STOP CASSINI Newsletter #153 -- July 15th, 1999

Copyright (c) 1999

STOP CASSINI Newsletters Index

To: Subscribers, Press, Government Officials

Subject: J. R. Nyquist is my bogey man tonight: STOP CASSINI #153

Date: July 16th, 1999

Time Frame: Cassini is scheduled to do the flyby of Earth August 18th, 1999 (August 17th in the USA) near Africa.

Today's Subjects:

(1) Government admits Nuke work was deadly -- but...

According to a report in the New York Times (that bastion of correctness) and reprinted in The North County Times, July 15th, 1999: "For the first time, the federal government is acknowledging that nuclear weapons production during the Cold War may have caused illnesses in thousands of workers..."

So what's the bad news?

The promised medical coverage will only be for a relatively easily-defined occupational hazard of the nuclear workplace -- namely, chronic beryllium poisoning. Officials estimate there might be 500 to 1000 people who either have or will develop chronic beryllium poisoning. The article discusses the fact that many workers were contract employees, who were previously not eligible for workers' compensation programs that apply to federal employees.

About radiation dangers specifically, the article said, "The government also will study how to compensate people exposed to asbestos and radioactive materials." It added that, "Radiation poses a particular challenge, because it causes diseases like leukemia and cancers that also have other causes, and the amount of radiation needed to cause a disease is in dispute."

The article dropped a carrot after that, saying, "Several people involved in the formation of the policy said that the Energy Department had originally favored including people exposed to radiation and other threats, but that the White House had demanded further study."

It's study, study, study. But never decide.

I suggest President William Not Anything Like Jefferson Clinton read up on Dr. John W. Gofman's summation of the scientific case against low level radiation which we presented in newsletter #127:

The announcement about beryllium poisoning compensation came Wednesday, directly from Energy Secretary Bill Richardson. Presumably, it was made now to offset various intense pressures the Department of Energy is under. From what? Most recently from the surfacing of the decades-long failure known as the Chinese spy scandal, which is, in fact, yet another propaganda ploy. The DOE takes a public relations "hit", but the ultimate payback is billions of dollars in weapons funding and no great and useful policy questions asked by the deeply disoriented populace.

In fact, there is no suddenness to the spy scandal and it was brewing near the surface -- ready for media and government attention -- for about a year. It only surfaced because the anti-human propagandists needed an excuse for increased military spending so they can build more weapons of mass destruction instead of public works programs like renewable energy systems and magnetic levitation transportation lines.

Similarly, this announcement of medical coverage is a propaganda ploy designed to shift attention first to and then away from the Chinese spy scandal and to lull the populace into ignoring other DOE abuses.

(2) Air Force failed to face reality -- James Oberg report discovered:

The full report, written in February, is as good as these clips which are the most relevant selections for our newsletters' discussions:

----- FROM: -----

By James Oberg

Special to

Feb. 12 — A collision 240 miles above Earth last month has U.S. missile experts pondering the statistics of chance. The most likely explanation is “practically impossible,” said one.
“Apparently it did collide with some piece of space junk," said Lt. Col. Rick Lehner, a spokesman for the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization in Washington, D.C., the test’s sponsor.
Don Kessler, formerly NASA's guru on space debris, says a collision is certainly possible. "But it's one of the least probable kinds of collisions you could expect."
The U.S. Space Command tracks about 7,000 objects in Earth orbit bigger than a few inches across, many of them fragments of rocket explosions. But all attempts to correlate this object with any catalogued space junk have been unsuccessful. “They don’t know what it was,” Lehner says.
Citing decades of flights, experts consider the odds of a missile on a half-hour flight actually hitting something in space to be exceedingly remote, and they’re reluctant to believe it could have happened.
Although the probability of a bizarre combination of other circumstances—a self-induced explosion from leftover fuel combined with an unrelated space junk fly-by—may actually be much less unlikely, the Defense Department seems satisfied it was a freak accident that will probably never happen again.

James Oberg spent 22 years as a rocket scientist for NASA, and has written eight books and numerous articles on space flight, He became an ABC News consultant in mid-1997.


No matter what happens, they just won't learn, will they? Cassini is at risk from space debris and every plutonium launch is a deadly gamble which science does not have a way to protect us from, but DOES have a way to avoid entirely! -- rdh

(3) Worldwatch won't watch -- prefers flying blind:

It's too bad the folks who wrote the following email claim (at their web site, to be helping the environment since they dropped off the STOP CASSINI newsletter list last month on the very day of the Venus flyby:


At 05:22 PM 6/24/99 -0500, wrote:



Technically, they were not subscribers, they were on the "unsolicited press distribution list", like Time and CNN and so forth. I wonder if they will do any Cassini reports in August? I could not find any radiation experts ("pro" or "con") on their staff when I checked their web site.

(4) From the mailbag: Feels it is a GOOD sign

Before presenting this next item I must state that I don't always get such nice compliments as are delivered here and probably NEVER deserve them. As for the suggestions for the Stop Cassini editor in the following letter, that is another matter. I get plenty of those and probably deserve every one.


At 06:09 PM 7/12/99 -0400, "L" wrote:

From: "L"
To: "Russell D. Hoffman"
Subject: Re: Public attention may soon destroy them:
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 18:09:52 -0400

[Russell Hoffman wrote in Stop Cassini newsletter #151:]

If item #1 of the following email is to be believed (and I have no reason not to believe it) NASA is now saying that Cassini will be the LAST EARTH FLYBY!

But this does not stop the battle against nukes in space and the nuclear demons that plague the space program and society at large. Although the first item in the email below may be taken as a victory by some, if we do not change policy to more openness and honest Environmental Impact Statements, and Truth in All, then we will have won nothing at all.

[End of clip from Stop Cassini newsletter #151.]

Dear Russell,

I have been a long time receiver of your emails and I'm very confident that all the things you are saying have great merit. And I thank you for your superb devotion to this very detrimental cause which has probably sprung a great interest to everyone willing to open their minds to the truths about the dangers of nuclear power use, not to mention the direct use of it NOW in space!

What you sent recently is a triumph in one little increment that we cannot allow to go unheard. We do need to use this information as a tool toward making more increments to follow and NOT back off.

My fear is in some of the ways you have come across which could use some refining to the point that I think a dear friend of advertising or a manager or someone in communications could help you greatly. Please hear what I say without insult. You [write well].

There is a great need in the world for more speakers like where you are headed. I just feel that your 'ranting' type is a bit on the side of ruining the chances of convincing the people who need to be convinced..while you are already convincing those who agree with you. I have a similar stance with my music in speaking through trying to activate those who are not 'believers' as if it were some kind of cult or religion - which it is not...but you know what I mean?

Just a word of thought...




----- MY RESPONSE -----


Thanks for the great email! The big problem is that right now, just when we are on the cusp of great public awareness, NASA is doing everything their "little black book of tricks" tells them to do to demolish honest inquiry by the world's media. If we activists make great hoopla about this statement (which is not even official!) I think it would lead to the same sorts of misunderstanding that in 1964 allowed the SNAP-9A reentry to lead not to a cessation of using Plutonium [above, say, .001 Curies at a time], but just to a slight change in policy from no containment to a faulty and imperfect one [which in fact was a less efficient system!]. Similarly, Grinspoon actually called for a moratorium -- but how long would that last? And he wants it AFTER Cassini, of course. Instead of calling for hearings BEFORE, he calls for a moratorium AFTER! But Cassini itself is by far the biggest problem -- so you see how these are sidesteps?

I wish I could cheer this moment (it would help if it were official) but I think it is another attempt by NASA to hoodwink us into complacency. Cassini is an issue with which we might be able to force an open discussion of "the dilution solution to pollution" over -- but not if we accept this triviality as a major accomplishment!

Well anyway, that's my view. It could be that I am just too grizzled from so many dashed hopes, but I really don't think so. I think this is a false victory at best, and playing right into their hands at worst. We'll see what comes of it -- an official statement of some sort, or something. Anyway, THANKS for checking in and for subscribing for so long, and for the kind words as well.


Thanks for writing,

Russell Hoffman

Still trying to find the perfect balance of outrage and enthusiasm...

----- END OF MY RESPONSE -----

I suspect, in the end, the word "planned" was left out somewhere, so that a phrase like "No future Earth flybys planned" became "No future Earth flybys". As we stated when we presented the item in newsletter #151, we have no idea who the original author to make the claim, Bruce Moomaw, is, or where he gets his information. It's probably what is known as a "trial balloon" and their bubble should be burst -- we should all make it perfectly clear that we know we have achieved nothing substantial yet. -- rdh

(5) J. R. Nyquist (my bogey man tonight) loses his cool (again)

Readers will recall that Jeff Nyquist is a columnist for World Net Daily ( He published an absurd item promoting the building of fallout shelters at the worldnetdaily web site, and when we responded to it with a detailed analysis, he started calling us names. Before he got down to retracting any of the absurd things he states or answering our various complaints about the lack of factuality in his prognostications, he simply stopped responding (like so many others). Then, we saw a juicy little item in SPACE NEWS and brought it to his attention (as published in newsletter #145) and taunted JRN to come back and start the real debate. Instead he fired off this strange demand:


Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1999 05:40:59 +0000
From: Jeff Nyquist (
Organization: SOLPAC
To: "Russell D. Hoffman" (
Subject: Re: I hope you checked out SPACE NEWS, June 28th, 1999, page 17

Give me the name of a working nuclear power plant operator or engineer who will confirm that a meltdown would occur due to an EMP. Got anyone's phone number I could talk to?



I was composing the following response when he sent off a second email to me, which appears below, so I stopped answering the above email and instead answered the newer one. Then I went back and finished up the next item and sent it to Mr. Nyquist as well (over two weeks ago as I write this). I have not heard back. I guess he is having trouble himself coming up with his "qualified spokespersons" even though his nuke spokespeople would NOT be jeopardizing their careers to speak out (if indeed, they could honestly say the things Nyquist expects to hear), whereas mine would be pronouncing their careers over.


Mr. Nyquist,

My sources are good ones (though I have no intention of sharing them all with you) and my facts are accurate. Indeed, you have not offered a shred of evidence, in all your letters, which factually corrects anything I have written.

Your challenge is absurd and off-target -- a feeble attempt to deflect the argument away from the facts. You forget who is on the "outside" and who is on the "inside". Besides that though, why would a nuclear power plant operator or engineer even know about or understand (or be willing to speak on public record about) the EMP? They don't know about or speak about what they will do with the nuclear waste, either! They don't know about or speak about the dangers of low level radiation to the public, either! They don't know about or speak about the FACT that no nuclear power plant has EVER provided the public with one single cost-effective kilowatt of energy (all the real costs have been defrayed for future generations or hidden in government loans, monopolies, and research efforts).

So your challenge is an absurd one. If you understand anything about the Electromagnetic Pulse you know that the things I've stated are correct -- you don't need a bought-off and blinded nuke plant worker to tell you anything.

Furthermore, you have something like TEN ITEMS you have yet to correct from our previous conversations. For example, stating that there are 22 operating nuclear power plants in Yugoslavia, all of which have been unaffected by the supposed EMP blasts you say we subjected them too, which were (at least locally) as strong as a nuclear EMP. That's what you used as "proof" before, Mr. Nyquist, that our nuclear power plants are safe from a nuclear EMP!

You are so far behind on the facts, you have no right to be issuing absurd challenges like this. Get the rest of your "facts" which you have already presented straight, make the corrections you owe my readers (and yours), if you want to advance the conversation.

I suppose if I told you a 747 crashing into a nuclear power plant would cause a meltdown, you wouldn't believe that either, and would insist that I find a "nuclear power plant operator or engineer" to back me up in my allegations. You don't know how to carry on a fair fight, do you, Mr. Nyquist? It's beyond your capabilities to actually debate the issues, isn't it? Not that I blame you; the facts are not on your side and I think you know it. That's why you issue this absurd challenge.

There is a difference between you and me, Mr. Nyquist. The difference is that in our previous correspondences, you have been proven to be grossly negligent in your presentations; both factually in error and misleading (while at the same time, lamely accusing me of same). May God help us if anyone like you EVER has their "finger on the button". You have been proven to trust unnamed Russian military leaders for your "insights". You have accused me of being a commie and then in a massive gesture of silliness, denied having said it. I on the other hand, have not presented ONE FACT which you have been able to disprove or lead me to a named, knowledgeable expert who could disprove it. So regardless of whether I have any friends currently working (why "currently working" makes a difference, perhaps you could tell us?) who will step forward to be destroyed by you and the nuclear industry if they publicly state what I know (and they know) to be true, the facts remain as I have stated. That is the difference. I have yet to be proven wrong in anything I have said to you; you have been proven wrong dozens of times, if only because your statements are contradictory and cannot possibly both be true. For example, it is contradictory to suggest on the one hand, that the power grid would be an early target of a nuclear attack by Russia against the United States (we both agree it would be), and then to claim on the other hand, that the nuclear power plants would NOT be early targets themselves, for whatever dreamy reason you gave (Russia wouldn't want to cause any environmental damage, you said) -- and despite your other logic failure -- namely, you said we ourselves (NATO, that is) attacked the ones in Yugoslavia (unsuccessfully, I guess)! (You said we attacked them with EMP bursts, no less!). Mr. Nyquist, you still haven't named the 22 operating nuclear power plants you said there are in Yugoslavia. You still haven't named the EMP weapons that you say were used there, and you haven't compared their yields to that of a nuclear EMP high above the Earth. You claim to be knowledgeable, and you made those statements, now back them up with references and scientific details. You can't because they are wrong. There are not 22 operating nuclear power plants in Yugoslavia and the non-operating one there is in Belgrade was NOT attacked with EMP weapons and thus, there is NO PROOF there that I am wrong. Those facts, you ignore. Those misstatements you made, you have failed to retract.

Again I ask: How sure are you that a nuclear EMP would not cripple our nuclear power plants -- not a single one of them? 100%? 99%? 51%/? Find me a working nuclear power plant operator or engineer who will certify that their nuclear power plant has been hardened against the EMP of a nuclear weapon. Go ahead, Mr. Nyquist. Since you obviously cannot cite any RAND reports or other fiction to prove your points, find me ONE at EACH nuclear power plant -- for all of them must be certified EMP-hardened for there to be NO WORRIES. You have the contacts. Give me ONE worker I can call (at EACH of the 103 operating civilian nuclear power plants) so that I can check on his knowledge about the EMP, and at the same time, test his knowledge about low level radiation dangers, the economics of nuclear power, and the odds against 747's falling out of the sky and onto his head. Got anyone's phone number I could talk to?

-- Russell Hoffman


Before I had time to send the above answer out, Mr. Nyquist fired off the following, which is clearly intended to confuse readers regarding who said what first -- it is a complete misrepresentation. If Mr. Nyquist is unsure that I am correct, he should simply go back and answer, to his own and his readers' technical satisfaction, the various points in the very first letter I sent him (published in newsletter #128). He should do so logically instead of illogically and factually instead of unfactually. I had no idea who I was writing to, I took his words at face value. I had no idea I was setting foot into a quasi-compassionate dog-kill-dog make-believe world where nothing makes sense:


Date: Wed, 30 Jun 1999 07:21:50 +0000
From: Jeff Nyquist (
To: "Russell D. Hoffman" (
Subject: Re: Mr. Nyquist: Exactly how certain of this are you?

Mr. Hoffman:

The reason I don't reply to your angry factually incorrect rants, is because you don't actually address the issues at hand, but engage in personal attacks and distortions. You accuse me of being associated with Russian generals. You say that I called you a Communist. You misrepresent facts and invent facts, challenging me to uninvent them. I'm afraid I cannot keep up with all the fantasy inventions of your overheated mind.

Your commentaries are not even remotely civilized and you don't deserve any sort of reply from me. And please do not publish my replies on the Internet. There is no need for you to embarrass yourself any further. You are a poor and haphazard reader of whatever I write, and you obviously put very little thought into what you write. Therefore, any correspondence with you is a waste of time.

You are highly emotional, unconcerned with sober discussion, and frankly, I don't need the childish rhetorical exchanges. I wrote you a simple note, asking for the name of one US nuclear engineer or nuclear plant boss who would confirm your allegation that EMP would cause nuclear accidents at US nuclear plants.

Since you failed to provide one source for your statement, I assume that you haven't talked to any of the people who are intimate with nuclear plant operations, that you don't know what the protocol is for a nuclear plant during a power failure. An EMP is a power failure, pure and simple. If nuclear reactors can be shut down manually, then you haven't a leg to stand on. But you haven't even got the name or number of someone who actually runs such a plant. Perhaps my information is incorrect, but I am waiting for you to give me the name and number of a nuclear plant operator who will confirm your statement. I am open to being corrected. But I don't think you're a serious person.

You are probably just making things up because nuclear power is your bogey man.



I take is as a compliment that I am "highly emotional" about the way this planet is heading for global catastrophe. It means (perhaps) my head is screwed on right! Although I have tried to limit my reading of J. R. Nyquist to the one article a mutual reader guided me too, and Nyquists' own letters to me, nevertheless, this "poor and haphazard reader" probably sent him the most detailed critique he's received of his writing since high school. Nearly every paragraph was answered in detail! I challenge Nyquist to point me to a more detailed and exacting critique of his writing anywhere on the web. As to the "Russian Generals", Nyquist publishes what he says they say they would do in a nuclear war. He publishes what he says they think about, and he indicates further that he believes them when they say whatever they say. So if they are not his friends, then they must at least be his comrades. I personally, do NOT trust the Russian Generals. I don't respect them, and I don't like them because they are threatening all the world's people with nuclear holocaust. But Nyquist trusts them.

Regarding name calling, Mr. Nyquist wrote of me: " 'Better Red than dead' is your slogan" which he apparently now claims is somehow NOT calling me a communist! He has yet to retract it or any of the other silly statements he has made. I would gladly retract what is wrong. He SAYS he would, but has yet to even retract either side of his contradictory statements, such as these two, written just a few pages apart in the same letter to me (published in newsletter #132):

"One needs to disrupt the enemy power grid..."
..."nuclear power plants would not be targeted in a nuclear attack..."

In his most contradictory statement, he accuses me of being defeatist: "Hoffman apparently thinks we should surrender at the outset of a nuclear war, or even before the war begins...", yet Nyquist himself wrote the most defeatist words I have ever read: "War is not a good thing, but it has always happened AND IT WILL ALWAYS HAPPEN." (MY EMPHASIS!)

THAT is the real talk of surrender before the war has even begun! THAT is assuming that sanity CANNOT come to the world! What could be more defeatist than that?

The Cold War goes on against humanity because people are not told the truth about what that war is like -- for the civilians. They are not told that for every soldier killed by a nuclear bomb, probably 10 civilians will die, NOT just people under the blast, but people half a world away, not even born when the war took place! That for every nuclear weapon tested, thousands have already died as a direct result of the radioactive poisons released because of the test. These are great big secrets the Russian AND the United States military keep from their citizens. If the Russians keep it secret, that's their business I guess (actually, presenting the truth to the Russians is what the VoA (Voice of America) is for. Too bad America's home "equivalent" of VoA, Pacifica, is RIGHT NOW being chained and its freedom fighters (aka "on air personalities") are being arrested and silenced). America is a free country, and freedom demands truth. There can be no freedom without truth.

Nyquist denies everything: He denies the true nature of nuclear war (it is unwinnable); he tries to promote a dangerous and expensive policy of continued investment in doom; and then on top of all that, when I unravel his poisoned penmanship and point out some of his many errors to him, he accuses me of lying simply because my facts don't match his fiction! Then he accuses me, the ultimate insult, of not being serious and of "making things up". I think Nyquist actually knows I'm as serious as a heart attack and I have no need to make stuff up.

As we all know, the pen is mightier than the sword, so it naturally follows that even the dullest pen can cut unfairly deep. Nyquist's pen is surely the dullest we have come across in 153 issues of this newsletter. He is as predictable as radioactive decay and quite possibly just as dangerous.


Date: July 1st, 1999

J.R. Nyquist writes:
"An EMP is a power failure, pure and simple"

Lowell Wood, a senior staff member at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Berkeley, California states that the EMP from a nuclear blast has:
"locally ruinous results which appear retrospectively to be basically similar to those resulting from a lightning strike."

(By locally ruinous, he means within "line of sight". Other similar quotes that show how wrong you are abound in the SPACE NEWS article which I guess you still haven't read.)

More to follow [the above response to J. R. Nyquist was sent after this one was, chronologically, although it was written first --rdh]. You think you're the only game in town, and deserve instant responses to your silly statements. Not so. Responding to Grinspoon's email was far more important [in the most recent issues], so your fanciful works of fiction got back-shelved for a while.

By the way, I will continue to publish your emails in my newsletters (if I feel like it), especially as long as you won't publish a link to my rebuttals at your worldnetdaily web site where you publish your works of fiction. And as long as you accuse me of "personal attacks and distortions" you should reread your own earlier letters to me (not to mention this one), which are viciously personal and completely off-base.

I don't make things up, but clearly you do. I have already listed a variety of inconsistencies in your emails and documents -- things which could not possibly both be true -- so you MUST be making stuff up! And then you DARE to call me "not even remotely civilized"! You are attempting to lull the nation to sleep before a holocaust we could prevent if we tried. Perhaps if we all faced the truth, we could prevent a tragedy. Instead you want to pretend the realities are simply not even possible.

-- Russell Hoffman


We have not heard anything more from Mr. "I've got the upper hand" Nyquist. If we do, we might publish it if it is not another meaningless attempt to misrepresent his own statements and our previous correspondence, and we certainly will tell our readers something has come in so that if they are curious, they can inquire directly of Mr. Nyquist what he has to say in response.

Somehow, I don't think Mr. Nyquist will ever get down to the business at hand, of retracting his many absurd and contradictory statements and speaking truthfully and openly to the American public about the dangers we face: nuclear war, the electromagnetic pulse and other aspects of the disastrous "radiation era" in human history (the last era, unless we wise up). Additional statements about the EMP can be found in the SPACE NEWS article on Page 17 of the June 28th, 1999 issue (some are quoted in newsletter #145). While it does not talk about nuclear power plants specifically, the facts presented make the connection plain to see (unless you are blinded by an unfounded and illogical "belief" to the contrary, as Mr. Nyquist is). To put it bluntly, common sense is sufficient to show the danger. In addition, I recently heard that Jonathan Schell (a famous and well respected author) has already written a well-documented account of the effects of the EMP in one of his books.

Readers who find Mr. Nyquist irritating may also enjoy the remarks about him by Internet journalist Robert Sterling, Editor of the Konformist electronic newsletter (, a worthless rag in Mr. Sterling's own opinion, but one many people read (including YH&OS).

(6) Gail Stewart, KFMB (San Diego) tunes out her duties to the public

This would not be "newsworthy" except KFMB is local to the editor of the SC newsletter. We will not expect much reasonable coverage about Cassini from KFMB this summer. Coverage, yes. But "reasonable" coverage? Not a chance.


Date: Thu, 01 Jul 1999 10:05:58 -0700
To: "Russell D. Hoffman" (
From: Gail Stewart (
Subject: Re: David Grinspoon takes the bate: STOP CASSINI #147, June 30th, 1999

Please, take me off your e-mail list. I do not want any of your updates. I do not read them. I immediately throw them away. So please, save some cyber space and leave me alone.

Thanks, Gail Stewart



To: Gail Stewart (
From: "Russell D. Hoffman" (
Date: July 1st, 1999
Re: Your email to me

Dear Ms Stewart,

As you requested, you have been "unsubscribed" from the STOP CASSINI press distribution list. Too bad you don't read about these things; they are important and you have a solemn duty as a member of the press to present the most important issues to the public. I am a local (Carlsbad, CA) activist at that; that should count for something, shouldn't it?

I personally think this one article is the most important thing I've ever written and if you ever decide to read one thing that I have written, I hope it will be this:

Now you may stick your head in the sand, but that won't protect the public and it will be an abdication of your duties.


Russell Hoffman


(6) What you can do today to stop the Cassini flyby of Earth:

To learn about the absurd excuses NASA used to launch Cassini in 1997, ask them for the 1995 Environmental Impact Statement for the Cassini Mission, and all subsequent documentation. At the same time, be sure to ask them for ANY and ALL documentation available on future uses of plutonium in space, including MILITARY, CIVILIAN, or "OTHER" (just in case they make a new category somehow!). To get this information, contact:

Cassini Public Information
Jet Propulsion Laboratory
4800 Oak Grove Drive
Pasadena CA 91109
(818) 354-5011 or
(818) 354-6478

NASA states that they do not have the resources anymore to answer most emails they receive. Liars! They have $13 billion dollars to play with. They can answer the public's questions!

Here's NASA's "comments" email address:

Daniel Goldin is the head of NASA. Here's his email address: or

Here's the NASA URL to find additional addresses to submit written questions to:


Be sure to "cc" the president and VP and your senators and congresspeople, too.

Always include your full name and postal address in all correspondence to any Government official of any country.

(7) Subscription information

Thanks for reading! Welcome new subscribers!

Home page of our STOP CASSINI movement:

This newsletter is free and is not distributed for profit.
To subscribe, simply email the editor at and state:
Please include a personal message of any
length and subject matter. Thank you!

To unsubscribe email me and say

Published by Russell D. Hoffman electronically.
Written in U.S.A.
Please distribute these newsletters EVERYWHERE!
What you do NEXT matters MOST OF ALL!

Next issue (#154)
Previous issue (#152)



This article has been presented on the World Wide Web by:

The Animated Software Company
Mail to:
First placed online July 16th, 1999.
Last modified July 18th, 1999.
Webwiz: Russell D. Hoffman
Copyright (c) Russell D. Hoffman