Date: Sun, 27 Dec 92 05:05:33 From: Space Digest maintainer Reply-To: Space-request@isu.isunet.edu Subject: Space Digest V15 #601 To: Space Digest Readers Precedence: bulk Space Digest Sun, 27 Dec 92 Volume 15 : Issue 601 Today's Topics: "Moonraker" -- fact or fiction? *** BUSSARD RAMSCOOP *** I thinI see our problem. (Was Re: Terminal Velocity of DCX? Justification LEI financing Welcome to the Space Digest!! Please send your messages to "space@isu.isunet.edu", and (un)subscription requests of the form "Subscribe Space " to one of these addresses: listserv@uga (BITNET), rice::boyle (SPAN/NSInet), utadnx::utspan::rice::boyle (THENET), or space-REQUEST@isu.isunet.edu (Internet). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 27 Dec 92 06:13:04 GMT From: Eidetics Int'l Subject: "Moonraker" -- fact or fiction? Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,talk.politics.misc,sci.space.shuttle,sci.space,sci.astro From Jon Volkoff, mail address eidetics@cerf.net MBADBH@rohvm1.rohmhaas.com (David B. Horvath, CDP @ Hidden - I don't speak for them) writes: >> > >Doesn't this remind you of a plot from a James Bond movie? Moonraker? > >Shuttle takes off from transport 747 causing the 747 to crash... and BrianT@cup.portal.com (Brian Stuart Thorn @ The Portal System (TM)) writes: ><...> >However the discussion, very weird discussion, that you dropped >in upon was about lighting the engines on the back of the 747 and >going into orbit, a'la 'Moonraker'. Suffice it to say that CAPS LOCK >seems to have trouble differentiating fact from fiction. Glad you guys brought it up. I just happen to have a piece from Dr. Beter Audio Letter #56 that you might find interesting with regard to "Moonraker" and the rest of the James Bond adventures, and the background of their author, the late Ian Fleming. "AUDIO LETTER(R)" is a registered trademark of Audio Books, Inc., a Texas corporation, which originally produced this tape recording. Reproduced under open license granted by Audio Books, Inc. ----------------------------------------------------------------- This is the Dr. Beter AUDIO LETTER, 1629 K St. NW, Washington, D.C. 20006 Hello, my friends, this is Dr. Beter. Today is July 30, 1980, and this is my AUDIO LETTER No. 56. <...> My three special topics this month are: Topic #1--IAN FLEMING AND THE FT. KNOX GOLD SCANDAL <...> Topic #1--Not many years ago millions were fascinated by the fictional exploits of an imaginary British spy. His name was James Bond, and he was the creation of the late British author Ian Fleming. It was Fleming more than anyone else who created the image of the modern "super spy." All the Fleming spy stories had two major characteristics in common that made them stand out. For one thing, every story was about a world-shaking situation which was kept secret from the public. The other common ingredient was always a dazzling display of secret high technologies of every description--things unknown to the public. These two unique features of his stories eventually catapulted Ian Fleming into world-wide fame. He was the undisputed leader in his field. As always happens many others tried to copy him, and spy stories were all around us in the late 60's. But he always remained one of a kind. Try as they might, none of his imitators could ever match his work. It was as though he had a secret advantage, a secret weapon of his own--and, my friends, he did! In writing his stories, Ian Fleming was drawing upon his own secret weapon. That weapon was knowledge. Fleming had been a high-ranking officer of Britain's crack Intelligence agency called MI-5. It was the British who practically invented and perfected the modern concept of Intelligence, and to this day British Intelligence remains the equal of any in the world. When Fleming left Her Majesty's Secret Service to become a writer, he was severely limited in what he could publish. He was bound by the restrictions of the British "Official Secrets Act." Under that Act, Fleming would have been liable for punishment for revealing any official secret without authorization. And so Ian Fleming, the former British Intelligence officer, became what is known as a "fictionalizer"--that is, he started with factual knowledge but rearranged and modified it in order to create startling stories of fiction. He was always extremely careful about how he did this. He always knew that he was skirting the fringes of the Official Secrets Act. He could not afford to make a mistake, because it would have meant prison for him and possible forfeiture of pension rights; and so he always altered every situation, every secret technology, and every personality enough to avoid revealing actual secrets. It was a long and meticulous process both to protect himself and to make each final story readable. For that reason Fleming completed a new James Bond novel only about once a year. If it had all been imagination, as many people believe, he would have been capable of producing a new book every few months, making himself far richer. But because his stories were all rooted in fact, secret fact, he did not dare speed up and run the risk of making a mistake. Ian Fleming had two purposes in writing his famous series of spy novels. One purpose, of course, was to earn a very comfortable living; but beyond that he was also trying to subtly open the eyes of the reading public by the medium of fiction. Because of the Official Secrets Act he could not publish the facts that he knew as fact without modification, so he did what he felt was the next best thing, and that was to use his stories to open our minds to at least think in terms which were otherwise hidden from us. Fleming truly believed that this was something which somehow had to be done, because knowing what he knew he was not an optimistic man. More than three decades ago he could see that the public was beginning to be left behind by secret new weapons, new technologies, and new techniques to enslave us all. A public awakening was the only hope he could see to prevent eventual disaster, and so beginning in the early 50's Fleming started writing exciting fiction in order to hint at secret facts. His plan was "Fictionalize to open eyes." By the early 60's the one-man campaign of Ian Fleming was starting to gather steam. His fictional hero James Bond started gaining popularity in ever-wider circles; and even though his exploits were understood to be fiction, people were beginning to think of possibilities which they had never seen before. James Bond movies were in the works. After years of gradual growth, the power of Ian Fleming's fiction was about to explode into a world-wide craze. Countless millions were on the verge of being encouraged to think unthinkable thoughts about what goes on in secret. Simply by encouraging people to think new thoughts for themselves, Ian Fleming was endangering secret plans of very powerful men--and he almost got away with it because they were slow to realize what he was doing. But just as the James Bond craze was beginning, Ian Fleming's plan was brought to an end. Sixteen years ago next month, on August 12, 1964, Ian Fleming died an untimely death at age 56. By making us think, Ian Fleming had posed a real danger to secret long-range plans of a powerful few. And even after he was removed from the scene, his fictional efforts to awaken us could not be stopped overnight. The momentum of public interest was just too great because he had caught the imagination of millions upon millions. The James Bond craze could not be stopped, and so the other choice was to control it. Experts in propaganda and public deception studied the problem and quickly hit on the solution. Fleming's plan had been "Fictionalize to open eyes." He wanted to make us see possibilities which were being hidden from us otherwise; but with him out of the way, the new plan became: "Fictionalize to close eyes." It was a plan to make secrets more secure than ever by making the truth unbelievable to us, and this technique of blinding us through fiction has been a major factor on the American scene now for 15 years. A perfect example of all of this took place with a book Fleming published 21 years ago in 1959. It was titled "GOLD FINGER." The starting point for the book was knowledge about certain secrets. Fleming knew that there was a long-range plan to create monetary chaos for private gain and power. He also knew that a central feature of the plan was to be the secret disappearance of America's monetary gold hoard at Fort Knox, and he knew that the kingpin of this international plot was a man with legendary greed for gold. His name: DAVID ROCKEFELLER. It was a plan that was totally unsuspected by the public. It was still the Eisenhower era, the heyday of the so-called "almighty dollar." The dollar was good as gold, because it was backed by the world's largest monetary gold hoard. Fort Knox was thought to be impregnable; and in those days, my friends, no one dared speak ill of the Four Rockefeller Brothers. Ian Fleming decided to write a book that would begin to alert people to what was afoot. He could not tell the whole story, nor tell it as fact because of the Official Secrets Act; but by fictionalizing he was able to cause people to think of possibilities which would never have occurred to them otherwise. For example, in the 50's it was a rare American who considered even the possibility of monetary turmoil. The dollar was good as gold, and that was that. Why even think about gold? Individual citizens could not own it except in jewelry. Wasn't all the rest of it thought to be sealed up in Fort Knox? Everyone knew no one could get in there, and so we didn't even think about it. But in his book GOLD FINGER, Fleming brought several key thoughts to our minds. He devised a fictional scheme to show that Fort Knox might not be impregnable after all. He raised the question: "What would happen to the dollar and other currencies if the Fort Knox gold were no longer available?" And he proposed the unthinkable thought that someone, if they were rich enough and greedy enough, might want to get their hands on America's gold. The actual GOLD FINGER story, of course, was fiction; but the basic points which I have just mentioned were fact. GOLD FINGER was published in 1959; and barely two years later in 1961, the hemorrhaging of America's monetary gold supply began. Agents of David Rockefeller within the United States Government provided a cloak of authority called the "London Gold Pool Agreement"; and then for seven years until 1968, big Army trucks loaded with gold bullion rolled out of Fort Knox constantly--and all without a word to the public! Some of the gold shipments during those seven years were recorded on a list kept by the United States Mint. Almost without exception the shipments listed went to the New York Assay Office, where they disappeared without any further accounting. As you may recall, the New York Assay Office was the focus of a scandal in December 1978 involving missing gold. Over 5,000 ounces had simply disappeared; but that, my friends, was a very small tip of a very large iceberg, and so the controversy over the missing millions in gold at the New York Assay Office was quickly smoothed over and covered up. They could not afford to allow any real investigation which might let the public know the truth. According to the official list of shipments I mentioned earlier, a large fraction of America's monetary gold went to the New York Assay Office in the 60's. There it disappeared, never to be seen again. But, my friends, the real situation was even worse. Long ago my sources gave me hard evidence of many large gold shipments from Fort Knox which were not even listed. Five years ago this month in AUDIO LETTER No. 2 I revealed a specific example of this. It was a shipment on January 20, 1965, in which four (4) tractor-trailers loaded up at Fort Knox and then headed for railroad tracks across the river at Jeffersonville, Indiana. My sources provided me with details, including photographs, of the operation. But the shipment was one of many which did not show on any official Government list of shipments. In June 1975, Mr. Edward Durell and my other associates were able to confront officials of the United States Mint with this example of missing shipments, and for once the confrontation took place under circumstances in which the Mint was under great pressure to respond. In the most specific terms the Bureau of the Mint was asked what was shipped out of Fort Knox in the four tractor-trailers on January 20, 1965. The written answer dated June 19, 1975 came from the then Director of the United States Mint, Mrs. Mary Brooks. She confirmed that this unlisted shipment amounted to more than one and three-quarter (1-3/4) million ounces of gold--and, my friends, it was not junk gold melted down from old coins which were confiscated from Americans in 1934. The shipment was part of America's true monetary gold, good delivery gold which is .995 fine or better. After this admission in writing about an enormous secret shipment of gold out of Fort Knox, one would have thought that there would be fireworks, but not so! My friend Mr. Durell showered the appropriate officials throughout the Government with this evidence of massive fraud at Fort Knox, and he notified the major media and all of the appropriate leaders in Congress about this evidence. For reasons which I will explain later in this message, I believe it's time to call attention to one of these people. He is Senator William Proxmire of Wisconsin, Chairman of the Senate Banking Committee. Proxmire loves to parade as a great defender of our financial interests in Washington. He's famous for his so-called "Golden Fleece Award." Proxmire searches through the Federal Budget with a fine-tooth comb, and he's always able to find some project or contract which rightly or wrongly will look ridiculous to the public. He then trots it out, announces how much it costs, and with a great flourish gives it his Golden Fleece Award. By this and other means Proxmire is a master at maintaining his image as a protector of the American economy. But if ever a situation deserved the Proxmire Golden Fleece Award, it is the FORT KNOX GOLD SCANDAL. The petty examples usually chosen by Proxmire fleece the American public out of perhaps hundreds of thousands or a few million dollars. It makes good publicity for Proxmire, but it's insignificant. By contrast, the Fort Knox Gold Scandal is fleecing every one of us out of the shirt on our back. It has undermined the dollar itself, which is on its way to destruction. It has set off ever-worsening inflation even while our economy is stagnating. The Gold Scandal is fleecing us all, but what has Senator William Proxmire done about that?? Let me tell you what he has, and has not, done. For more than five years Proxmire has been among the top American leaders who have been kept informed about major developments and evidence in the Gold Scandal. He has been given the evidence I mentioned earlier about the missing shipment from Fort Knox, as well as other evidence of major discrepancies; but up to now, Proxmire has kept his lips sealed about discrepancies about America's gold supply--with one exception. That exception took place in December 1978. Word had leaked out about the 5,000-or so missing ounces of gold at the New York Assay Office worth over $3,000,000 at today's prices. As Chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, Proxmire immediately jumped on the story. Frowning in disapproval, he proclaimed that this would have to be looked into. Hearing those words from the champion of the Golden Fleece Award, the public relaxed and quickly forgot about it. And almost as quickly, Senator William Proxmire made sure he forgot about it too. To this day, no real investigation has ever taken place over the missing gold at the New York Assay Office. Proxmire's failure to follow up that $3,000,000 gold discrepancy was bad enough, but it's nothing compared to his apparent disinterest in investigating the truth about the Fort Knox Gold Scandal. The case of the missing Fort Knox shipment is a case in point. At today's prices, that one shipment alone was worth more than one billion dollars ($1,000,000,000)--not a mere million but 1000 times a million! And that, in truth, was only one example. There were many unreported shipments like that. That is why the Treasury figures, which show a huge remaining American gold hoard, are a fraud--a total fraud. And that's why the United States could auction off only a small amount of junk gold over a period of time and then had to stop. And that's why the United States dollar is no longer "as good as gold"; instead, it's fast becoming worth less than the paper it's printed on. Senator William Proxmire, like many others trusted by the American public, has been given massive evidence about all of this; but his actions so far have helped only those who have taken our own gold in order to fleece us of everything we own. Later in this message I will have more to say about Senator William Proxmire and the Fort Knox Gold Scandal. But for now I want to finish the story of Ian Fleming's aborted efforts to alert the public about things like these. As I already explained, his principle was "Fictionalize to open eyes"; but after his untimely death in 1964 his stories were seized upon and warped, especially in movies, for the opposite purpose. The new purpose became "Fictionalize to CLOSE eyes." Nothing could be done to alter and neutralize Fleming's books once they had been published, so instead attention was drawn away from the books to the James Bond movies; and as the movies were in preparation, disinformation agents were planted on the scene to guide the process. As a result, the James Bond who emerged on film was a very different character from the one in Fleming's novels. The basic story lines remained the same, but in many subtle ways the psychology was radically changed. The movies retained the adventure, fast action, dazzling secret technologies, and bold plots which Fleming had pioneered; but by clever use of satirical humor, every James Bond movie ended up by laughing at itself. Secret weapons were exaggerated or twisted so as to make them entertaining but also ridiculous; and by filling the movies with strange characters and never-ending gimmicks, viewers were distracted from the underlying warnings of the basic plot. The GOLD FINGER story was a perfect example of all this. Fleming's original novel called attention to something which most readers would never have thought about otherwise. That was the potential relationship between Fort Knox gold and international monetary chaos, and through his fictional plot he also planted the idea that the legendary Fort Knox bullion depository might not be invulnerable after all. But these lessons were rarely, if ever, realized by those who saw only the movie; instead, the typical viewer walked out of the movie laughing. It was obvious that what he had seen could happen only in fiction, and from that point onward he was programmed to react with disbelief if he should ever hear of tampering with Fort Knox gold. Such a thing could only be fiction--it was just too ridiculous ever to really happen. This is the attitude I encountered more than seven years ago when I began giving public warnings about deliberate plans for economic chaos. I myself was first alerted to the Fort Knox Gold Scandal by none other than British Intelligence in London after completing a secret mission for Queen Elizabeth in Zaire; and in my book THE CONSPIRACY AGAINST THE DOLLAR, I outlined the overall plan, including the unseen role of America's gold. I had one major advantage which Ian Fleming did not have. The United States does not yet have an Official Secrets Act like that of Britain, and so I was not forced to fictionalize. Instead I was able to give the real plans and real names of those responsible for things to come. The prototype for Ian Fleming's GOLD FINGER of two decades ago was none other than David Rockefeller, and in my book I showed in detail how he played his kingpin role in the plan to destroy our economy. I described how this was leading to a collapsing dollar, skyrocketing gold prices, a stagnating economy, spiraling financial problems for State and local governments, urban unrest, and eventually NUCLEAR WAR. But when David Rockefeller himself was interviewed about my book, even he resorted to the technique "Fictionalize to close eyes." His comment about THE CONSPIRACY AGAINST THE DOLLAR was: "Interesting science fiction." But, my friends, the truth is always stranger than fiction. Today it is fiction that we believe, and fact that we don't believe. Most people still believe the fiction that David Rockefeller himself is still alive, but he actually died in a secret coup d'etat nearly a year and a half ago, as I revealed in AUDIO LETTER No. 43. What we see today is no longer David Rockefeller but only his image. My friends, the truth is the truth, no matter what we choose to believe; and what the late David Rockefeller dismissed as "Interesting science fiction" seven years ago is coming true today. Yesterday we would not believe. Today we are suffering. Tomorrow it will be too late--if we do not act NOW. <...> ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 26 Dec 92 08:03:23 PST From: Jason Cooper Subject: *** BUSSARD RAMSCOOP *** Newsgroups: sci.space This is just a quick repeat of a message I sent earlier this week. Can anybody in this group help me with the physics aspects of the Bussard ramscoop? For those who don't know, the ramscoop collects charged H (charged by it) from the interstellar material with a huge magnetic field (moving, at reasonably high velocities, that is), thus deflecting that hydrogen into the engine itself, where it is fused for thrust. I'm seeking assistance with the fusing itself. Can anybody here explain to me (in reasonably plain language, I'm in Grade 11 (though I _can_ understand most grade 12 concepts, or perhaps better (try me))) what the fusion reaction produced in the sun requires (IE do I just need to pressure up a bunch of plain old Hydrogen?) and what the _exact_ reactions are that occur resulting in how much energy (MeV please) produced? Anybody know much about the Bussard ramscoop here and just feel like helping me? Oh yeah, I should mention that this is for a science fair project, which is why I am looking for detailed descriptions of reactions, etc, as, firstly, I need to explain this to a judge, and secondly, I need to know all I can. Thank you for your time. Jason Cooper [mail replies please] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1992 07:07:50 GMT From: "Simon E. Booth" Subject: I thinI see our problem. (Was Re: Terminal Velocity of DCX? Newsgroups: sci.space In article ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright) writes: >In strider@clotho.acm.rpi.edu (Greg Moore) writes: > >> In reality it sounds more like you are talking about DC-10, >>DC-12, etc. >> Unless you are saying that a 747 is the same plane as a DC-3 >>was. >> If your claims are about 50 years from now, or even 20 >>eyars from now, I'll buy them. > >I think it would do you a world of good to go out to your local >airport and look around. > >Do you have any idea how many DC-3s are still flying? After 50 >years? > >And the 747, which you cite as an example of a modern airplane, >is well over 20 years old! > And don't forget the G and H model B-52'as. Those are at least 30 years old and still flying. I think I read somewhere that many old planes are so durable that the primary problem in keeping them flying isn't how well they were designed but maintaining a supply of spare parts (i.e. WWII aircraft still flyable today). Supposedly this is a similar problem for the shuttle--only 5 flight capable orbiters built in past 13 years makes a very rare craft, and thus creates a maintainence problem due to their limited numbers. Simon ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1992 07:36:49 GMT From: Bill Blum Subject: Justification Newsgroups: sci.space In article roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov (John Roberts) writes: > >Has anyone had personal experience with magnet schools? I'm curious about >whether they provide any benefit. > Well, I did not attend a magnet school, but I was part of a gifted/talented program in grades K-8. My only complaint was: Some programs (such as the one I was subjected to) do not take into account that not all students will be interested in the same things. We were taught Spanish, we produced plays, we saw nature films. A friend of mine and I grew immensely bored with the material presented and spent our time in the library, reading books like Issac Asimov, etc. I was never given a reason to WANT to learn Spanish, or to learn about nature, or to care about drama. I'm sure that magnet schools would fare better in this regard---they are aimed towards what some students WANT. -- Bill Blum * "God willing...we shall return." Purdue University * Gene Cernan, The Moon, Dec 1972(BSEE P.U. 56) School of Nuclear Engineering * Member of the SEDS National Board blumb@sage.cc.purdue.edu * Ad Astra Per Ardua!! ------------------------------ Date: 26 Dec 92 17:38:18 From: David.Anderman@ofa123.fidonet.org Subject: LEI financing Newsgroups: sci.space You are absolutely correct - that NASA does not necessarily have to be the agency that purchases lunar science data from the private sector. Other agencies, such as the US Geological Survey, are also under consideration. However, political realities may force NASA (and one of its field centers,in particular) to be the agency with the responsbility to purchase the data, under the final version of the Lunar Resources Data Purchase Act. Besides, NASA is *already* purchasing science data from space from a private vendor. --- Maximus 2.01wb ------------------------------ End of Space Digest Volume 15 : Issue 601 ------------------------------