Flyby News Home - Flyby News Archives - Casinni NoFlyby - Flyby Links

Flyby  News

"News Fit to Transmit in the Post Cassini Flyby Era"

Bush Missile Plunder - UFO Press Release - Grossman's Address to Parliament

This issue of Flyby News covers quite a spectrum. It includes Star Wars updates and actions, item 3 is on UFO and extraterrestrial disclosure. This may require more review and a wait and see attitude before getting too excited. However, it is based on fascinating testimonies from numerous high-level military and government witnesses on UFO/Extraterrestrial presence, with hearings & space weapons ban sought.

Please be ready to respond to proposed actions suggested in this issue. The time is now to stop Missile Defense and protect our environment. The U.S. Bush Administration is representing a small group of military and coroporate interests, and it will be up to Congress, the media and others, to stand tall in the face of such falsehoods and honor treaties and directions for peace and well being for planet Earth and its diversity of life.

Just prior to transmitting, I received a message from Karl Grossman, confirming that his newest video, "Star Wars Returns" is ready for distribution. For ordering visit . Knowing the quality of their past videos, this will be a wonderful educational tool, (30 minute TV-formatted) to help Stop Star Wars. Please purchase and distribute to all mainstream and community access TV stations In Item 6, is the transcript of Karl Grossman's May 3, 2001 Presentation to Members of the British Parliament, which will be sent in a following E-mail.

1) Uniting with the World to Stop Star Wars

2) More on Bush's "Pie in the Sky" Proposal

3) UFO Witnesses at the National Press Club May 9th

4) Presentation to British Parliament Members by Karl Grossman


1) Uniting with the World to Stop Star Wars

The following letter to President Bush and the governments of NATO and US allies is to be sent by fax on June 12 in Washington, London, and Sydney. Please consider signing and also sending to your newspaper. This action is being sponsored by Friends of the Earth, Sydney - Nuclear Campaign

Dear Presidents, Prime Ministers, Secretaries and Ministers of Foreign Affairs and Defense:

We, the undersigned organizations, representing millions of people world-wide, write to express our opposition to current US plans to deploy a national ballistic missile defense network.

We urge instead that the United States proceed with deep cuts to the US arsenal and de-alerting of nuclear weapons -- promised by President George W. Bush during his campaign -- in order to move toward the total and unequivocal elimination of nuclear arsenals, to which the United States, Russia, and other nuclear weapons states are obligated under binding and repeated international commitments.

The deployment of missile defense will undercut these measures, making the fulfillment of those commitments more difficult.

In our view, the deployment of a National Missile Defense (NMD) network is deeply-flawed and reckless, decreasing rather than increasing overall international security.

President Bush says that the United States will propose modifications to the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty to allow for US national missile defenses. If Russia does not agree to the US proposals, the Bush Administration has said the United States is prepared to withdraw from the ABM treaty. President Bush may decide as soon as this year whether to begin construction of a key NMD radar site in Alaska, which could violate the treaty.

Russia has stated clearly in the recent session of the Conference on Disarmament that its offer of deep reductions in warhead numbers is conditional on the integrity of the ABM treaty. Russia's ratification of START-II was also conditional on the maintenance of the integrity of the ABM treaty, and therefore the non-deployment of US missile defenses.

It is our strong view that the deployment of even so-called limited missile defenses will undercut the possibility of deep reductions in US and Russian nuclear weaponry, and could foreclose the possibility of removing US and Russian missiles from their current, dangerous hair-trigger alert status.

Military planners react to capabilities rather than intentions. The deployment of even limited missile defenses could lead to Russian re-deployment of tactical nuclear weapons and multiple warhead missiles. It also may accelerate a Chinese build-up of strategic nuclear weapons, which could include deployment of multiple nuclear warheads on long-range missiles, and a dramatic increase in the now limited number of those missiles.

A Chinese build-up could easily result in a dangerous acceleration of Indian, and in turn, Pakistani nuclear weapons deployments. This escalation of offensive capabilities is likely to lead to nuclear arsenals poised at even higher levels of alert.

Furthermore, missile defense systems, particularly the NMD network now being contemplated by the United States, are extraordinarily expensive and have not been proven to work in an operational environment.

No NMD system, even a limited one, can be deployed for at least six to 10 years. Two out of three US NMD flight tests so far have failed, yet in order to be effective, NMD (or TMD) must intercept incoming nuclear warheads with close to 100% reliability.

Even if an NMD system could be designed to defeat countermeasures, could be engineered to be operationally effective, and would not prompt a state to build additional offensive missiles to over-saturate missile defenses, neither NMD nor TMD can guard against less sophisticated and more reliable means of delivering weapons of mass destruction.

Likewise, various systems of proposed Theatre Missile Defense, possibly to be deployed in Taiwan, Japan, Europe or the Middle East, suffer from many of the same technical problems, and may have the same effect as NMD in creating a dangerous action-reaction cycle leading to offensive missile

The deployment of missile defense/TMD in Taiwan is particularly likely to result in a Chinese build-up.

The problems associated with missile defenses require that the international community work together to make effective use of diplomacy, trade and assistance, and new mechanisms to control and reduce existing and potential ballistic missile proliferation. Near-term efforts should be focused on securing a lasting and enforceable framework agreement freezing the North Korean missile program.

Further efforts to enforce and strengthen the Missile Technology Control Regime, and control and reduce missile stockpiles on a global and regional basis, should be pursued on an urgent basis.

In light of the above:

--We respectfully urge the United States not to seek to deploy such missile defenses, and to support more effective methods to prevent missile proliferation.

--We urge governments of NATO and other US allies not to enable US deployment of such missile defense systems by allowing the upgrading of joint facilities at Menwith Hill, Fylingdales, Pine Gap, Thule, or elsewhere, for NMD- or TMD-related purposes, and to use their diplomatic influence to continue to dissuade the US government from the pursuit of missile defense.

To address the most immediate and dire missile threat:

--We urge that the United States and Russia remove all nuclear weapons from hair-trigger alert as part of a policy of eliminating launch-on-warning from their strategic war plans. This will serve as the most immediate step to increase global security and stability, and reduce the risk of unintended nuclear attack.

--We urge the United States and Russia, with the support of other states, to proceed toward immediate, verifiable and irreversible reductions of strategic and tactical nuclear stockpiles to less than 1,500 warheads each through implementation of START-II, START-III, and/or by other means.

The above measures would help fulfill their solemn commitments as expressed in the final declaration of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty 2000 Review Conference to "an unequivocal undertaking by the nuclear weapon states to accomplish the total elimination of their nuclear arsenals leading to nuclear disarmament to which all states parties are committed under Article VI."

The undersigned organizations believe that these measures, and not the deployment of missile defense, constitute the way forward to the elimination of nuclear arsenals to which the nuclear weapons powers are committed, and which the overwhelming majority of the world's peoples and governments expect.

(Signed by more than 475 organizations/parliamentarians)

Say No Star Wars

# # #

Organizations can sign this letter by forwarding it to John Hallam, Friends of the Earth, Sydney, Australia. Please include your name, position, organization, and location, (including country). Individuals are encouraged to forward this to Organizations and copying and sending it as a letter to the editor to your local newspaper.


2) More on Bush Tuesday's "Pie in the Sky" Proposal

Sunday April 29 1:26 PM ET
Bush To Propose Missile Defense

By ROBERT BURNS, AP Military Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - The missile defense favored by President Bush - a shield of global reach rather than covering only U.S. territory - bears a striking resemblance to the approach his father's Pentagon was pursuing a decade ago The Clinton administration quickly killed it.

Bush will outline his intentions for missile defense in a speech Tuesday that aides say will link the concept to his desire for substantial, perhaps unilateral reductions in the U.S. nuclear missile arsenal.

The question Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld has been mulling is how to go beyond the current missile defense approach that is focused on a land-based intercept system designed to protect just the 50 U.S. states.

One approach reported to be under consideration by Rumsfeld and Bush is known as a ``layered'' missile defense.

It might combine the Clinton approach, which would use ground-launched rockets to intercept missiles midway through flight, with sea- and space-based weapons that would make the intercept during the hostile missile's ascent phase, or while its rocket plume was still burning inside the atmosphere.

The result - if it worked - would be a missile defense system with global reach.

Brig. Gen. Michael Hamel, director of space operations for the Air Force, said last week he supports that approach.

``Layered missile defense is absolutely the right way to go,'' he said.

More than 30 scientists and missile experts who oppose the administration's push for missile defense planned to gather at the Capitol on Wednesday to assert that the science of missile defense is too immature to justify moving ahead with a project expected to costs tens of billions of dollars.

The administration has made clear it will press ahead; when, at what cost and with what blueprint are the only questions.

How far-reaching a missile defense should be is a sensitive issue.

For one, it affects the degree of political support by Canada and U.S. allies in Europe. It also bears on the prohibitions against certain missile defenses spelled out in the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty. The first Bush administration believed that with the demise of the Soviet Union the emphasis in missile defense should shift from protection of the United States against an attack by thousands of nuclear missiles to protection of America and its allies against perhaps several dozen missiles of any origin.

It was called Global Protection Against Limited Strikes, or GPALS, and was made public at a Pentagon news conference Feb. 12, 1991.

The official who presented the $32 billion plan was Stephen J. Hadley - then an assistant secretary of defense, now a deputy national security adviser to Bush. The defense secretary at the time was Dick Cheney, now the vice president.

Rumsfeld may come up with a different acronym, but the concept of global protection is likely to be a key aspect of whatever missile defense program the administration decides to pursue, in the view of many private analysts who follow the subject closely.

``After the president's speech we will no longer talking about national missile defense,'' but instead a global or international approach that is much broader - and probably much more expensive - than the Clinton administration was developing, said Joseph Cirincione of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

Alan Frye, an arms control expert at the Council on Foreign Relations, said he believes, based on his contacts with administration officials involved in the matter, that Bush will adopt a GPALS-like approach. He also thinks it highly unlikely Bush will announce a U.S. withdrawal from the ABM treaty, but rather that he is willing to discuss possible missile defense cooperation with the Russians.

Morton Halperin, director of policy planning at the State Department during the Clinton administration, said he believes the Russians would be more likely to engage in missile defense talks if Bush also committed to reducing the U.S. offensive nuclear arsenal to 1,500 or 1,000 warheads.

The United States now has about 7,200 active warheads and is committed to cutting to 3,500; Clinton favored cutting to 2,500, although that has not been made a binding commitment.

Rumsfeld has made a point lately of saying that he has stopped using the term ``national missile defense,'' because ``what's `national' depends on where you live,'' as he put it to reporters March 8. His point was that if a U.S. missile defense is capable of protecting, say, Japan, then it is ``national'' to the Japanese but is global to everyone else.
= = = = = = = = =
Late Developments and Actions Needed!



On Tuesday, May 1 George W. Bush will outline his plan to dramatically expand the so-called "missile defense" system.


Bush intends to go beyond National Missile Defense (NMD) to include a multi-layered program that will be made up of:

* Theatre Missile Defense (TMD) systems on ships, land, and air which would be forward deployed surrounding China and provoke a new arms race.

* Space-based laser (SBL) which was Ronald Reagan's original dream of weapons in space. This constellation of 20-30 orbiting lasers would likely be powered with nuclear reactors and would knock out other countries satellites in space and hit targets on the Earth.

Funding levels would virtually double to around $10 billion per year just for research and development for Star Wars.

Bush's call for reductions in nuclear weapons is essentially being made in order to appear as a promoter of peace and global stability. He intends to move money from nuclear weapons right into Star Wars and will propose to keep enough nukes to still destroy the world. His plan will just create more instability.

Contact U.S. Congress and government representatives immediately and say no to the Star Wars program:

* White House Comment Line: (202) 456-1111
* Congressional Switchboard: (202) 224-3121

Also please write a letter to the editor of your local newspaper.

Thank you for your efforts.

Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
PO Box 90083
Gainesville, FL. 32607
(352) 337-9274


3) UFO Witnesses at the National Press Club, May 9th

Military, Government, witnesses to provide testimony on UFO/Extraterrestrial presence; hearings & Space Weapons Ban Sought

On Wednesday, May 9th 2001, over twenty military, intelligence, government, corporate and scientific witnesses will come forward at the National Press Club in Washington, DC to establish the reality of UFOs or extraterrestrial vehicles, extraterrestrial life forms, and resulting advanced energy and propulsion technologies. The weight of this first-hand testimony, along with supporting government documentation and other evidence, will establish without any doubt the reality of these phenomena, according to Dr. Steven M. Greer, director of the Disclosure Project which is hosting the event.

The Disclosure Project, a non-profit research organization, is calling for open Congressional hearings on the UFO/Extraterrestrial presence, and for legislation that will ban space-based weapons. Congressional hearings were last held in 1968 by the House Science and Astronautics Committee (90th Congress, 2nd Session, Committee Print No. 7. "Symposium on Unidentified Flying Objects.")

The Project has identified several hundred witnesses throughout the world and spanning every branch of the armed services, the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), DIA, CIA, NASA, Russia. UK, and other agencies and countries. Over 100 have been videotaped; 70 have been transcribed into edited testimony. Videotaped summary of the testimony and an in-depth briefing document with witness transcripts will be available at the press conference.

Among the witnesses attending the event are: John Callahan, former Division Chief of the Accidents and Investigations Branch, FAA; Master Sergeant Dan Morris, former US Air Force and NRO operative with cosmic top secret clearance; Dr. Carol Rosin, space missile defense consultant and former spokesperson for Wernher Von Braun; Major George A. Filer III, former Air Force Intelligence; Graham Bethune, retired Navy commander pilot with a top-secret clearance; Michael Smith, former Air Traffic Controller, US Air Force; Sergeant Clifford Stone, United States Army; Lt. Col. Robert Salas, former SAC Launch Controller, US Air Force and FAA.

Participants in this phase of the disclosure effort are asking for Congressional, White House and UN action to allow witnesses to testify under oath in open hearings. The group is requesting a Presidential Executive Order to protect witnesses afraid of violating security oaths and to declassify documents and secret projects for the benefit of all world citizens.

"These testimonies establish once and for all that we are not alone. Technologies related to extraterrestrial phenomena are capable of providing solutions to the global energy crisis, and other environmental and security challenges," says Dr. Greer.

The Disclosure team and selected witnesses will be meeting with members of Congress and conducting briefings to address these issues and call for legislation.

Wednesday, May 9th
8 ・9 AM Continental Breakfast
9:00 AM - 11:00 AM ・Overview by Dr. Greer; Witness Presentations;
Release of Statement for Congress; Questions Ballroom -
The National Press Club 529 14th Street NW - 13th Floor
Washington, D.C.



4) Presentation to British Parliament Members by Karl Grossman

London May 3, 2001

The United States is seeking to make space a new arena of war--and is looking to the United Kingdom to be a "partner" in this venture.

The Bush administration would--as President George W. Bush attempted in his speech two days ago--have the world believe this is all about "missile defense."

This is untrue. A broad U.S. space military program is involved, indeed revealed in U.S. government and military documents such as the recent report of the "Space Commission" chaired by the new U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, the blueprint for the space military program of the Bush

As the report of the commission's report, issued January 11, says: "In the coming period the U.S. will conduct operations to, from, in and through space in support of its national interests both on the earth and in space."

"Power projection in, from and through space" is advocated by the "Space Commission," formally called the Commission to Assess United States National Security Space Management and Organization. It urges the U.S. president "have the option to deploy weapons in space" and the U.S. Space Command be made a quasi-independent U.S. armed service, a Space Corps, like the U.S. Marine Corps.

The Rumsfeld "Space Commission" report follows a series of U.S. military reports in recent years that call for the U.S. to "control space" and from space "dominate" the Earth below.

I have brought copies of pages from these reports for you. You will see that "missile defense" is a "layer" in a far wider program.

As the U.S. Space Command's "Long Range Plan" declares: "The time has come to address, among warfighters and national policy makers, the emergence of space as a center of gravity for DoD [Department of Defense] and the nation ・ Space power in the 2lst Century looks similar to previous military revolutions, such as aircraft-carrier warfare and Blitzkrieg."

But the U.S. is hard-pressed to do this alone. We need you and a few other nations for sites for command-and-control facilities and other assistance--"Global Partnerships" as the "Long Range Plan" puts it to "strengthen military space capabilities." And also there in the "Long Range Plan," above an oval with the words: "Potential Initiatives To Enable * Control of Space * Global Engagement * Full Force Integration" and below the word "Partnerships" are the flags of nine nations. Among the flags: the Union Jack.

The United Kingdom shouldn't be involved in this U.S. scheme.

It is a scheme involving, in part, money. President Bush, for example, spoke in his speech about three emissaries he'll be sending around the world to promote the U.S. space military plan. He identified one as Stephen Hadley.

Stephen Hadley? Before joining the Bush administration, Hadley was a partner in the Washington law firm of Shea & Gardner which represents Lockheed Martin, the world's biggest weapons manufacturer and a corporation central to the U.S. Star Wars program. The U.S. recently gave the go-ahead for development of the Space-Based Laser, a $20 to 30 billion program. The Space-Based Laser's builders: Boeing, TRW--and Lockheed Martin.

And it is a scheme involving power. When President Ronald Reagan first announced the U.S. Star Wars program in 1983, he said it was about fending off what he considered the "evil empire," the Soviet Union. There is no Soviet Union any longer. Why Star Wars now?

The U.S. space military documents, as you will note, stress the "global economy." As the U.S. Space Command's "Vision for 2020" report, its cover depicting a laser weapon shooting a beam down from space zapping a target below, says: "The globalization of the world economy will also continue with a widening between 蘇aves' and 蘇ave-nots.'" From space, the U.S., the engine of the global economy--would keep those "have-nots" in line.

"Vision for 2020" further declares the mission of the U.S. Space Command as "dominating the space dimension of military operations to protect US interests and investment. Integrating Space Forces into warfighting capabilities across the full spectrum of conflict." And it compares the U.S. effort to "control space" and Earth below to how centuries ago "nations built navies to protect and enhance their commercial interests," referring to you and the other empires of Europe which once ruled the waves.

The "Long Range Plan" states: "The United States will remain a global power and exert global leadership. The United States won't always be able to forward base its forces・idespread communications will highlight disparities in resources and quality of life--contributing to unrest in developing countries・The global economy will continue to become more interdependent. Economic alliances, as well as the growth and influence of multi-national corporations, will blur security agreements. The gap between 蘇ave' and 蘇ave-not' nations will widen--creating regional unrest. One of the long acknowledged and commonly understood advantages of space-based platforms is no restriction or country clearances to overfly a nation from space."

Of power, when I was last here at the British Parliament, the Honorable Alan Simpson took the copy of "Vision for 2020" I was showing and declared: "Professor Grossman, we understand. We, too, were once an empire--drunk with power."

That is the situation my dear Members of Parliament. I regret to inform you that your former colony is out of control. Its government and a segment of its military--plus more modern entities called corporations--are drunk with power.

Your other North American progeny, Canada, not too incidentally, has been trying hard to stop the U.S. Star Wars program. It has been moving at the United Nations for a strengthening of the basic international law on space, the Outer Space Treaty of 1967. Canada is proposing a ban on all weapons in space (the Outer Space Treaty presently bans nuclear arms and weapons of mass destruction in space).

At the UN in October Marc Vidricaire of the Canadian delegation declared: "Outer space has not yet witnessed the introduction of space-based weapons. This could change if the international community does not first prevent this destabilizing development through the timely negotiation of measures banning the introduction of weapons into outer space. It has been suggested that our proposal is not relevant because the assessment on which it rests is either premature or alarmist. In our view, it is neither. One need only look at what is happening right now to realize that it is not premature."

"There is no question that the technology can be developed to place weapons in outer space," said Vidricaire. "There is also no question that no state can expect to maintain a monopoly on such knowledge -- or such capabilities -- for all time. If one state actively pursues the weaponization of space, we can be sure others will follow."

The United States has been blocking the Canadian initiative.

Weeks later, on November 20, 2000, because of the U.S. space military program, a vote was held on a resolution for "Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space." It sought to "reaffirm" the Outer Space Treaty of 1967 and specifically its provision that space be reserved for "peaceful purposes." Some 163 nations--including the United Kingdom--voted in favor. The U.S.--an original signer of the treaty--abstained. We have become quite the rogue state.

But getting drunk with power can do strange things. The legislation which got the Rumsfeld "Space Commission" established in 2000 was authored by U.S. Senator Bob Smith of New Hampshire. Of the U.S. "controlling space," Smith in a new TV documentary"Star Wars Returns"that I have written and narrate (copies of which I have for you today) says: "It is our manifest destiny. You know we went from the East Coast to the West Coast of the United States of America settling the continent and they call that manifest destiny and the next continent if you will, the next frontier, is space and it goes on forever." Yes, now it's U.S. Cosmic Manifest Destiny.

No, the United Kingdom shouldn't be involved in this U.S. scheme.

What the U.S. is up to will destabilize the world. Canada as well as China, Russia, indeed basically the rest of the world, seek to keep space for peace and are agreed on banning all weapons in space.

As, after the horror of chemical warfare in the First World War when nations said we can no longer allow chemical warfare, the world for nearly 35 years has agreed--and successfully managed--to keep war out of space. The Outer Space Treaty should be strengthened to ban all weapons in space. Verification mechanisms should be added. And space be kept for peace.

But there is only a narrow window to do this--for if the United States moves ahead with its Star Wars scheme there will be no putting this genie back in the bottle. Other nations will respond in kind and there will be an arms race and ultimately war in space.

This weekend, people from around the United Kingdom--indeed from all over the world--will gather in Leeds because of the proximity of Menwith Hill, an important component in the U.S. space military program. The meeting is titled "No Star Wars: An International Conference to Keep Space for Peace."

I urge you distinguished members of Parliament to join in helping stop this move by the United States to turn the heavens into a war zone.

Karl Grossman is full professor of journalism at the State University of New York/College at Old Westbury. He has specialized in investigative journalism for 35 years

He is a principal of EnviroVideo, a New York-based company which produces news, interview programs and documentaries for television and the Web.Video documentaries he has written and hosted for EnviroVideo include "Nukes In Space: The Nuclearization and Weaponization of the Heavens," "Nukes In Space 2: Unacceptable Risks" and his new video documentary, "Star Wars Returns," just released by EnviroVideo (718.318.8045) or

His books include "The Wrong Stuff: The Space Program's Nuclear Threat To Our Planet" and "Weapons In Space," to be published in June 2001 by Seven Stories Press (212.226.8760 or

Grossman is the recipient of the George Polk Award, James Aronson Award and John Peter Zenger Award along with six citations from Sonoma State University's Project Censored for his journalism on space issues.

Grossman's home address: Box 1680, Sag Harbor, New York, USA 11963.

Email address: