.)
I believe that my accusations will some day be proven correct, and for the sake of my pride and reputation, as well as for the sake of the need to find out what's wrong and fix it, I expect to be fully exonerated of any false charge against me. (Such as CSR has raised, namely, that it is I who is, in fact, the "spy" in our midst. Such an idea is truly preposterous, as I'm sure the CIA can tell you.)
Perhaps Rosin can collect more people today, and more famous people, than I can, in a famous-people-pissing contest, who will say she is right and I am wrong, but that will not constitute proof of anything. I am not in a popularity contest, but a search for basic, fundamental truths about democracy in America. Who's ruined the right of people to form fairly-run and honestly-guided environmental organizations, particularly those opposed to nukes in space? That's the question to be answered.
Perhaps Rosin's many friends will go out into the world, attempting to sway public opinion against me on her behalf. It will be too bad, but it won't matter. I know that I am fighting a fair battle, searching honestly for my foes before exposing and denouncing them, whether they work at NASA or pretend to be our friends, and I know that even though it may look like a dirty and mean fight to those unaccustomed to the depths of depravity to which our own government will stoop to conquer, it is, in fact, a "gentleman's war". I do not hate my enemy; they do not appear to hate me.
********
HOWEVER:
********
However, a person must be free to seek the truth, and I believe all activists should PICK A TOPIC and STICK WITH IT UNTIL THEY WIN.
That, I believe, is the only effective way to fight for anything. This NKS newsletter is nothing more than the natural followup to the STOP CASSINI newsletter, simply because this is the real reason Cassini could not be stopped. It was a lunatic idea supported by mad scientists and their lackeys. So how did it fail to be stopped? How did it fail to be investigated? How come most people still have never even heard of Cassini, despite the awesome threat to humanity which it posed, during launch in 1997 and especially, during its flyby of Earth in August, 1999?
The newsletter became an investigation into infiltrators who gain leadership positions within the movement against nukes in space, so I changed the name to Nukes, Kooks, and Spooks, and this is issue #3.
So far, for those keeping track, we have identified the following as dishonest infiltrators into various aspects of the anti-nuke movements: Carol Rosin, Regina Hagen and Bruce Gagnon (See NKS #3, #2, and #1, respectively, for the latest on these three clowns). Also a Catherine Euler in England (see Stop Cassini newsletter #190), and Alice Slater and Christa Rossner from GRACE (see SC newsletter #217). I personally believe Loring Werbil is too, though the data is still somewhat sketchy (see below for the latest information). Greenpeace, as an organization, is filled with spies. I believe all these people work for their respective governments, in a secret network, in conjunction with each other (not that all these people know each other, but they work for essentially the same group -- the Nuclear Mafia). All should be ignored and if you do deal with them you should do the exact opposite of whatever they want you to do to stop the destruction of planet earth by nuclear waste -- unless it happens to be a good idea, in which case do it, but even then, never think that it is enough. It won't be.
**********
THESE PEOPLE ARE NOT OUR FRIENDS:
***********
Infiltrators into the anti-nuke movement are acting in complete opposition to the principals America was founded on. They do not support truth. They do not support human health, the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Not at all. They waste our time, violate our civil rights, and ensure that dangerous policies which result in the DEATHS OF MILLIONS are continued in perpetuity. And perhaps worst of all, they tend to rise to the top of the organizations they infiltrate, sometimes even founding them for the sole purpose of preventing other organizations from functioning as "the voice of the people". They are a cancer upon society.
There are many others this editor has been forced to humiliate -- by hoisting them in their own petard -- in the course of my investigations about the Nuclear Mafia and the Demon Hot Atom. People who openly support The Evil Poison (uranium, plutonium, etc.) , despite all the evidence that indicates it is a health hazard of absolutely unprecedented proportions around the globe and in space. (Sure, there are a few good uses of radioactive materials. But they are so few and far between, that the waste which was generated from the very first experimental nuclear reactor is probably enough of these materials to supply all of these trace amounts the world would need for the next 10,000 years!)
Some of those who openly support nukes, and have been made fools of on these pages, include Jeff Nyquist (perhaps the biggest fool and almost certainly among the most unscrupulous), David Grinspoon, Louis Friedman, Woody Smith, David F. Doody, Mary Beth Murrill, the editor of IEEE Spectrum (who published an awful, biased piece, but would not publish Dr. Horst Poehler's (or my) response) and dozens of others, all named in -- and the factual errors of their thinking described in -- the STOP CASSINI newsletters and/or in the NKS newsletters. But these people are not the focus of my efforts, because try as they might, in a democracy they would be stopped, and the mad-scientist things they are supporting would be prevented by a society interested in the health of its human population.
But those who become the focus of this newsletter are a different sort, because they do not openly support nukes, but instead destroy movements from within. Why would they be willing to do something so evil?
************
SEE NO EVIL:
************
The reason someone like Rosin can behave the way she does is because they refuse to investigate the issues, to inform themselves, to educate their own minds.
Carol Rosin, for instance, said to me (last Saturday) on the phone, that she does not know whether nukes in space are so dangerous that they should be banned (I am for a .001 Curie limit for radioactive materials on all space flights, as proposed by Kai Petzke in 1997 and incorporated into our International Petition in 1999). She said she personally hasn't studied it enough and doesn't have enough training in the relevant technical and medical fields -- that she's not an expert. Neither am I, but I've interviewed dozens who are, and she could have read those experts' opinions in my newsletter, or interviewed them herself. She also said she hasn't read all that many of my newsletters (because, of course, there were so many). But the point is, she failed to educate herself somehow about the dangers and risks from nuclear launches. Or so she now says.
**********
SUCH "NAIVETY" IS UNCONSCIONABLE:
*********
Such "naivety" is unconscionable at her level of interaction on these issues. She should have interviewed such great doctors and scientists as the late Dr. Karl Z. Morgan, and Dr. John Gofman, Dr. Horst Poehler, Dr. Jay Gould, Dr. Ernest Sternglass -- all of whom (and many others) I have interviewed, in most cases for many hours. Indeed, those interviews are why I am convinced of the dangers of America's radioactive policies in the space program. My Stop Cassini newsletter (available online) contains numerous descriptions of what these learned people have said to me. Their story is very consistent. If there are good scientific arguments against their thinking, and Carol Rosin knows who disagrees with my scientific sources (as she implies), then long ago (1997, when she first started contacting me offering to help me in any way) she should have put me in contact with those people, to help me find the truth whatever it may be, but she did not. That is one way she has blocked the truth from getting out.
She even said that some people (clearly she is talking about NASA's employees or their contractors and other cronies) tell her NASA CAN make a good enough plutonium containment system. She ignores not only the opposition scientists (such as Dr. Horst Poehler) but common sense as well (consider the speeds of space debris collisions and common sense tells most people that 100% containment in 100% of the accidents is utterly impossible). She said she has heard that they can make containment systems that are strong enough -- that's all crap. The potential stresses involved in space accidents and collisions are unpredictable but there is NO DOUBT that they can be so intense as to destroy anything mankind has ever created -- so each space flight with plutonium or other radioactive substances is a terrible risk. (Launch explosions when nuclear payloads are involved are extremely risky, as well as the dangers from space debris and other post-launch hazards. See Dr. Poehler's article on Cassini Cancers, posted at the Stop Cassini web site, for a good discussion of the launch dangers from Cassini.)
It's one thing to support these crimes openly, because you have been mentally deluded into thinking there is no crime going on, and nuclear poison is not poison at all, and containment systems are perfect, and all such technical crap -- like the Mad Hatter, who was poisoned by his own use of mercury in the making of hats. All hatters were mad when mercury was used for hats. Those who do not accept the facts about plutonium and uranium's deleterious effects are, in effect, mad as the Mad Hatter. Completely deluded. They are uncomprehending of the statistical, engineering and medical data which makes the dangers so hard to understand.
The organizations which support nuclear power are both secretive and powerful. And nuclear waste is being spread throughout the ecosystem, in rockets like Cassini, from power plants, by U.S. and Russian nuclear submarines already at the bottom of the ocean, and all around us. Tens of thousands of waste sites.
**********
LOS ALAMOS: A NUCLEAR DISASTER?:
*************
Residents are being taken to the places where their homes once stood. They can take pictures -- but they can't leave the busses! It sounds like they might even be special air-filtered, sealed busses. Reporters likewise were taken around to the labs, but did any reporters carry Geiger counters? I have not heard that they did. Reporters savvy enough to do so would probably not have been given press credentials.
But Nukes, Kooks, and Spooks isn't about the wildfire at Los Alamos, or the recent generator fire (and subsequent venting of nuclear material into the atmosphere) at Diablo Canyon. It's about spies in our midst, and the dishonesty. It is not about naive reporters.
It is one thing to make an honest (if utterly devoid of fundamental logic) mistake and support the Demon Hot Atom.
But it is quite another thing to PRETEND to belong to a peace movement in opposition to these things, when in fact you are fully supportive of the system that allows nuclear poison -- 400,000 Curies of it -- to be launched into space. "I don't know what you mean by Curies" says Carol Rosin, last Saturday when I described Cassini's 72.3 pounds of plutonium dioxide (mostly Pu 238 and Pu 239) as "400,000 Curies", which it is. I agree that it is difficult to understand Curies, half-lives, lethal doses, global dispersals, spectrums of particle sizes, the dangers of Pu 238 versus those of Pu 239, and it is hard to keep track of what all the initials stand for, like RTG, GPHS, GIS and so forth, and all the other details. But her lack of understanding is, as I said, unconscionable, if SHE want's to play at the top. I can assure Carol Rosin that Dr. Helen Caldicott, whom Rosin disparages, understands it all, and can describe in painful and painstaking detail, the exact medical effects on the human body as well.
CSR states that many of the activists at the Washington, D.C. meeting did not want to work with her because they did not want to have anything to do with "working within the system", which she advocates is still a possibility. Perhaps it is -- but those in the system will have to come out and talk to the activists openly, not through secret meetings with "insiders" such as Rosin. That hasn't worked, and never will, and is undemocratic anyway.
I completely agree with those activists who recognize that "the system" is so corrupt that there is very little percentage to working within it. You will just be shuffled from one level to another, from one bureaucrat to another, from one side of a two-headed coin to another, and you will not change a thing.
**********
IT'S TIME FOR A REVOLUTION -- BUT WHICH ONE?:
***********
A "design science revolution" as R. Buckminster Fuller would say. A revolution in thinking about humanity globally. And a revolution against the Demon Hot Atom and the Nuclear Mafia.
I do not believe Carol Rosin when she tells me she does not work for the CIA, the KGB, or any other spy organization or anyone at all -- only for herself. It's possible. If so, she desperately needs an education very badly, because she claims to have been seriously abused in Washington last month at the Global Net meeting, denied a voice, accused and embarrassed. She claims to want to know why, but pretends not to understand when I explain it to her. When I refer back to the many earlier explanations I have already written, she claims not have been reading my newsletters very much (yet she never fails to appear out of the woodwork whenever I attack Bruce Gagnon (now she is claiming to think he's bonkers)).
**********
PLEASE, DEAR READERS, READ THIS NEWSLETTER CAREFULLY:
********
I have tried very hard not to include any more of the incredible amount of boring detail than necessary, and I apologize profusely for the length of this issue and the fact that these issues require presentation of reams of minutia to prove a simple point.
So I'll state that point here:
In my opinion, Carol Rosin is a spy, and Bruce Gagnon and Regina Hagen are as well, and together their job is to completely confound and confuse the anti-nukes-and-weapons-in-space movement. NONE OF THEM should be trusted to give you the time of day (else Carol, for instance, would know it is improper to call someone you respect at 8:30 am on a Saturday morning).
These people are so dishonest, so meddling into the minds of activists, so criminal in their violation of our civil rights as activists, that they should be exposed and despised by all who see what they are doing.
Carol Rosin said she wanted to meet with me, after reading NKS #2. I suggested she come down for dinner in San Diego, and bring various documents, and attend the R. Buckminster Fuller play which was recently performed (to standing ovations nightly and an extended run) and which my wife and I were working for two nights a week, in the foyer selling "Bucky" books and videos (an unpaid position for a non-profit organization). Despite her telling me Bucky himself had "given" her the space portion of his famous World Game, she did not make it down -- too depressed, I was told. After the play ended she suggested coming up to her house in Ventura, and I agreed to that meeting, and would have actually met with her, but half-way there I had a terrible car accident and we were unable to make the appointment that day.
**********
PERHAPS IT'S JUST AS WELL WE MISSED THE MEETING:
*********
Since then (last Wednesday), I have talked to her for nearly 10 hours on the phone, and NOTHING SHE HAS SAID has changed my conclusion -- it has only made it stronger -- that she is pretending to be naive about the ways of an infiltrator or spy, that she is intentionally not becoming fully knowledgeable regarding the importance of preventing the nuclear aspect of the race in space because of the health risks to humanity. I have told her repeatedly during the conversations that have gone on, that I would like to be convinced she is not a spy. But I am tired of her attempts now, because they are utterly ineffective -- enough hours of conversation have gone by and I cannot think of anything more to ask her which might prove different, which she cannot send me by email, postal service, or fax. Her own statements convict her over and over and over -- why hear any more? She indicates that once she has had an opportunity to prove me wrong, we will become lifelong friends -- but no friend ever calls me at 8:30 am on a Saturday, except in an emergency or by pre-arrangement, say, to go mountain-biking together. Just two nights earlier she had called me at 10:30 pm, and it was discussed that I am more of a night owl than a morning dove. Yet two days later she calls me then anyway -- you get the picture. Psychological abuse is what it is going on here, done by a professional (she has training in that general area, and used that fact to explain to me why she thinks Gagnon is crazy and not "crazy like a fox" as I suggest he is).
As I said, Rosin protests her innocence in all this, and the purpose of my visit was because she said she would "open her files, her house, anything" up for inspection so that I could ascertain for myself that she is utterly honest and utterly committed to stopping the weaponization of space (she failed to mention the nuclearization of space in that same sentence).
I have come to realize that I am no match for such an investigative challenge. (The officers investigating the aforementioned accident had written and verbal statements from each of the 6 people involved within an hour of the event.) I have been asking Rosin, for nearly a month now, to simply send me complete eye-witness reports of what she and two friends (one named Michael, a musician who apparently performed at the D.C. conference, and the other the editor of "Crone's Chronicles") witnessed regarding the way Bruce Gagnon and others treated Rosin. I have also asked her to email me her letter to Gagnon asking for a formal explanation of his behavior, and the response she says she received, for publication in my newsletter. She as agreed to show me all four of these documents -- as apparently both friends of hers have completed statements specifically for publication in my journal, but I have not been allowed to see them, evidently these documents are being held "hostage" against my willingness to physically go and visit Rosin.
*********
BEATING A DEAD HORSE:
***********
Well, I see no reason for the visit. Over the phone, in nearly 20 hours of conversation since the Washington D.C. meeting, she has professed to understand nothing about why Gagnon does what he does, continuously proclaiming that he is simply misdirected, blinded by ego, etc. etc. etc. with a large bunch of sheep who worship him (it is true that he has the flock of poor unfortunate sheep). But she will say anything to avoid labeling him a fraud, a fake, a spy, and a criminal. Last Saturday she even went so far as to say that if, indeed, he IS a spy, what is criminal about that? Perhaps it is true, that currently the laws permit such mischief, but it is a clear violation of the fundamental principals America was founded on. It is, in a word, UNAMERICAN.
"He's violated my civil rights, Carol", I replied. It's as simple as that, but the really bizarre thing about her question, was that I had explained all that very clearly in NKS #1. She should reread that issue about 10 times if that's what it takes for her to understand what Gagnon is all about. But then again, if she fully understands it, and is a part of it, and thinks it's perfectly legal and morally right even if he is a spy, well, then I guess reading NKS #1 10 times won't help.
***********
WHY WE NEED A REVOLUTION:
************
The nuclear power-struggle that is going on in this world is killing humanity even without another nuclear war or another Chernobyl. Humanity needs to fight back to save itself from the Demon Hot Atom and the Nuclear Mafia, and all it's cronies, lackeys, savants and other foolish, devious, and degenerate supporters need to be exposed and thus made ineffective. This newsletter is dedicated to describing how such operatives operate, so that others can recognize such behavior when it is they, and not me, who is the target.
For today, dear reader, it is I, but tomorrow it will be you, if we remain silent and do not together solve the problem of the Nuclear Mafia and the Demon Hot Atom.
I have attached, as a final item in this edition, a letter from Jack Shannon, an NKS subscriber, which describes in detail the types of abuses the United States Navy commits against its own inductees. The violation of the rights of a free, non-conscripted citizen in the United States (such as myself) should not be unexpected, when they treat our military personnel the way Jack describes (reprinted from a Stop Cassini newsletter and from Jack Shannon's web site).
Russell Hoffman
Carlsbad, CA
************************************************************
*** NKS #3 ITEM #2: CORRESPONDENCE WITH LORING WIRBEL REGARDING NKS #2:
************************************************************
At 11:45 AM 5/7/00 -0400, Loring Wirbel
Loring Wirbel
lwirbel@aol.com
Dear Mr. Wirbel;
I thank you for your opinion (shown above), but I will write about what I see, and if it relates to the nukes-in-space issue, I will continue to send it to the STOP CASSINI leaders (I consider you one) and to the press and to government officials, if I feel it is important for them to know about.
I wrote about exactly how Regina Hagen has treated me. If you have been treated differently, I'm not surprised, as I would rank you -- like Karl Grossman, Dr. Michio Kaku, and Dr. Helen Caldicott -- amongst the people these creeps are going to be especially careful of and treat with kid gloves. I'm sure all of you get a very different view of Gagnon, Rosin and Hagen than I and other legitimate "outsider" activists are presented with. When do they know to worry? Whenever we try to organize outside of their group. You don't organize, you follow their leadership and consider them the leaders. Therefore you are not a threat to them (this, assuming you are an honest activist). My newsletter -- even this new one with a mere 16 subscribers (so far) -- is an organization of sorts -- and SC had about 150 subscribers (sometimes over 200), many of whom wrote for it and submitted information, as these subscribers do now.
Indeed, we may be few in number, but we are fairly well organized and we are enthusiastic about solving these problems -- and the newsletters are, like the SC newsletter before, often redistributed to many others. Yet you never took advantage of this "market".
How about an eye-witness report from YOU on what you think happened, generally, at the Washington meeting last month, and specifically what happened to/with/regarding Carol Rosin? Do you think Rosin's a spy, if you don't think Hagen is?
Is it true (I'm sure it is, but I'd like to hear it from more people) that Gagnon told everyone that he was impressed with Carol Rosin and considered her brave -- not for her opinions on what to do about space problems, but simply for coming to the "Global Network" meeting?!? I mean, that would appear to be about the most unfriendly gesture one activist could say to another -- were you there? Did you witness that event by Gagnon?
I believe it was a staged event, and that Rosin and Gagnon work for the same subversive force. But if it wasn't staged, were you outraged? You should have been, even if you think Rosin's idea's are lunatic. She still had a right to speak and to be there, but I understand Gagnon and Hagen interrupted her when she tried to speak from the floor, and would not permit her on any panels, even though she is without question the most knowledgeable activist there is on the subject of the thinking and mind-set of the military-industrial complex -- the whole lot of you together can't match her credentials. Even if I'm right that she's actually fervently working against the cause and is an agent or spy or whatever, she STILL can lay down the most devastating and accurate line about what's going on I've ever heard.
This should come as no surprise; after all, Congressman Bob Barr can speak eloquently about the potential for abuse from the computer capabilities of the CIA, NSA, etc., yet as head of the various Government committees involved in overseeing these agencies, he is the one permitting such abuse!
As I understand it, Rosin was only allowed to speak at all as the second-to-last speaker, prior to a socialist or communist or something (I forget which I heard it was; whichever, it was a token speaker) -- whoever it was that closed the show certainly must have expected to be ignored. The camera crews had long gone home. I know; I often speak last when I attend a public hearing here in San Diego, for example. (I do so by choice; I like to speak off-the-cuff and fill in the gaps earlier speakers had been forced to make, since none of us are ever given enough time. Those aren't activist's conventions, they are public hearings, but nevertheless, by then the cameras have usually all gone home, and half the activists as well. I'm also comfortable with speaking first, FYI.)
This reminds me of the time I gave a presentation to investors in London, England. John Scully, the former head of Apple, was supposed to be speaking a little over an hour later than me, which was a much better time slot. I was scheduled early, and the room was 25% full when I was supposed to speak. It was SRO when I actually spoke, in Scully's time slot. I ended up "ranting" as you put it about the lack of investors in educational software, and the need for more educational opportunities of all sorts for children, and so on and so forth -- to a packed house and good applause. Another one of my 15 minutes of fame had suddenly and rather unexpectedly (and pleasantly) gone by.
One listener offered me the complete use of his computer facility if I ever needed it for anything -- not a bad offer, coming as it did from the head of the San Diego Supercomputer Center, right down the road from where I live. My work being what it is, I haven't had the opportunity to take advantage of the offer, but it was a kind one. So I must have said something right, and used my time slot well.
Timing is everything.
I think Rosin, Hagen and Gagnon are all spies or agents or whatever the technical term is, and I don't know how much further it goes but that's far enough to fool you (apparently) and devastate the movement. I shall continue to describe what I believe is happening, in the next NKS newsletter, along with publishing your letter (and this response). I think Rosin's ill treatment at the D.C. event was a staged event by Rosin, Hagen and Gagnon (and perhaps others), but I think other activists who took part in it (the denouncing and silencing of Rosin) were acting in a shameful, mob fashion.
You were there. What's your opinion? For the record, of course. Did you make a point of hearing Rosin speak?
Besides, who are you, anyway? I don't recall you contributing anything to the STOP CASSINI battle -- that is, as far as you've shown yourself to me. As far as you have let me know, you are a leader in name only. Of course, as a subscriber, you weren't *obligated* to send me information you were producing relating to the STOP CASSINI movement's activities, but it would have been a cooperative thing to do and you certainly must have known it would have reached a vast (about 200 people) audience you could not possibly have reached any other way. But you were silent then. You too, did not see any crime when Woody Smith attacked me, nor David Grinspoon, nor Jackie Alan Giuliano, nor Jeff Nyquist, nor any of the others who are supposedly our "mutual" opponents -- but now, you are suddenly out and loaded for bear.
Who are you?
Lastly, I will note that I've "ranted" about Hagen before, and just as deservedly so. I'll do so again as the occasion warrants. And about you, too, if I feel like it.
Good Day. I'll await your eye-witness report.
Russell D. Hoffman
P. S. My letter to the president's email address came back undeliverable (permanent fatal errors). [[[ Note: This was evidently because the email was too large for the presidential system. -- rdh ]]] Do you know his current address? How about Doug Isbell's, over at NASA? His email address no longer works either.
Attachment #1: Your previous defence of Gagnon (and not-too-subtle attack on Bill Sulzman) and your only letter to me besides subscribing early on in the newsletter's history (this letter was previously published in SC newsletter #90):
At 01:24 AM 2/2/99 EST, Loring Wirble wrote:
Attachment #2: An earlier email posting written by you, collected from a NOFLYBY newsletter, regarding the Titan IVA explosion in August, 1998. It's interesting that you don't discuss the rather obvious fact that that was probably a nuclear mission itself, much like Cassini -- except it blew up over Florida! Your mention of Cassini clearly is referring only to the similarity of the launch vehicle. Very interesting indeed. (And please do not bother to respond that you don't "believe" it was a nuke-tipped rocket. I have listed (in NKS #1, and elsewhere) a long string of engineering considerations which you would need to refute to properly respond, considering the relevant nature of your employment in related industries.)
*******************
Attachment #3: The only other email from you to me I could find, written to me right after the launch of Cassini:
At 02:32 PM 10/12/97 -0400, you wrote:
==================================
************************************************************
>>>>> A letter not sent (written mostly on May 8th, 2000): >>>>>
To: Carol Rosin
Dear Carol Rosin,
Regarding your phone call this morning, I wish I had stuck to my original statement that we have nothing to talk about.
I understand that you originally stated that you just wanted clarification of one point -- namely, did I really believe that you and Gagnon and Hagen (and perhaps others) were putting on an act, pretending to fight, down in D.C. last month, and did I believe that you are, like I believe him to be, a fake, a fraud, a spy, a double-agent, an agent-provocateur, or whatever the technical term is for such persons?
I confirmed that you had correctly assessed my opinion: That you are as guilty as Gagnon and Hagen, and working directly with them to hoodwink others.
You indicated that you had seen my most recent emails, namely, the NKS issue #2 and the subsequent correspondence with Loring Werbil, and wondered if they had been written after our long conversation late last week. I confirmed that they had indeed, been written just before they were sent. (If you had thought about it, it would have been obvious, since for example, the Loring Wirbel correspondence came in after NKS #2 went out, and was dated and thus had to have been created Sunday (May 7th, 2000).)
You proclaimed that accusing you meant that I was likewise accusing R. Buckminster Fuller of being a spy/government operative, because, you say (and I believe you), he "gave" you the space part of the World Game, and that I was also thus accusing Werner von Braun of being a spy/government operative, because, you say (and I believe you), you were his personal assistant/secretary/adjuvant/something like that, and I think you mentioned another person. In any event, such chain-reaction, guilt-by-association insinuations are preposterous. My charges are much, much better focused than that; they are based on my own eyewitness accounts, and others I have communicated with regularly about these issues.
Even the most complex web can somehow be untangled, if one simply sticks with it.
You said your lawyer is also Daniel Ellsberg's lawyer (or you said something like that), and, if I understand everything properly, was also Karen Silkwood's lawyer, who was the young nuke-worker-turned-activist-turned-probable-murder-victim, depicted so well by Merryl Streep in the movie Silkwood.
I find the idea laughable that you have tied up someone who is probably the best lawyer I might have asked my lawyer to try to work with, to engage in a legal attack on the Pentagon's infiltration of otherwise-legitimate environmental movements, by having him as your own lawyer -- clever tactic. Well done -- it just shows the depths the military-industrial complex is willing to go, to destroy the environmental movement's ability to fight back. Buying up even our lawyers!
You also said that you don't trust the courts -- but who does -- and what other choices are there anyway? You said this, after saying something about suing me for slander if I go ahead with the planned NKS #3.
You told me a very, very interesting story. You said that Lyndon LaRouche (the right-wing political activist and perennial presidential candidate) was the last person to make a concentrated attempt at proclaiming you to be a spy, and that he had, in fact, made a half-hour documentary about you, explaining his reasons. You even said this guy stated that you are incredibly powerful, and "write most of the laws in Congress" if I've got what you were saying correct. (Later, you told me that LaRouche's documentary (which you say you cannot find for me to watch, and suggested I contact LaRouche directly) states you are a KGB agent. I believe you to be an agent of the Nuclear Mafia, presumably working for the U. S. Government or some subcontracted corporation.)
La Rouche is crazy. Just last night (May 7th, 2000), in one of those bizarre coincidences that make people wonder (or was it a coincidence?), someone was talking to my wife at the Bucky Fuller play I told you about where she and I have been manning the booth for the Global Energy Network Institute, selling Bucky books and explaining the GENI concept (non-paid positions, of course). (It was interesting that you also called last night at about 5:45 pm, when you knew I would be heading towards the play, and left a message saying you wanted me to call you. I did not return that call, and had no intention of returning that call, and you called again moments after I got out of the shower this morning (Monday), around 10. (Late night again, of course. Close of the show.).) This person my wife met saw the GENI proposal (see www.geni.org to learn more, if you like) and said "Lyndon LaRouche likes this idea, but wants nuclear power to supply the energy transmitted by the cables"!
Everyone can be very right some of the time, and very wrong some of the time. If Lyndon LaRouche and I partially agree about you, it apparently won't be the first thing we've partially agreed on, regardless of the many things we undoubtedly completely disagree on.
In August, 1997, I wrote to you the following:
I don't like Bruce. Bruce doesn't like me. But I do not have any
That was then. This is now. Now, I have figured out that my feelings about Bruce were induced, that he had in effect instigated our fighting because that's the #1 tactic for getting activists to back out and off. And, I realized that I don't have a significant amount of anger against him. He's just doing his job, which is to screw up the environmental movement against nukes and weapons in space. He doesn't trust the scientists who explain the dangers to have studied the matter properly. He certainly isn't swayed by any activists. He sees himself serving a higher goal, somehow, by serving the destructive powers of the military/industrial complex who wish to destroy certain environmental movements whose actions would, if successful, get in their way and curtail their world-domination plans. Or just cost them a lot of time and money.
You help Gagnon, for instance by encouraging me to talk to you, claiming to listen to all my evidence (enough to convince even the most jaded skeptic, I think, if they actually take the time to wade through it all), and then pronouncing said evidence insufficient each time, predictably as clock-work. You stated (in an email last Friday, May 5th, 2000), "I just don't believe Bruce is a criminal or agent or plant, or whatever." You add, "I can see, however, how it fits into the picture you present." Well, either you see it or you don't. If you see it, you should be so outraged that nothing will stop you from presenting the truth immediately to stop this outrageous behavior. And if you don't see it, you should still want to present everything you saw, because as you say I say, "it's the truth and it is part of the story that should be told."
You also stated, "Truth is, I believe he just isn't very bright, obvioulsy (sic) not bright enough to see what he is doing and to understand the consequences...which is why he and his group will be totally ineffective in any case" (your ellipses).
You then suggested that "something is definately (sic) fishy" because "Bruce wouldn't allow me to educate these people". (I'm sure you know I agree with that statement.)
You suggested that the whole lot of them might be "criminals...agents" (your ellipses again), stating, "I'll bet these people would vote that you ... and I ... should not be speakers even if Bruce wasn't in charge." (your ellipses, both times).
Maybe so, at this point. But I think I could win them over, given a chance, that chance coming when the government admits that they have, indeed, been infiltrating these organizations for years, and they have, indeed, especially concentrated on the space nuclear organizations for the simple reason that -- well, that you are right about how important it is -- and that they have, indeed specifically placed people at the heads of as many environmental organizations as possible, and that among those organizations, Global Net is one of their main targets. It fact, it was invented to be a dummy environmental movement. That's my charge.
While I appreciate your offer that I can drive up to Ventura and look at anything and everything anywhere in your house (after your two-day vacation), it is not sufficient and at this point, would be a waste of both our time. The first thing I would ask to see is all your communication with Bruce Gagnon.
Since you no doubt have that information stored electronically, you could simply forward it to me. I have asked you twice before (recently) and other times in the past to do so, yet you have refused. So what good would going up there be?
Also, by the way, your husband Jon owes me an apology. He did not announce his presence on the line during the first few minutes of our conversation, which was dishonest and disingenuous -- and creepy.
If you want to protest your innocence to me, you would be well-advised to do so -- and to advise your husband to do so -- politely at all times. I am sick of your abusive tactics which include late-night and early-morning phone calls, endless pages of phycho-babble about how we have to all get into the light (Akido-style, whatever that means), or about how you are suicidal whenever you feel like a failure, and all other guilt-trips you try to put me through to stop me from publishing what I observe and what information I have gathered. STOP IT. If you feel compelled to contact me or express any idea about anything you think I might be the least bit interested in, do so in writing and expect it to be published at will. Better yet, publish it yourself, I don't have time for your act.
I feel my claims against you are well-founded and accurate. If you truly wish to cooperate (rather than threaten me by warning that it will (somehow; you wouldn't say how you will accomplish this) be MY reputation that will be ruined if I go forward with NKS #3), then you can start by sending me the Gagnon correspondence via email, going back as far as you have known him (oh yes, you've told me of your hard drive failures, which would conveniently preclude that).
I must also insist on your find or securing a new copy of, and mailing me, LaRouche's "expose" of you, to see if there are, in fact, any significant commonalities. For a "radical tree-hugging environmentalist hippie revolutionary computer geek" like me to agree with Lyndon LaRouche on such a "far-fetched" idea adds a remarkable amount of weight to the possibility that you are, in fact, the fraud you appear to us to be, even if we think you come from opposite camps. And I need the "testimonies" you say your two friends have written.
Lastly, I need you to use the FOIA to get a complete U.S. Government official dossier on yourself. Therein, I'm sure (unless it's been blacked out) will be the truth, for all to read, of whether or not you are a spy for the U.S. military-industrial-nuclear complex.
There is no proof, Carol, that you can provide me, which would overcome three years of psychological abuse which you have put me through, every time I mentioned Gagnon and his crimes. But there is proof which our own government, faulty and imperfect but the best there is and my last resort, can provide us all with, if you agree to request those documents.
So let me summarize my requests:
1) Send me all letters from you to Bruce Gagnon, ever written.
Once I have received ALL these items, I will publish them. YOU said you would open your life to me to prove you are not a spy. I am hereby specifying exactly how I want you to go about that process. There is no need for a visit to your property and indeed I think such a visit would be utterly inappropriate because I believe you to be a dishonest and unpatriotic lackey for the Nuclear Mafia, and an immoral and secretive supporter of the Demon Hot Atom.
Sincerely,
Russell Hoffman
Attachment #1: Your 1st email to me regarding whatever happened in D.C. last month. You include not only Regina (Hagen), whom I have accused (see NKS #2), but, sad to see, Karl (Grossman), who I have never accused, and who you said in a phone conversation, probably is nice to me simply because I "sell" his books at my web site. That's absurd. Actually, since I don't get any commission from his books, I don't "sell" them, and also, I'll bet he hasn't sold 5 books from that web site in total. But anyway, your description of his behavior is difficult to fathom and doesn't match my own experience. I have not accused him, and do not expect this "investigation" will ever include everyone you have implicated, such as Dr. Helen Caldicott (see attachment #2). And a note about your possible claim that some of this (or all of it) was to be confidential: None of it was sent confidentially, and we both pretty much assume that the CIA can and does read our email.
So the only ones we are keeping anything confidential from is the public, who have a right to know. And, of course, you promised your life would be an open book, and I'm opening it.
At 01:56 AM 4/21/00 -0700, rosin@west.net wrote:
Russell-
CSR
<<<<< END OF ATTACHMENT #1 <<<<<
Attachment #2: Your second email to me regarding this matter. In this email your attacks broaden to include Dr. Helen Caldicott and Bill Sulzman, both of who I believe you are unfairly attacking (I have never met Bill Sulzman, but have never seen a reason to doubt him, notwithstanding your accusations in the following email):
At 01:03 AM 4/24/00 -0700, rosin@west.net wrote:
I think one of the emails I sent you got "lost." Weird. I got a new laptop and may have accidentally zapped it out instead of sending it. I can't find it.
[[[Note to readers. The above means she will not have the material, if subpoenaed. -- rdh ]]]
Sorry, I'm busy trying to keep a marriage together so I'm not on-line as much as I used to be at the moment. Jon is not happy I'm getting involved again. We had some lengthy arguments about it all week since I've been back, so I've been off line mostly. I'm going to have to take time off every day to spend with him so he doesn't feel neglected. And maybe even take a day trip or a two or three day trip once a week or so with him...participate in the relationship, in other words. We're negotiating. In other words, this work takes me away from him way too much. I work all night and all day when I get into this stuff. Not good for a relationship...and this work has destroyed (or I have) every relationship I've had since 1974. I've been with Jon for 14 plus years (my record) and he's about had it. Because, he says, it's a waste of time. He says the powers to be are too well organized and funded...the activists are splintered/fragmented/ignorant/unorganized/underfunded, at best. And he confirms his theory
because of what I've told him about my experience in DC with GAGnon.
[[[ Note to readers: It is regrettable that activism is emotionally challenging! -- rdh ]]]
Not that I expected much to happen with this group of peace/anti-nuke activists and Bruce who don't seem to even be interested in banning space-based weapons even though that was supposedly the theme of this event.
In fact, I can't believe it but this group still actually believe that the protests actually are what stopped the Viet Nam war. Even though I tell them it stopped because the boys/industry had dumped all the weapons they wanted to and then had enough rationale to get more funding for another new phase of weapons for another war in a place not yet saturated with US weapons. But you can't tell them anything they don't want to hear. They develop their own myths. They think thier protest did the trick. They seemed to be happy that they "almost" stopped Cassini, and actually believe they almost did. We're talking about major denial here. And - They have never used a strategy that would impact this game. And, here they had someone who worked in that strategy arena on the inside, me, and they won't listen to a word I say. Well, Jon says, therefore, this group is a total waste of time. Stupid takes on a new meaning. But, trying to be compassionate, we are all on different places on the path.
[[[ Note to readers: Most people (including me) believe the Vietnam war ended because the protests were destroying the "domestic tranquility" of America, and the protester's message was getting through to too great a percentage of the population. The WTO protests, or other environmental actions which have followed and will continue to follow (such as the A16 protests) might do that some day too (recognizing that most, if not all, of the violence in Seattle was done by cops or infiltrators, NOT by protesters). Also, it should be noted that although banning space-based weapons is extremely important, the most unconditional danger to human health from space is from the nuclear threat placed above our heads, not the weapons, because the weapons are only a danger if used, see -- but the nuclear waste is a danger always! More importantly, the weapons are INEVITABLY powered by nuclear reactors or nuclear thermoelectric generators, or are atomic in nature (a nuclear bomb), so stopping nukes in space will, for all
intents and purposes, stop the weaponization of space. Yet Carol Rosin, the "great" anti-weaponization speaker, completely ignores this obvious issue. -- rdh ]]]
I tell Jon that I'll give it a few more weeks of my time, and that is it, forever. If we haven't gotten a law made and agreed to soon after this Presidential election, we will never stop them. There will be weapons in space and a bigger nuclear industry and worse.
[[[ Note to readers: She has "resigned" from the movement repeated in the three years she's been attempting to influence me. -- rdh ]]]
But, I believe that there is a pubic and a group of decision makers who are more in the middle, not at the ends where the Gagnon peace activists are (though he is building a worldwide network that will absolutely sabatog any efforts to educate the publid and decision makers if he is allowed to proceed who could stop and transform this war/nuclear game) ... and there are people in the middle before the the hard core hawks are at the other end of the extreme, who can be reached with common sense because there IS an alternative route...IF we can get the mandate changed and space-based weapons outlawed before it's too late to do it. That lid put on that industry and mentality, that is. But that has to be done in the same breath as calling for the simulaneous agreement to build a world cooperative space R&D program that is grand enough to replace the war industry. It can be done. But these activists won't hear it. They just want to shut down the industry..>OR is it that they know they can't and so that is the
position they are taking...because some of them actually WANT space-based weapons and nukes in space and everywhere...maybe they are even believiing that Armageddon is necessary to creat. I'm not sure. But I do know that Jon is right about one thing...it is a waste of time to work with them. And now I believe more...that you are right...something is wrong here. And Bruce has proven it to me.
[[[ Note to readers: The above statement appears very strong, but remains ambiguous. That is the art of lawyers, diplomats, politicians and psychiatrists, but not scientists. -- rdh ]]]
But, I do want to do one more thing with them...that is...expose them. I now truly believe Bruce does not want to see an end to the war industry or the nuclear industry. I'm telling you, Russell, if he did, he would never have done what he did to me at this event. That is proof to me. And this is not my ego talking. It is my brain.
[[[ Note to readers: She has since backed off, claiming that, after consideration, she thinks the "GAG man" is just crazy. It is interesting to note that she has had many compliments for me over the past three years, but yet, only comes around when I am "ranting" (as Loring Wirbel would describe it) about Gagnon. Where has her help been the other 360 or so days of each year? -- rdh ]]]
Aside from Gagnon for a moment, it's important to detach from him to stay healthy and half way sane, look up the website www.cseti.org or it's under Steven Greer, a physician. He has collected about 200 "active insiders" who are preparing to "go public" about the truth about the US government hoax about extraterrestrials and the hoax re abductions, etc.,...and about how the US is making people "think" they had an abduction/UFO experience, and about what is really going on in that area and how it realtes to space-based weapons and the nuclear industry, etc.. If it's real, it's fascinating. And sources tell me he is real. And about how the US government has, in fact, been contacted by and has bodies of extraterrestrials...and about the "secret government" that knows all this. I met him ... and asked to meet with him with his wife so I could better assess the man and the scene. They have been married for 28 years and have two children...and seem to be quite credible to me. In fact, two astronauts told me
that this man "knows" what they have known but have been sworn to secrecy about...and that what Greer says is "it." Dr. Greer is raising money to do a documentary on these people. He has written a book called Extraterrestrial Contact: the Evidence and Implications...which mentions names like the former CIA director who has, with his wife, admitted they have seen real extraterrestrials themselves. He names names in this book as a start. You can order it from the website. He has some extraordinary papers documented on that website. He says it's time for disclosure...and has the approximate "year" deadline as I feel...BEFORE they put weapons into space. I'm not even sure we have that much time to stop this...I doubt it. A few months, maybe. He is looking fo rmedia types "who can be trusted," because of the impact this must have and a strategy these people have agreed to partiicipate in for their own protection, to help him disclose things at a precise moment and not before. His attorney is the same one
I have, Karen Silkwood's attorney, so I trust him even more because I know how this man advises and that he will only take on clients who are honest.
[[[ Note to readers: The above is malarkey. There are no aliens, and you should not waste your time on such trash. However, a very reasonable case can be made that the government purposefully instigated the aliens/area 51 story as a cover-up for normal, terrestrial advanced engineering flight operations and experiments. If that is true, it is relevant to this case because it shows the depths of dishonesty our government is capable of. Also, I think that lawyers are supposed to believe their clients, generally. -- rdh ]]]
Now back to Bruce and his ever-growing dangerous gang, I don't care if the people reading this do it...but before I go public with it in your newsletter or on the web, I just want to write the experience I had up "properly" before the "activists" see it. I want to, in other words, make sure I've well thought out and written this exposure piece.
[[[ Note to readers: The document in its final form has not arrived (yet?), but a preview version appears below. -- rdh ]]]
I tried to talk to Bruce before I left the event ... I left it early ...
before the strategy session whic, if I didn't see that something was so wrong with Bruce I would have thought was the most important session ... but he practically uninvited me to it anyway and I was so blown away by the dangersous game he was playing that I didn't say what was really on my mind.
I just wanted to get out of there as quickly as I could. I was chocking in the toxicity of it all.
[[[ Note to readers: As noted above, we have requested a copy of all her email communications with Bruce Gagnon, so we can review them, then summarize them and publish the relevant information. -- rdh ]]]
Now, when this goes out to the public, when I do, that is, I want to tell it like it is with no hold backs and with no gramatical or social errors, if you know what I mean. So that when it does go public it says what I want it to say clearly. And I'm just too exhausted, as you see by this babble, and busy with other stuff at the moment to do it properly. But I will do this sometimes this week, I hope, and I will give it to you immediatelky when it's done.
[[[ Note to readers: We cannot wait forever. Memories fade and eyewitness reports need to be written down immediately. We can correct grammatical errors easily enough (although for accuracy here, we have not done so). -- rdh ]]]
And thanks for respecting this confidentiality. I know you believe in open disclosure, and so do I, but this time I think you can see what I'm getting at. I've had it...see that this is wrong...and want to say it well.
[[[ Note to readers: Confidentiality is not granted to criminals asking me to cover up crimes against humanity. The promise of confidentiality she refers to was temporary, strictly for the purpose of allowing her to "sort out her thoughts". Instead she has refused to complete the (admittedly difficult) task of sorting those thoughts into a document, and so I have little recourse but to publish this supposedly "confidential" email. Recalling, of course, that it was not sent in an encrypted form, and is not stored in an encrypted form, either, so any claim of "confidentiality" is absurd and unachievable, irrelevant -- and criminal. The only purpose for secrecy was to allow the document to be formatted coherently, not to hide the truth from the public. -- rdh ]]].
But because you told me for so long about Bruce, and I defended him, I just wanted to tell you "first" that you are right. And I'm pouring more and more on you even though this isn't my official statement...just so you know.
[[[ Note to readers. The above statement is unequivocal. She has since, evidently retracted it, claiming she merely thinks Bruce Gagnon is some sort of crazy person. I don't think he's crazy at all. I think he's a paid agent provocateur. -- rdh ]]]
When I told Connie, the director of my Institute and one of my best friends, what Karl even said about her in the public meeting...she flipped out and said she'd help me write it. I mean, Connie is true blue and against nukes and weapons in space...and Karl acted like she was a traitor for going to work at NASA. She is on the "inside" now, but is further from being a traitor to our cause than anyone on this planet. And Karl should be sophisticated enough, he knows her very well, to know that. So, I can only conclude that Karl has either been influenced, hard to believe because he is so bright, or has been bought. And so, not wanting to get this paranoid, I started to get suspicious of even Karl. He , after all, Bruce's right hand man all the way, now. They talk and work closely together on everything. I didn't realize it had gone this far. Karl, by the way, after being such a "good friend" to me for so many years, would barely speak to me at this event. It was really weird.
He is answering my emails when I request technical information, but was clearly not "warm" to me at this event. And he won't address "clearing" this up with me at all. And I've asked him to. He just ignores my request for this dialog. Very very weird.
[[[ Note to readers: I remain convinced that Grossman is an honorable gentleman. Unfortunately, I have never met Connie van Praet, but she gave one of the most wonderful talks I've ever heard, it's on a video from Enviro-Video. Working for NASA does not necessarily make you "guilty" of anything but a desire to explore the universe, however, it is difficult to fathom how someone who spoke as eloquently as Connie van Praet did was able to make the transition. To the best of my knowledge, she no longer speaks out against nukes in space. And, it is difficult to fathom why Carol Rosin never suggested Connie become one of my sources of information regarding space technical issues, during the Cassini battle. -- rdh ]]]
Bill Salzman, Colorado group, never even said hello, either...but all of these guys are real palsy walsy with Bruce. I think Bill has his heart in the right place...but he is an example of how these guys are "following Bruce" as though he was a god. Egads.
[[[ Note to readers: Unfortunately, I have never met Bill Sulzman. -- rdh ]]]
And as for Regina, the people I was with said she looked "evil." I've never felt such negative energy from a woman. She was more than being self-important.
[[[ Note to readers: Wow that is strong psychobabble! Regina "looked 'evil'"? I wonder what Loring Wirbel thinks of it! (He has not responded to our letter published in NKS #2.) -- rdh ]]]
But when the group nearly attacked me after my speech, saying they refuse to even talk to military people or people in NASA or in the military or in government, except to confront them and not to listen or to find out ways to get this game changed...still not seeing that this method has proven to fail...for example...all but about ten or fifteen who later told me they were in complete understanding and agreement with what I was saying but were too afraid or not given a chance to speak out in that group at all, Bruce stood up and talked to the group about how "courageous" I am for going to speak there at all, and about how he totally disagreed with everything I said but that they shouldn't confront me like that. Note, he had to emphasize that he doesn't agree with anything I say. At that moment, I saw that something was really really wrong there. If Bruce really wanted to prevent the weaponization and nuclearization of space, he would never have said that.
[[[ Note to readers: I'm sure that Bruce's attacks on people are very, very calculated. However, it should be noted that the corruption evident in the military's support of nuclear poisons makes it impossible for many activists to have any hope of every working within the system. It's a corrupt system destined to destroy activists who try to rise above the nuclear waste pool and scream out in horror about what is happening, and the cancers, leukemias, and birth defects they are witness too and understand the cause of. -- rdh ]]]
And as for Helen Caldicott, much as I respect her for being out there, she is really really a dumb woman, which doesn't seem to be the fact, or she is a plant, which I hope isn't true, or someone who IS got to her for sure. I mean, there she was saying she wants to shut down the military, shut down the industries, shut down the space program...which surely she knows cannot be done...at least not in the time frame necessary to prevent what she "says" she wants to prevent. But worse of all, someone told her to say that we should shut down the entire space program and go explore the oceans instead. I mean, really. I haven't heard that one in years. I wanted to ask her why we couldn't explore both...and ask her if she isn't aware that the oceans are already militarized WITH weapons so what the heck is she even talking about...but needless to say, every time I raised my hand in this group I was NEVER called on. Hmmm.
But she could say "let's light the rrom on fire and burn in it" and everyone in that group would stand up and cheer, so she is a hero no matter what...and unrealistic as she is (at least she didn't run down the street naked like she did in San Francisco...as though that would help anything at all except to make anyone who might have listened to her never listen again), the "activists" who follow Bruce and who have bought into his kind of processing love her no matter what...and Bruce, too.
[[[ Note to readers: Dr. Caldicott is brilliant, a wonderful and inspiring speaker, a gifted writer, and I think she should be Secretary General of the United Nations. Rosin's attack on Caldicott is as calculated as Gagnon's attacks on Rosin, and reaks like any pro-nukers' similar condemnation. -- rdh ]]]
One thing I was right about, is that no none who is "following" Bruce will ever change their minds...and so I am right about this...there is nothing you or I can do...except to expose what we see is going on. But my gut hurts so badly...because I see that something is really really wrong there...with Bruce. Even I, who have loved him for years, am wondering why he would be sabotaging efforts to outlaw space-based weapons and the reduction and elimination of dangerous nukes and other dangerous technologies. Because he must know, he can't be that stupid, that the things he is doing is going to stop nothing.
[[[ Note to readers: Again, she has correctly assessed Bruce Gagnon! -- rdh ]]]
But Russell, when he bumped me out of speaking at the rally, that first day, Friday afternoon, that is when I really got it. I don't believe GAGnon is a stupid man. And he has people thinking he's dedicated and sacrificing everything to do this. I mean, he is a hero, a legend in this group. And he works side by side, by the way, with Karl, who was supposedly in charge of the entire agenda...so HE could have gotten me on to that podium and should have, if HE was sincere about what he says he is about. So you figure it out.
Anyway - There I was, dressed up in my closed toed pumps and my power suit...and I am the woman who started the "movement" to stop the weaponization of space...and I've worked "inside" the belly of the beast...well, with my credentials...he could have gotten loads of media attention if he just announced who I was and gave me one minute ont he podium. But, he wouldn't do it. And I know I'm for real. Am I ever supposed to think again that HE is for real? I don't think so.
[[[ Note to readers: A week later, she had reverted back to "he's just crazy or dumb". That's why I'm presenting these earlier comments, as they clearly are more accurate "off the cuff" remarks, which Carol should be commended for writing. It's too bad she has backed off completing her organized version of this document, but at least we have this one. It's also too bad she repeatedly throws in her attacks on Karl Grossman, for instance, and on Dr. Helen Caldicott, and more generally, on all the honest activists who were in D. C. -- rdh ]]]
And as for Karl, the people I was with also thought he was evil looking...the look on his face actually was. At first I thought he was just tired. But then he shot Connie down when he spoke of her publically...at the same time as he talked about me and my Institute and give me the wrong title...he knows I was the founder and President, he was on the Board, but he gave me a lesser title...it was truly amazing to watch him do this. But Connie IS the best on this issue of anyone I know even now...and Karl knows this...so his put down of her going to work at NASA made me even more suspicious of him, too. (My entire insistute staff went to different parts of the "game" to get jobs when I could no longer raise funds to support them...and they continue to work the issue from the inside. Karl knows this, too.) And note, Karl has gotten cold to me only since he started to work with Bruce, and now has this oh-so-important position on the Board of the Global Network working side by side with Bruce in a way that is
almost sickening...and was even "put" in charge of the "press" at the rally. I had to insist Karl carry around my article as they didn't put it in the press kit with Bruce's and Karl's articles...guess they forgot to include my material. And with his utter coldness to me there...well, the body language alone speaks for itself to me.
I used to believe Karl was sincere. Maybe this self-importance positioning has gone to his head. Maybe Bruce has fooled Karl as Bruce once fooled me.
Who knows. Maybe he believes in Bruce as these other 150 or so people do, totally....and as I once did. Bruce appears to be so sincere. Though not to me anymore. But in any case, Karl isn't a stupid man, either, so being right there working with Bruce all the way for a couple of years now...well, you can't work so closely to someone and not know that they are up to no good. So why is Karl, too, suddenly sabotaging what I'm saying, if he is sincere about what he is talking about? Why would he put Connie down? Why wouldn't he be able to look me in the eye?
Karl and Bruce are partners here. What do you think? !
[[[ Note to readers: I don't profess to understand Karl's, or Caldicott's, or Kaku's, willingness to work with Gagnon. I would long ago have thought that all the evidence I had gathered against him would be more than enough to convince these three that something is seriously wrong, evidence which was, at least at this point in Carol Rosin's life, supposedly sufficient for her. But there is always so much more going on than meets the eye, and they probably have not read all the relevant issues of the STOP CASSINI newsletter and the new Nukes, Kooks, and Spooks newsletter, and surely, they don't WANT to get involved in such a hopeless, cruel -- and potentially very costly and dangerous -- "sport" as "outing" subversives. That is why it is so important for Senator Harkin to feel pressured to announce the results of the "investigation" he might well have done into who Bruce Gagnon really is and who he works for. -- rdh ]]]
And when I see the ignorant "timeline" "they have developed...like working this issue into the 2005 range, I know something is wrong. They can't be that stupid. They know, or should by now, about momentum...that if it moves past a certain point (like Cassini did when they "decided" to jump in...I had told them to jump in way before anybody did...and when they did they KNEW it was too late to stop it...why didn't they do it sooner?)...I told them when they started on several other escapades that they were "too late," and that they needed to get real. Ghee;, wonder why they wait until it's too late to stop it. You'd think they'd see by now that what they do isn't working, IF they wanted it to work...and that if they cut out people like me (and you) from their speakers platforms and media contatcts who hold pieces of the puzzle that are vitally important, they are making us lose this battle...well, it becomes harder and harder to believe they are in this for the reasons they say.
[[[ Note to readers: The above and below remarks are Carol Rosin's "grandstanding", which Gagnon apparently did not permit. Her letter continues attacking honest activists left and right, which makes me want to edit it, but instead, not one word has been omitted or changed. -- rdh ]]]
Well, just maybe THAT is their job...to make sure we DON'T change the game.
Maybe. I'm not sure. I hate to accuse anyone of anything. I've been falsy accused before...so I'd hate to do it myself to anyone. But, BUT, clearly there is something really wrong here and it's keeping me awake.
[[[ Note to readers: Eventually, she fell asleep. -- rdh ]]]
And, time is running short. I'd say, as I said, we have just a couple of months after the election at best, to make sure we have outlawed space-based weapons...and if we haven't, that momentum, as usual, will make that and the nuclear industry and probably our inevitable destruction of the human species impossible to stop.
[[[ Note to readers: A common tactic of Bruce and Carol is this "we only have a couple of months" line. In reality, every day we delay, we lose something. There is NO time and all the time in the Universe. It's a never-ending battle. -- rdh ]]]
That is, unless extraterrestrials blow up our weapons programs so we won't go after them, and/or if someone discloses the facts about available "free and non-polluting" energy, etc., quickly enough to stop some of that industry.
Possible.
[[[ Note to readers: There are no extraterrestrials. There are no "free and non-polluting" energy sources, but there are plenty of nearly free and nearly non-polluting energy sources available, including: hydroelectric, wind, solar, tide, geothermal, biomass, wave energy, and other techniques. All of these are technologically feasible and the know-how to build them is currently available. All that is missing is the public willpower to invest the trillions of dollars necessary, and to recognize that the trillions we have dumped into nuclear energy options was a complete and utter waste. -- rdh ]]]
Anyway, when I say it all publically, I want to say it "just right." And I'm tired now. But I'll wake up and cool down so I say it like it is in a way that blows the whole thing wide open, from my perspective, anyway. And I'd like to let you read it first to see if you think I should change anything once I've done it, if that's ok with you. It will be a report of my conclusions after that weekend experience with Bruce, Karl, Helen, Regina, Bill Salzman, etc., and the activists.
[[[ Note to readers: Our indictments are of Bruce and Regina and Carol Rosin herself (and perhaps that Loring Wirbel fellow, as well), NOT these other activists. -- rdh ]]]
I'm not sure "Helen" would intentionally sabotage anything. I don't think so, anyway. She just doesn't seem to be very bright, actually, at least about what will actually work. I just think she is probably a good pediatrition, who knows, and that she absolutely is not sophisticated activist (though she is a popular one) who has gotten caught up in the ego of it all. At least that's what I'd like to think. But she clearly has helped to build a movement of anti-nuke activisits. Too bad she leads they astray and they won't accomplish anything because what she gives them to do won't work.
[[[ Note to readers: I think Dr. Caldicott should be Secretary General of the United Nations. -- rdh ]]]
I did, by the way, think Michio Kaku was for real. I'm not sure whether we agree on some things or not. I couldn't hear all of what he had to say because I was trying to distribute my article to members of the media while he was talking at the rally, and then he had to leave. We had a short talk before he left, and I felt his sincerity. He doesn't seem to be "one of them," whomever they are, even though he works with the Gagnon crown.
[[[ Note to readers: Kaku has never behaved in any way that would make me doubt his veracity, and he is an excellent speaker on these matters. -- rdh ]]]
What is your fax number? I'll fax you my latest article. But now that I've been there, I see that I have to revise everything. If THIS is our group of activists, I have to revise this to reach another group of people who think logically, who are not following one who is going to sabotage the movement.
Anyway, I'll be glad to fax it to you.
[[[ Note to readers: It's at the bottom of every email I send out, but the article was never faxed to me. -- rdh ]]]
Bedtime.
Love,
CSR
[[[ Note to CSR: Love? I ask you this: How do you sleep? This movement has been methodically destroyed, and you saw how it happened and have largely documented it right here. My rights have been violated and the spirit of democracy this country was founded on has been crushed, yet now, just a few weeks later, you have backed off from virtually every claim you made here, and not delivered the compelling document I was promised. Instead you choose to become silent, and even to threaten that if I accuse you of being a part of the conspiracy, my reputation will suffer irreparable harm because you have many people who will vouch for your authenticity (and you have a big lawyer, famous for defending environmentalists and activists). In three years, you have had many opportunities to let me meet these people who might have vouched for you. I would welcome the chance now to hear them speak on your behalf, but for the purposes of this report, it is too late. -- rdh ]]]
<<<<< END OF ATTACHMENT #2 <<<<<
Note to readers: Carol sent me several additional letters, each one less compelling and less focused on the question of Gagnon than before, until she finally made the claims described in the top part of this newsletter, that he is simply crazy in some way, not a spy or fraud at all. She called me twice, for a total of over three hours, once late last week and once today (May 8th, 2000) (and left a message on my answering machine yesterday evening). Both conversations were nonproductive as she continued to simply be trying to get me to agree that Gagnon is crazy and all those other activists are in on a plot to destroy the movement, or are crazy themselves, or some such "rot", as Loring Wirbel would put it. -- rdh
[Note: The preceding was mainly written May 8th, 2000. There have been many more phone calls, and even an attempt to visit Rosin in Ventura where she lives, since then. Indeed, I was forced to turned my telephone "ringer" off beginning last weekend, so I could complete this report without further interruption. -- rdh]
===================================
************************************************************
This next item was in response to CSR's comments in several long letters, which included the following lines:
"I can't tell you all that has gone down in my little brain today. But suddenly, for the first time in my life, I really seem to be planning to drop out of all this. I left this movement for six or seven years when I moved out here. I became literally deathly ill.
"Dr. Rashmi Mayur, from India, and a few others got me going again. And I'm now on a couple of space Boards as a result...a board dealing with space laws and a board dealing with the moon. There are some who actually do think that the concept I talk about is logical and important. Those who are realistic, I'd say...who know we aren't going to shut down the space program and take down the satellites, for example." (Her ellipses (...) in both instances).
It is interesting to note that the attempt at a "guilt trip" in the first paragraph is immediately followed by a carrot-on-a-stick (that CSR is the way to get to talk to the "big boys", and knowing her will give you a key to their boardrooms and minds).
Perhaps she is. But nevertheless, she's still a manipulative spy, capable at hanging everything on you from guilt trips to Napoleon complexes. If she is indeed some sort of connection, it's nevertheless an undemocratic and irresponsible way to run such important decisions that need to be made universally, by all people. Experts are STILL being denied a voice at those same boardroom meetings, and if Carol wants to change that, she's welcome to do so. But many activists -- including Your Humble and Obedient Servant (YH&OS), know that the boardroom is closed to environmentalists, and the media is closed to environmentalists, and we also know that specialists cannot conceive of the complexity of the dangers caused by Cassini, and neither can Carol Rosin because she doesn't want to - won't review the evidence (see below for more details on this aspect). We know all this, so who cares what board she sits on? Not I. She's still either helping or hurting -- that's the real question that needs to be answered.
Not who she can talk to, but what her own views actually are. Those views are astonishing. They are the views of a small band of mad scientists whom she actually supports -- people like Louis Friedman, who took a few cracks at me long ago (back in 1997, to be exact). They are of no consequence to the rest of us. They are illogical. She's not a "Mad Hatter" or a "Mata Hari". She's both.
>>>>> Letter to CSR from RDH May 4th, 2000: >>>>>
to: Carol Rosin
Re: your attitude needs serious adjusting...
Carol,
I am sorry that you choose to blame me (again, in part) for your current moral dilemma.
The fact is, Carol, we each must choose our own moral path, and we each must take the initiative to do the right thing, which appears before us at various times.
A global and unified search for truth should rule our thoughts and our actions.
You --- YOU -- choose to write to me after I released NKS #1 and after you went to D.C. As Bucky says in the play, you had the most important thing in life -- initiative. I did not contact you. You wrote to me.
But you failed, after making that contact, to do anything useful with it. You have had nearly a month to write your eyewitness account, and have failed to do so. Yet you've found time to write 30 pages or more about other matters. Time's a-wastin'. Instead of getting down to the issues at hand, in a timely fashion when it might do some good, you just tell me no one listens to you so you don't want to play the game any more. You claim you wish to be, in a word, a quitter. Whoever told you this would be easy? They are the ones that lied to you, Carol, and abused you. Not me. I never told you it would be easy. As Bucky says in the play, quoting e. e. cummings, it is the hardest thing you will ever do.
But you have responsibilities, because of the positions you've held. You have no moral right to be a quitter now. You have an obligation to the society that fed you to help it in its time of need. It gave you many privileges, and you met Bucky and von Braun and so forth for a reason -- so don't just apologize to Bucky. Apologize also to von Braun, and T.L. and also not to mention R.D.H., for you abuse all of them when you quit.
You -- YOU -- made an offer to me, out of the blue, and you so far utterly abused the privilege I gave you to write to me in confidence. I consented to accept some "private" letters from you in order to learn information related to the issues discussed in NKS#1. That is what I work on. I am not involved in space issues at all, only in issues of infiltration of environmental groups in America. Space is just a place, a part of the Universal Environment that needs to be saved for future humans. You knew that was what I was interested in, it was what you were offering to talk about: There is no doubt my language was absolutely clear on the matter when I consented to receive your emails.
But instead of staying on topic and on target, you have talked about everything else in life except that which you were granted confidentiality over. You have abused the privilege. You have wasted my time. You knew what my focus was, you knew when you sent the material, and it doesn't cover that issue at all.
Please do not bother me anymore with your complaint that no one will listen to you. You're writing four books and you are on two space boards, so obviously, lots of people are listening to you. I am not on the space Boards you are on. You never invite me to join them. You've never invited me to anything space-related at all. I am a nobody. No one listens to me either. You are barking up the entirely wrong tree with that complaint. You claimed of me: "You contact people on high levels who are in the game, for real. You dialog. You listen and hear and try to get them to hear you."
Sure, I listen. Sure, I contact people "on high levels" but they hardly ever contact me back anyway, and nothing gets done. I am utterly powerless, and if you had been reading my newsletters more carefully I'm sure you'd know this instead of suggesting I have achieved anything in three years.
No, Carol -- no one in the "high levels" dialogs with me -- that's a fantasy on your part to even begin to think that. I'm nobody, I have accomplished nothing, and that's the way it is. However, unlike you, I'm not a quitter.
But now I think I understand you. You contacted me not because you wish to be friends with me, and commiserate, and share information, but rather because you want to complain that others have not listened to you, and then that I have abused you as well by not listening, and then you get out of the business (blaming me again), and run off and tell the world I have ruined your stomach for activism because I was the "last straw".
Such manipulative tactics are not appreciated. When you first wrote me nearly a month ago, I thought you had changed. I thought you were going to be forthright, open, cooperative and that we would symbiotically solve both my problem and yours. Instead you have made this a one-sided conversation which ignores all the issues you initially claimed you were ready to talk about.
Hopefully, this will all come out in court. I can't see it going anywhere else at this point. Gagnon has violated my civil rights, and justice needs to be done. I thought you were going to help provide me with information which would be useful in any upcoming trial, even if it's only a "people's court". Instead you've accused me of ruining your drive and ambition, and provided me with ZERO useful information for my fight for justice. You have, in a word, wasted all our times.
-- rdh
************************************************************
This next item is Carol's "rough draft" of her report, written in response to the letter shown above from May 4th, 2000. Notice that it is much milder than the earlier statements and concentrates almost entirely on the idea that Gagnon is simply confused and incompetent. Indeed, by the next day (Saturday, May 6th, 2000), Rosin had completely retracted the idea that she believed Gagnon is a fraud. (Nothing has been deleted or changed, except minor spelling errors have been corrected for readability.)-- rdh
At 01:13 AM 5/5/00 -0700, rosin@west.net wrote:
Date: Fri, 05 May 2000 01:13:58 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
You are right about everything. Without wasting another minute of your time by repeating and responding to each point, I'll just apologize for it all, make the attitude adjustment, and give you the piece I promised.
Also, note, I have another piece coming to you from a man who was there at that event. I think you'll really love his piece.
Here, Russell, is my first crack at this article for your newsletter, and for Bill, later. I'm only sending this to you so we can work it together before anyone else sees it. I'm also taking you up on your offer to edit this and to work with me on it...and thank you. Feel free to slash and burn or whatever.
****
My experience at the Keep Space for Peace events was basically a nightmare.
I'd hate to be suspicious, to accuse anyone of being an "agent" or a "plant" trying to a group like this into a direction that, if anyone took them seriously, which, fortunately, no one except themselves will, would "cause" weapons to be placed in space.
But I have to be suspicious when Bruce Gagnon, who is now leading the Global Network that I originally co-founded, blatantly omits me from being a speaker at the public rally in DC on Friday even though I flew across the country to be there, places me on a panel and gives me only about ten minutes to speak at the very end of the long day of speakers on Saturday, and tells me that if I go to the Sunday strategy meeting and talk at all that I'll only cause arguments and waste people's time.
Now, a quote that has followed me for years that was in the newsletter "Military/Space," says "Rosin is regarded to be the original political architect of the move to stop the SDI and ASATs.' If you were running a rally to bring attention to the "Keep Space for Peace" concept, and you wanted to get press coverage...wouldn't you have put a person with that kind of credential up front as a speaker? And wouldn't you want that person to be a keynote speaker? I can only wonder why Bruce, and Karl Grossman, who worked closely with Bruce on the Agenda and Karl was in charge of press contacts at the rally, refused to allow me to speak.
When I thought of forming a coalition years before I met Bruce, when I founded ISCOS in '83, and when the Director of the Institute for Security and Cooperation in Outer Space , Connie Van Praet (whom Karl Grossman put down in a shocking manner to those of us who know her, in the middle of the meeting, because, he said, "we lost her to NASA," as though that would change her perspective or work on the issue), and when Bruce and Connie got a group together to form what we then called a "coalition" at our first meeting in DC, what Bruce is now creating is not even close to the vision I had. The vision I had was that this group would work the issue in every way possible, including as many people as possible. Every approach should be recognized and made available to everyone in the network...I thought. But this coalition that Bruce now calls a "network," is so much more limited.
According to him, those who are in the network do not even want to consider, let alone present to those who might be interested within the entire network, any other approaches to working the issue. Why is that?!
Also, I can only wonder why anyone would want to repeat strategies and techniques that haven't worked in decades of peace activism, especially when there is a possible realistic approach to working the issue. There are still weapons, wars, nukes, and more dangers in these categories than ever before.
Why would he stop information from flowing ... ? He could have made the decision to post my article without his Board's approval...though it was easy to get their agreement with him as he selected only people to form the Board whom he knew would agree with them...not even allow another approach to be posted on the webpage!
According to Bruce, the Board he leads unanimously voted not to even tell their "network" that there was another approach that I presented...making sure they agreed not to post my article...even so that those who might be interested won't be able to see it. This doesn't sound like a man who wants to outlaw space-based weapons to me.
Mary Beth, Bruce's very close associate, told me that, in fact, this group works from "in a box" and "behind a wall," using descriptive hand motions to make sure I understood. Another woman who overheard the conversation later told me she was appalled to hear Mary Beth make it sound like the entire network thinks this way.
This woman certainly didn't. Mary Beth said that while they were willing to listen to my approach and strategy, that they "don't want to be even surrounded by anyone who differs from them," and they won't consider anything other than what Bruce has said they are going to do and support. Hmmm.
After I spoke on the panel, Bruce stood up to control the hostility that came from many of the approximately 150 or less people in the audience. He told them they should respect my "courage" for attending...and then made sure that he said that he didn't agree with anything I said. With friends like this, do I need enemies?
Dr. Helen Caldicott, whom I highly respect for all the great movement building work and attention to the nuclear issue she has drawn, got cheers when she called for us to explore the oceans instead of outer space...instead of doing both which is how she should have said it...and gave a rap about the oceans as she poo pooed going into space, and didn't use any time to talk of the benefits derived from space. She has somehow not been educated about space. She never spoke of how we can see, reduce and eliminate nuclear weapons because of satellites. How she wouldn't even know where the sick waters are if there weren't for satellites. And so much more...and unfortunately I wasn't given as much time to talk about those benefits. It seems to be unlikely that Bruce wants this group to get educated about such things. I can only wonder why he won't allow such information to be presented. And I told him I wanted to...but he said no way.
Anyway, I felt sorry for Helen, because someone had given her the wrong track to emphasize and to me, she sounded like she must have been joking. Not that we shouldn't go into the oceans, not that anyone should stop protesting...but the "oceans instead of space" is a ridiculous statement to make when you are trying to prevent the weaponization of space. Apples and oranges.
The cries heard were to shut down the space program (rah rah rah), shut down the military (rah rah rah), shut down the aerospace and nuclear industries (rah rah rah), shut down NASA (rah rah rah), etc. Sounds realistic to me...right?! Sure.
And they applauded themselves for "almost" stopping Cassini...Almost??!!! I think they really believed they almost stopped Cassini. I think most of the people there are beginning to actually believe they can just shut it all down.
Why would anyone lead them to think such a thing. I can only wonder.
I have been focusing full time on the space-based weapons industry for about 26 years...have worked as a corporate manager of an aerospace defense company, as a space and missile defense consultant and strategist for several companies, have testified before the House and Senate and the President's Commission on Space and at UN space meetings, to people in over 100 countries about this issue, written countless papers and given countless presentations...and told Bruce I'd love to be given enough time to give an overview that would show where we are now and where we can go...and how we can get there...from my experience. But Bruce made sure that I was not introduced to any members of the media, allowed to speak at the public street rally, was only allowed to speak for about ten minutes at the end of the day on a panel, and every time I tried to speak after that in a meeting I was interrupted and cut off intentionally. This was no accident. I can only speculate as to why.
I wanted to have time to explain some basic points that we all need to know in order to work this issue. One is about why I once coined the word "weaponization" in order to get all of us on the same page...because one cannot be taken seriously if he/she protests the "militarization" of space. But the concept needs an explanation that Bruce was determined to not allow me to make. Space is already militarized. Three quarters of the satellites up there are of a military nature.
Everyone going into space is somehow inexorably linked to the military. And the military has a list of very important things they are doing, and can do, in space, that provides needed benefits to us on earth. And, the military is NOT going to disappear from the space frontier. Most of the people with whom I've talked in the military don't want weapons in space, so I'm getting a different vision of what they are doing, and can do in space of a non-weapons nature. It's fascinating. And realistic, and feasible. I'm writing a book about that right now.
Another point is that since the military is not going to go away, and they are in service, being trained to protect us, why not re-define the enemy....make it the environmental and human and other animal problems. Let them protect us and provide services, a new kind of security based on global cooperation, more community involvement with our kids and gangs, etc., with their well trained organization of men and women. Let them work with militaries around the world...take a US leadership role if they want to...to teach everyone in the militaries how they can help their communities and countries. After all, the militaries already have the technology to know what each other around the world are actually doing. They know they can't really keep secrets anymore. So the point is, why not meet with people in the military as I've been doing, invite them to your homes and meetings, and talk about what the military is and can do in space of a non-weapons nature.
But NO. Led by Bruce, I now see, humble as he makes himself appear to be, the so-called peace activists have to have an enemy or two, too...just as do the hard core hawks. The military (boo boo boo), NASA (boo boo boo), corporations (boo boo boo)...and let's dare not talk to anyone about what they are doing and can do in space of a non-weapons nature. Let's, in fact, personalize these organizations and companies...as though they are people themselves...enemies. YES YES YES.
More signs outside of meetings. More protest marches. More candle vigils. And more of the same results. Of course, if you are happy with now having the largest R&D program in history be designed to weaponize space, keep on doing what you are doing, I say. Don't even allow anyone to confuse you with the facts...and certainly not with a new vision...one that just might be feasible to create and give us all a world of real peace with justice. Wouldn't you think, by now, that these people would see that something is wrong with the way they are doing things? I can only wonder why.
There were a dozen or so people there, out of 150, who made contact with me expressing their agreement with what I was saying. They said they were "afraid" to speak out, and were not even given a chance to midst that hostile crowd. So, Bruce is making sure that they, too, don't get any further information that has any perspective except his. And he and Karl Grossman and his "insiders" in the room formed a Board right before my eyes that he made sure agrees with him. I only feel sorry for the Network members who will never know there is another way to deal with this issue. I can only wonder why.
I never said that anyone should stop protesting. I hope they continue to...I only wish they would get real...talk about what is possible and how we can do it in a year or less...because that is all the time we have before an unstoppable momentum builds (alla CASSINI and so many other projects) of vested interests and funding.
But thanks to Bruce and the gang, they have said that there is no other way to work the issue...not giving the network of innocent people the information they deserve to have. I guess they don't believe in Democracy after all. In giving out valid information from a credible friend. I can only wonder why Bruce wouldn't want his network to be aware of other approaches to this issue so that those who might want to participate in could.
There is a vision of a civil, commercial and military (they are inexorably linked) space R&D program that can be cooperative worldwide...bring the world together..even the "adversaries" because the benefits and opportunities are sooooo great. I can only wonder why Bruce is so determined to not talk with people in the military industrial complex to get better educated about what can be done in space of a non-weapons nature that can provide so many benefits and opportunities ... that can help to solve urgent and potential human and environmental problems...that can help to reduce and eliminate nuclear and other dangerous technologies...that can provide a new kind of marketplace of products and services that can benefit health, education, etc.., and a new kind of security system that is based on worldwide cooperation and advanced communication instead of confrontation and secrets. Why wouldn't everyone be interested in hearing more about this?
I can only wonder why Bruce would stop this information from flowing to his network.
And the space program is the only program large enough to replace the war program...the ocean program exists and isn't adequate to do that job. We are exploring the oceans and should and will do more, hopefully in a cleaner and safer way, and we are going into space...big time...it's just a matter of HOW we are going to do it.
One thing for sure, whether Bruce is just a naive do-gooder, or stupid, or an agent of some kind sent to destroy the peace and justice movement by making them totally ineffective so that weapons can be placed in space, the approach is going to be disregarded as ludicrous doesn't matter to me anymore. There are more important things that need to be done and quickly...for those of us who really want to put a lid on the arms race.
<<<<< END OF "DRAFT VERSION" OF CSR'S "STATEMENT" <<<<<
**************************************************
In the next item, note the contrast between Carol's "naive" comment (or shall we say, "practiced naivety"?) and the general comment about Gagnon's newsletters presented in NKS #2 and written by Trish Bracey, namely that his newsletters are "incredibly dull, pedestrian, lacking in original thought being as they generally are extracts from media articles, speeches, interviews and so on. On reflection this is strange for such an informed activist." Yes, it is strange, and stranger still that Rosin is blind to it:
At 03:51 PM 5/5/00 -0700, rosin@west.net wrote: Date: Fri, 05 May 2000 15:51:10 -0700
To: "Russell D. Hoffman"
Another thought: If he was an agent...would he send news updates?
I think you mentioned you don't get these. Just in case...here are the latest ones:
Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space wrote:
http://www.the-times.co.uk (World)
Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space wrote:
PENTAGON DOWNPLAYS IMPORTANCE OF BMD TEST
Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space wrote:
May 3, 2000 - 09:17 PM
Subject:
http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/DailyNews/poll000502.html
(Includes photo from April 14 Global Network demo at Treasury Dept in DC)
Missile Shield Support Wanes
ABCNEWS.com Poll:
Cons Beat Pros
Analysis
May 2 - A narrow majority of Americans finds the downside of a $60 billion missile defense system more persuasive than the potential benefits, mirroring initial public opinion on the more extensive Star Wars proposal of the mid-1980s.
Forty-four percent say today's planned system would be worth its cost to protect the United States from a limited nuclear attack. But 53 percent side with opponents who say the plan wouldn't work, would cost too much and could initiate a new arms race.
Views on the Strategic Defense Initiative were almost identical in July 1985. But support for SDI grew to 55 percent in the next few months, as then-President Reagan promoted the idea in advance of his December 1985 summit with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev.
The Congressional Budget Office last week estimated a $60 billion cost for the system, now designed to protect the country from a limited rather than an all-out nuclear attack. President Clinton is to decide this summer whether to pursue the plan, which would require amending the 1972 Antiballistic Missile Treaty. Clinton meets with Russian President Vladimir Putin on the subject in June.
Separately, the five largest nuclear powers, the United States, Russia, France, Britain and China, issued a joint pledge Monday stating their "unequivocal commitment" to eliminate nuclear weapons. They didn't give details or a timetable.
There's a sizable gender gap in views on a missile defense system. Women, who tend to be less supportive of military programs, oppose the notion by 58 percent-38 percent. Men narrowly support it, by 52 percent-47 percent.
There are political differences, as well. Republicans support a missile defense system by 60 percent-37 percent, while Democrats oppose it by 56 percent-41 percent. On this issue independents side with Democrats, opposing the system by 59 percent-38 percent.
Finally, older Americans, those 65 and older, are more apt to support a missile defense system - 55 percent are in favor, compared to 42 percent of younger adults. Older Americans may have clearer personal awareness of the devastation caused by nuclear weapons, given the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945.
Methodology
Gary Langer is the head of ABCNEWS' polling unit.
Bruce K. Gagnon
**********************************************************
To: Senator Tom Harkin:
Dear Senator Harkin:
I see that your name, too is on the list to speak in Washington, D.C. in April at the anti-Star Wars conference sponsored by the organization led by Bruce Gagnon, whom I have claimed is a government subversive sent out to disrupt and destroy the anti-nukes-(and weapons, but that's a separate issue to me)-in-space activists.
I find it amazing that despite my having sent you all or most of these newsletters, you would want to take part in this charade -- presuming, of course, that you have done an internal investigation of my claims (and my background, *of course*), and determined their veracity.
I can't know the truth, unless "the government" wishes to divulge it -- I have no moles (that I know of), just the emails I get and the people I see around me, the papers I read, the TV, the phone and the mail, same as every other citizen. That's all I am, is one citizen. Perhaps a bit more clever than most in some ways (but not in others), but overall, pretty totally normal. So I can't know the truth. But I can perceive it.
However, in your esteemed position, you CAN (hopefully) know the truth -- after all, that's one reason the public elects people to the highest positions in government -- so that we the people can know -- ultimately, at the highest level -- what is really going on.
So, what IS really going on? I'm asking you, since you're going to be speaking at the conference. Surely it is of interest to you to know the truth of this matter. And I have some 61 emails from you which I have received, indicated my comments (in my STOP CASSINI newsletters) have been received and noted by you -- that's not all 253 issues, but this topic would be hard to miss if you've looked at them at all.
If Gagnon is a fraud, and you know it, then you have a duty not to serve him and make him look bigger and more important than he is. If you don't know it, then I wonder if you're being deliberately blinded by somebody, because *I've* certainly told you it's so, and I've provided what I believe is plenty of evidence. More than enough to raise the suspicions of many people -- how about you? At least you can go and look it up somewhere, or ask someone, or set up a congressional investigation into the matter if you have to.
So I'm asking you, before you go and speak: Is Gagnon a fraud?
What about Dr. Carol Rosin? If they are not frauds in the nukes-in-space movement, are there any who are? Because I suspect, having been unfortunately thrust by circumstances beyond my control into the position of having to make these claims, that some people suspect *me* of being that fraud who destroys the effectiveness of an organization, but in fact, it isn't me. Sure, I write software that can control lasers, and lasers can be used to blow up ballistic missiles (or zap cancer cells) but so what? It's just software, the same software that can be used to control robot vision and so forth. It doesn't mean I'm a government agent or anything! (Although the government does own a copy of my ASM source code, from a transaction more than a decade ago, which paid very little, by the way.)
I'm genuine, and if I'm right that Gagnon is a fraud, it's unfair for the government to let him ruin my name (and destroy my (and other activists, as well) efforts) just because our paths happened to cross and we ended up having to butt heads. And just because the organization involved in this particular environmental concern is corrupt and infiltrated (so say I).
So please tell me what you know about Gagnon and Rosin, and what you did to find out the truth.
Thank you in advance for your help.
Sincerely,
Russell Hoffman
If you're going to rant against a good person like Regina, please unsubscribe me from all your lists immediately.
CPIS/PPJPC
Citizen Activist
The Global Network has gone through several tumultuous months, but to accuse
Bruce Gagnon of willful failure to notify you on this is just petty, paranoid,
strange and unwarranted. Like a lot of space activists, Bruce is overworked.
Similarly, Bill Sulzman here in Colorado Springs, sometimes fails to notify
others of us about specific things, not because he means anything bad by it,
but because the man is trying to do so much! You owe everyone in GN an
apology for such rot.
Loring Wirbel
Citizens for Peace in Space
Titan IV-A
The recent Titan IV launch explosion attests to the game of Russian
roulette that is going on! A Titan IV rocket was used to launch Cassini on
October 15, 1997.
A website featuring the Titan IV-A rocket explosion photos can be found at:
http://www.flatoday.com/space/explore/uselv/titan/a20.htm
*******************
The following is a short analysis of the Titan-IV-A explosion by an
Abolition 2000 caucus member, Loring Wirbel:
"Not only does the explosion of the Titan 4A represent an excellent case
against Cassini and its ilk, but the cargo -- an Advanced Vortex satellite
managed by the National Reconnaissance Office on behalf of the National
Security Agency -- hardly works in terms of U.S. or global security. Its
tasks have turned away from telemetry studies and order-of-battle analysis,
and toward greater and greater broadband interception of civilian
communications. This is why the women at Menwith Hill Peace Camp are so
opposed to the new radomes at MH supporting the Vortex and Orion
satellites. The violation of civil liberties is obvious, but the satellite
networks also help to implement the Space Command's Long-Range Plan for
2020, which explicitly calls for U.S. domination of the planet, in
violation of the 1967 Outer Space Treaty. The demise of this Vortex should
be considered a victory for both civil liberties and anti-space-domination
pacifists."
Loring Wirbel (lwirbel@igc.apc.org)
CPIS/PPJPC
Colorado Springs, CO
*******************
And thank YOU, Russell, along with FCPJ and others, for trying to make some
inroads against the dinosaurs!
Loring Wirbel
Citizens for Peace in Space/Pikes Peak Justice & Peace
Colorado Springs, Colo.
lwirbel@aol.com
fini
==================================
*** NKS #3 ITEM #3: CORRESPONDENCE WITH CAROL ROSIN SPECULATING ON WHO'S A SPY IN THE NUKES AND WEAPONS IN SPACE MOVEMENT:
************************************************************
From: Russell Hoffman
information that indicates he is insincere.
2) Send me all letters from Bruce Gagnon to you, ever received.
3) Send me the testimony about the events in D.C. written by your friend "Michael" and the editor/publisher of Crone's Chronicals ( http://www.cronechronicles.com/+home.htm ) who you say also witnessed what happened in D.C. and were upset at the treatment you received from Gagnon and others.
4) Send me whatever the Government sends you in response to your request to the Government (through the FOIA) that you be sent any and all documentation which might pertain to any possibility that you are or ever have been a spy or secret agent for the government or other pro-nuke interests. No other details need be revealed.
Citizen Activist
I want to send you a long paragraphy I just wrote to you, but I want to make sure you are willing to keep it between you and me...this one. I plan to re-write it because I want this to get out to the public. In fact, my partner at ISCOS, Connie, who used to run our institute, just might even put her name to it, too.
She said it's about time we expose all this...now that we know. But this first part has to be just for YOUR eyes only. It's about GAGnon and the Global Network....and those names youv'e mentioned so many times (Regina, Karl, etc.)...that I am NOT a part of...not anymore, anyway. And I didn't realize that I never was, actually. You see, I just went to that Global Net long weekend in DC., well, until I walked out before it was over. And I've concluded that I need to apologize to you privately for ever defending them, and for trying to tell you you need to work with them...for making it seem as though it was YOU who needed to change and to work with them, egads...etc. I will tell the whole story to the public later after I chill from the experience, for sure, and I'll be glad to put it in your newsletter. You see, clearly I am NOT one of them...in fact, something IS fishy...and I now understand what you are saying.
And, by the way, Bruce did not allow me to speak at the rally where the press was on the first day as I thought he surely would if I got there. And what I am saying actually is, as I see it, the only realistic approach to putting lid on the arms race and on reducing and eliminating dangerous technologies. Well, I won't be duped anymore by this group..that's for sure. Anyway, can you keep the next email between you and me? I'd love to tell you what happened...in private.
FINI
===================================
*** NKS #3 ITEM #4: CORRESPONDENCE WITH CAROL ROSIN: "YOU NEED A SERIOUS ATTITUDE ADJUSTMENT":
************************************************************
from: Russell Hoffman
*** NKS #3 ITEM #5: CAROL ROSIN'S "ROUGH DRAFT" OF HER REPORT, WRITTEN MAY 5th 2000:
************************************************************
From: Carol Rosin
To: "Russell D. Hoffman"
References: <4.2.0.58.20000502081808.009a91c0@mail.adnc.com>
<4.2.0.58.20000503181716.009c3990@mail.adnc.com> <4.2.0.58.20000504091725.00a05c30@mail.adnc.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-UIDL: d41213add33d0a9aa7515662e45cf5e6 Status: U
Here goes:
Though with the warped sense of humor I've developed over the years of doing this work, I have to also say it was one of the funniest experiences I've had yet. And a total waste of time except to have my worst thoughts of the peace and justice movement confirmed and amplified.
HMMM.
*** NKS #3 ITEM #6: SOME ADDITIONAL CORRESPONDENCE WITH CAROL ROSIN (INCLUDING BRUCE GAGNON'S LATEST NEWSLETTER:
**************************************************
From: Carol Rosin
The Times (UK)
May 5 2000
"Many European members of NATO also expressed anger at
what they saw as U.S. arrogance and unilateralism with
regard to war with Yugoslavia over Kosovo."
Missile dispute 'threatens Nato'
BY MICHAEL EVANS, DEFENCE EDITOR
DISAGREEMENTS between the United States and its
European allies on several key issues, particularly
Washington's proposal to build a national missile
defence system, are threatening the future of Nato, a
report said yesterday.
Past strains in the alliance had been "manageable"
because of the willingness of all members to operate
"on the basis of mutual trust", the London-based
International Institute for Strategic Studies said in
its annual Strategic Survey.
The US proposal for a limited missile defence system
to protect against potential attacks from rogue states
such as North Korea, however, was neither understood
nor welcomed by European nations, the institute said.
Europe was also "irritated" by the reluctance of the
United States to give a clear signal of approval for
its plans to develop the European Security and Defence
Identity, which would lead to a European rapid
reaction force of about 60,000 troops.
"Many European members of Nato also expressed anger at
what they saw as US arrogance and unilateralism with
regard to war with Yugoslavia over Kosovo," the report
said.
The institute added: "The danger for the coming years
is that the bridge of communication seems to have
broken down and, unless some way is found to
reconstruct it, the loss of trust could have a
profound impact on the alliance's cohesion."
The biggest illustration that the United States and
Europe were "marching to different drummers" was the
argument over the American project to construct a
national missile defence (NMD) system which would mean
modifying the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty.
"The US has had little success in convincing its
European critics that its plans for NMD deployment are
needed, sensible or useful . . . [and] many Europeans
do not believe the system will ever work as intended,"
the report said.
The report added: "There are few in Europe who believe
the so-called rogue states are led by men so
irrational they would threaten the US with weapons of
mass destruction carried on ballistic missiles, even
if they were able to do so."
Bruce K. Gagnon
Coordinator
Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
PO Box 90083
Gainesville, Fl. 32607
(352) 337-9274
http://www.globenet.free-online.co.uk
globalnet@mindspring.com
Updated 4:24 PM ET May 4, 2000
By Jim Wolf
HUNTSVILLE, Ala. (Reuters) - Pentagon planners are playing down the
importance of a coming test many outsiders had viewed as a crucial hurdle
for a proposed U.S. anti-missile shield.
Project leaders say they do not want a failure in the next test to
automatically derail the tight timeline for national missile defense
deployment.
The next shot, "no sooner than June 26," need not necessarily hit its target
for the project to get a thumbs up at an impending Pentagon "deployment
readiness review," officials said at the Army's Space and Missile Defense
Command here this week.
If a miss occurs, "it will depend on what caused the failure," said Mike
Biddle, a spokesman for the Pentagon's Ballistic Missile Defense
Organization (BMDO).
A mechanical glitch, as opposed to a design flaw, might not be a show
stopper, he said, even though it might mean launching a multi-billion-dollar
program based on a 1-for-3 record.
The coming test will be the last of its kind before President Clinton is to
make a high-stakes decision on whether to break ground for the
multi-billion-dollar project, which critics argue could trigger a new arms
race.
Russia has said the United States would put decades of arms-control efforts
at risk by building a missile shield barred by the 1972 Anti-Ballistic
Missile Treaty with the Soviet Union.
The proposed system would use ground-based interceptor missiles to launch
"kill vehicles" designed to destroy their targets by smashing into them
outside the earth's atmosphere.
So far, the national missile defense program has succeeded once and failed
once in tests often likened to trying to hit one speeding bullet with
another.
Initially, the BMDO had said it wanted two successful hits before the
readiness review, which is due to take place about 30 days after the coming
test. The review will assess the maturity of the technology, project
feasibility and cost.
Biddle said the original 2-for-3 goal had been "self-imposed," not an
absolute requirement. Even so, hitting the next target could all but ensure
the breaking of ground next spring for construction of a radar station in
Alaska, the start of missile defense deployment.
Defense Secretary Bill Cohen told Congress April 26 that a second hit "would
be sufficient for me to make a recommendation to the president to go
forward."
"You'll have to make a determination on your own as to whether you think
that there is a viable threat out there," Cohen told the Senate
Appropriations Defense Subcommittee. "I happen to believe that given the
spread of technology that, yes, if it isn't here today, it'll be here
tomorrow."
Clinton is expected to decide by November at the latest on launching the
first phase of the plan, which is to be completed by 2005 in line with what
U.S. intelligence calls the mounting missile threat from countries like
North Korea, Iran and Iraq.
The first intercept, over the Pacific on Oct. 2, 1999, smashed a dummy
warhead. But the second, on Jan. 18, missed by less than 100 meters when
water molecules froze in a cooling pipe the width of a human hair and
blocked the interceptor's heat-seeking sensors.
Lt. Gen. John Costello, who heads the Army Space and Missile Defense
Command, told reporters here he was confident now that "that the system will
work" and that "we're on the right track."
The third test would be the most complex yet, incorporating an inflight
communications system used to update the Raytheon-built Exo-atmospheric
"kill vehicle" twice during flight on the target.
In recent weeks, the Pentagon has projected the total life cycle cost of the
proposed system, including research and development, acquisition and
staffing, at $36.2 billion in then-year dollars from 1991 to 2026, taking
inflation projections into account.
Boeing is the lead system integrator for the ground-based program. TRW
builds the system's battle command, control and communications system.
Lockheed Martin is the prime contractor on the current booster system.
Former U.S. Nuclear Planner Warns Against Altering the ABM
By Dafna Linzer
Associated Press Writer
UNITED NATIONS (AP) - The former U.S. government official who leaked the
Pentagon Papers sharply criticized proposed U.S. changes to the
Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty and warned Wednesday that it would put the
world in danger.
U.S. efforts to change the treaty to build a limited missile defense would
encourage an arms race with Russia at a time when the former Soviet Union's
nuclear forces are "vulnerable and accident-prone," Daniel Ellsberg told a
press conference.
He spoke at the United Nations on Wednesday where meetings were continuing
on the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. Joined by the mayor of Hiroshima and
the deputy mayor of Nagasaki, Ellsberg said current discussions on weapons
programs demonstrated that the world had forgotten lessons learned after the
atomic bombings of the two Japanese cities in World War II.
"With the current policies of my country, and other weapons states, there is
no assurance whatever that the crime and error will not be repeated," said
Ellsberg, a former U.S. nuclear war planner.
The United States wants Russia to clear a legal path for a limited missile
defense system to shield the United States from an attack from "rogue"
states such as North Korea.
The move would require modifying the 1972 U.S.-Soviet Anti-Ballistic Missile
Treaty. Russia so far has refused, warning that changes could touch off an
arms race.
Ellsberg said the changes would encourage Russia to resume stockpiling
weapons and return missile warheads to a state of alert.
President Clinton is considering a limited missile defense, but many
conservative Republicans in the U.S. Congress would go further by scrapping
the pact and proceeding with a space-based weapons program.
"In order to advance a domestic political agenda ... the U.S. is encouraging
the Russians to remain on and advance a launch-on-warning system," Ellsberg
said, explaining that a new American program would force Russia to devise
new deterrents.
He urged the U.N. conference to establish a strong disarmament agenda over
the next five years.
Ellsberg joined the U.S. Defense Department in 1964 and then worked for the
State Department. Outraged by U.S. policies in Vietnam, he copied a
classified 47-volume study of the U.S. role in Indochina and gave it to The
New York Times, which published the so-called Pentagon Papers in 1971.
In recent years, Ellsberg, who is based in Washington, has been an activist
against nuclear proliferation.
Bruce K. Gagnon
Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
http://www.globenet.free-online.co.uk
STAR WARS SUPPORT WANES/ABC POLL
Date:
Wed, 3 May 2000 21:12:43 -0400
From:
"Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space"
To:
On Defense Plan
By Gary Langer
This ABCNEWS.com survey was conducted by telephone April 26-30, 2000, among a random national sample of 1,004 adults. The results have a three-point error margin. Fieldwork by ICR- International Communications Research of Media, Pa.
Coordinator
Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space PO Box 90083
Gainesville, Fl. 32607
(352) 337-9274
globalnet@mindspring.com
http://www.globenet.free-online.co.uk
*** NKS #3 ITEM #7: LETTER TO SENATOR HARKIN FROM THE NKS EDITOR:
**********************************************************
From: Russell Hoffman
Re: Who do *you* trust?
Carlsbad, California