Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Info-ParaNet Newsletters Volume 1 Number 582
Info-ParaNet Newsletters Volume I Number 582
Friday, August 21st 1992
(C) Copyright 1992 Paranet Information Service. All Rights Reserved.
Today's Topics:
Reply From Phoenix Project
newsletter
Reply From Phoenix Project
Conclusion - Reply From T
What Does It All Mean?
Reply from Phoenix Project
Conclusion - Reply from the Phoenix Project
Mufon
"The Dancing Lights"
CBS Special
AIR$SPACE Article
Lawsuit Against Nsa...
newsletter
Book blub
Re: Sociopaths
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Don.Sudduth@p0.f26.n1012.z9.FIDONET.ORG (Don Sudduth)
Subject: Reply From Phoenix Project
Date: 14 Aug 92 01:37:00 GMT
> Emotions play too big a role in UFOlogy. They often
> not only affect but sometimes *control* the way people
> perceive things, process data and form opinions. Too
> frequently, the person who is the best at manipulating
> the emotions of his audience, gets the best response.
> When many of us read Jack's rantings, we were reminded
> of the emotional response of George Green (Hatoon) to
> Don Ecker's expose of that guy in UFO magazine.
Emotions aside, the Phoenix Project's response to Mike was not that of a
careful scientific voice. It was mostly irrational and emotional. I'm not
saying that scientists and researchers should keep their emotions at bay.
However, the Phoenix Project's response lacked any sense of how a group of
scientists would act in this situation. The ranting I read was of someone who
seems somewhat off balance. But that is only my opinion....
--
Don Sudduth - via ParaNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Don.Sudduth@p0.f26.n1012.z9.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jim.Speiser@f100.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG (Jim Speiser)
Subject: newsletter
Date: 13 Aug 92 15:09:00 GMT
JH> In short, a very worthwhile read that certainly doesn't follow the "party
JH>line." Highly recommended.
Thanks, John, you took the words right out of my mouth. I've been getting
_The Ufologist_ too and have the same reaction. Love those cartoons, too!
Jim
* OLX 2.1 TD * A ParaNet Point System - Excellence in Ufology since 1986
--
Jim Speiser - via ParaNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Jim.Speiser@f100.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: John.Burke@p0.f9.n1012.z9.FIDONET.ORG (John Burke)
Subject: Reply From Phoenix Project
Date: 14 Aug 92 07:26:00 GMT
Don Sudduth writes:
> Emotions aside, the Phoenix Project's response to Mike was
> not that of a careful scientific voice. It was mostly
> irrational and emotional. I'm not saying that scientists
> and researchers should keep their emotions at bay.
> However, the Phoenix Project's response lacked any sense of
> how a group of scientists would act in this situation. The
> ranting I read was of someone who seems somewhat off
> balance. But that is only my opinion....
I think you've hit the nail on the head! If these guys really are who they
claim they are (a group of scientists and former intel. community - types) we
would have seen a more restrained response. That kind of goofy flame-throwing
is what we usually see from the lunatic fringe.
-- John
--
John Burke - via ParaNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: John.Burke@p0.f9.n1012.z9.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Michael.Corbin@p0.f428.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Conclusion - Reply From T
Date: 15 Aug 92 05:21:03 GMT
> In his ramblings, Mathias does bring up one issue that needs to be
> addressed: just what IS ParaNet's information/position on Dulce? The report
> seems to imply that we have some kind of evidence of a base there, or
> was that just some unfortunate wording?
At this point, I can state that we are in the process of replying to Mathias'
ramblings. There is more interesting information to include in the next
update, so stay tuned!
Mike
--
Michael Corbin - via ParaNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Michael.Corbin@p0.f428.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Michael.Corbin@p0.f428.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Michael Corbin)
Subject: What Does It All Mean?
Date: 16 Aug 92 07:01:01 GMT
* Forwarded from "Fidonet UFO Conference"
* Originally from Jim Speiser
* Originally dated 08-14-92 11:32
GS>Until abductees or other individuals with hard evidence step
GS>forward, the whole movement will be relegated to the Weekly World News
GS>crowd and, eventually, be thrown on the scrap heap with the Utopians
GS>and countless other movements that collapsed under the weight
GS>of their own dogma and/or silliness.
Gerald:
Much of what you say is true, of course, but much of it seems to be based on
the mistaken premise that the purpose of this echo, and of ufology in
general, is to prove that UFOs are ET spacecraft. As to this echo, there is
of course no amount of ASCII rantings that will even prove the writer's
identity, let alone the nature of UFOs. We see messages here all the time
asking for "proof," and I picture a hand emerging from someone's monitor
holding a chunk of molten, unearthly metal, and a voice saying, "So there.
Nyah." Short of that, I don't really see what is expected out of a computer
echo.
As to ufology in general, it is important to remember the words of Hynek:
"Ufology does not study UFOs, it studies UFO _reports_." Which is to say
that we are not here to answer the question, "Do UFOs exist" or "What planet
do UFOs come from," but "Why do people report seeing UFOs?" Thus the
solution set is expanded to include sociological, as well as
phenomenological possibilities. From that standpoint, it is an exercise in
misdirection to focus on "proof" so single-mindedly as to imply that the
entire field is unworthy of serious discussion until such "proof" is
forthcoming.
Do certain people here take certain UFO "truisms" as given? Yes. For some,
they represent a belief system; for most, however, they are merely a
starting point for discussion. This echo would dry up and blow away if no
one could post without absolute proof positive of whatever they proposed.
For that matter, so would all of science.
And that, I believe, is the central point. Much of science deals with things
that are unproven. This is not a barrier to discussion or even speculation
in the mainstream sciences, yet it seems that when it comes to UFOs, its
"put up or shut up." Many of us recognize the need for proving our
assertions, and we accept the challenge of "extraordinary claims demand
extraordinary proof." What we resent is the implication that, in the absence
of such proof, we are doing no more than engaging in mental masturbation and
tabloid-style pseudo-science. This does not seem to apply to such unproven
postulates as black holes, super-string theory, or what happened one
millisecond after the Big Bang; why does it apply here?
If your answer is the lack of evidence to support the very _existence_ of an
unexplained phenomenon, I must take issue. While the field is, as you say,
rife with anecdotes and unproven assertions, there IS a solid body of data
constituting evidence of an unexplained and _paradoxical_ phenomenon. This
database includes thousands of reports of _high strangeness_ from highly
reliable sources, reports that transcend the "Threshold of Observational
Ambiguity." This means that the degree of strangeness involved obviates the
tired old chestnut of "misperceived prosaic phenomena" and places the
reports in a realm where the only two realistic choices are fabrication -
deliberate or not - and objective reality. When such reports come from
multiple independent witnesses of unimpeachable character, I submit that it
is unrealistic to ascribe them to fabrication and it is time to start
dealing with the _possibility_ of objective reality. To propose otherwise is
to yourself breech the walls of "extraordinary claims."
The database also includes evidence of a more tangible nature. Certain
photographs have yet to be explained (and yes, they're a little fuzzy; I
don't trust the crystal-clear ones). Certain videos have undergone extensive
analysis by skeptical scientists and yet defy explanation. There are ground
traces which have undergone the same thorough testing; you can read the
results for yourself in "The Journal of UFO Studies," a refereed science
journal. The phenomenon as described _exists_ Gerald. I assure you, as a
card-carrying skeptic myself, I wouldn't be here if it didn't.
I emphasized "paradoxical" in the above text; the fascination the UFO
phenomenon holds for me is its paradoxical nature. We are told by science
that it is profoundly unlikely that UFOs could carry visitors from other
solar systems, and, having some inkling myself of the barriers involved, I
am forced to accept that (for the moment, anyway). Yet in light of the
evidence cited above, I submit that it is _equally_ unlikely that they're
"from here," either. They shouldn't be in our skies, yet they can't NOT be.
What's a scientist to do?
It is this concurrent duality that caused Vallee to speculate that it may be
time for a new scientific paradigm, Kenneth Ring to postulate his "Imaginal
Realm," and others to begin to investigate new ways of looking at reality.
No one is suggesting that we tear down the old house before building the new
one, but I think its fair to at least look at the proposed blueprints. I
submit that it is the job of mainstream science to help guide us through
this process, rather than sit back and laugh at our efforts, or turn a blind
eye to the questions raised by the evidence. I founded ParaNet as a means of
extending a hand to curious skeptics and even nay-sayers, to ask them to
join us in formulating a way out of this "hall of mirrors with a quicksand
floor." I extend the same hand to you, in the spirit of mutual curiosity and
cooperation. You ARE at least curious, aren't you?
Jim
* OLX 2.1 TD * A ParaNet Point System - Excellence in Ufology since 1986
--
Michael Corbin - via ParaNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Michael.Corbin@p0.f428.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Steve.Rose@f601.n109.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Steve Rose)
Subject: Reply from Phoenix Project
Date: 16 Aug 92 07:33:34 GMT
PP> But, this was not the end of your attitude problem regarding the
PP> Phoenix Project. You did the same thing, again, issuing warnings,
PP> etc., with our release of the K-2 and the Ultimate Secret Reports.
PP> And, again, you had not seen or examined the supporting documents
PP> at the time you issued those warnings to ParaNet and the public.
On the contrary. Many of us welcome Michael's frankness and honesty in warning
others of pulp reports and cult article findings. We applaud him for doing so
here, and wish him continued progress and success in speaking his mind.
--
Steve Rose - via ParaNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Steve.Rose@f601.n109.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Steve.Rose@f601.n109.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Steve Rose)
Subject: Conclusion - Reply from the Phoenix Project
Date: 16 Aug 92 07:39:50 GMT
PP> should be our objective. It is up to "serious" researchers to
PP> really dig and reveal the facts and make them known. The Phoenix
PP> Project has dedicated its staff and resources, for over forty
PP> years, to that objective.
Forty years! Wow...and organized religions have been giving us the side show
for four thousand years. Except for the unfamiliar names of various circus
instellar deities...I don't see much difference.
--
Steve Rose - via ParaNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Steve.Rose@f601.n109.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jeff.Walker@f601.n109.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Jeff Walker)
Subject: Mufon
Date: 15 Aug 92 19:25:00 GMT
I'd like to know if somebody could tell me how large an organization MUFON
is, what their basic investigative philosophy is, and what their relationship
is to other UFO networks. I'd also like to know if they can be reached in the
Los Angeles area and/or what their headquarters phone number is. Thanks!
-Jeff
___
X SPEED 1.10 [NR] X I come from Alabama with a QWK packet on my knee...
--
Jeff Walker - via ParaNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Jeff.Walker@f601.n109.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Brent.Wilcox@f100.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG (Brent Wilcox)
Subject: "The Dancing Lights"
Date: 16 Aug 92 02:55:00 GMT
>>Then I forgot all about the paranormal for Y E A R S, until just a couple of
>>years ago. Maybe I'm having my second childhood....
I guess I never grew up! Except for a few years as a "serious
teenager" -- when (tossing it all into the Adamski basket) I gave up
reading para-stuff for a year or so, and then stumbled over Hynek's
"The UFO Experience" and Bernard Heuvelman's "In The Wake of The Sea
Serpent" in 11th Grade and dove head first back into it all.
Speaking of Moving Earth... I moved out of L.A about a week after
the two quakes in June, only to be greeted at my new home up the
coast by a local 3.4... Just making me feel at home, I guess...
* JABBER v1.1 #55 *
--
Brent Wilcox - via ParaNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Brent.Wilcox@f100.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jim.Speiser@f100.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG (Jim Speiser)
Subject: CBS Special
Date: 16 Aug 92 07:38:00 GMT
Did y'all see "Visitors from the Unknown" last night? I have to say, I was
pleasantly surprised by their treatment of the Trans-en-Provence case.
CUFOS, and especially Jerry Clark, have been touting this case for some time
now. Although I had seen a very brief summary of the case before, I wasn't
quite sure until last night why it was so impressive. If that biochemist's
credentials are as solid as represented, that's a helluva case. Seems like
it belongs next to the Delphos landing.
The crop circles segment was also very impressive, and surprised me. I've
been looking at crop circles with a jaded eye for some time now, feeling
pretty confident that they are all hoaxed, and that sooner or later the
hoaxers would be caught. But looking at those large agriglyphs one more
time, and realizing that no one has been caught yet making a "real"
circle....I'm just not so sure any more. And again, the show last night
presented some startling new information that I wasn't aware of...genetic
manipulation of the seedlings in the stalks?? Did anyone here know of this?
If it weren't for that middle segment about the ghosts of the airmen,
t'would've been an outstanding show.
Jim
* OLX 2.1 TD * Extraordinary Research Requires Extraordinary Funding
--
Jim Speiser - via ParaNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Jim.Speiser@f100.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: violet.berkeley.edu!chalmers
Subject: AIR$SPACE Article
Date: 16 Aug 92 19:17:26 GMT
From: chalmers@violet.berkeley.edu (John H. Chalmers Jr.)
(Reply to John Powell re my post about this article:
'Aliens in the Basement' by Frank Kuznik, Air &
Space/Smithsonian, ISSN 0886-2257, Smithsonian Institution,
900 Jefferson Drive, Washington, DC 20560. $18/yr.)
John: I picked the issue of Air&Space and reread it for the
'Suggestions for Anticipatiing Requests Under the Freedom
of Information Act' document you mentioned. I found myself
with mixed feelings -- is this partly tongue-in-cheek? As
a former employee of a large private company, I can appreciate
the advice from the writers point of view. Where I worked not only
were our lab notebooks microfilmed every 90 days or so but all memos
had to be reviewed by a superior as well as microfilmed.
I once got into trouble because after a seminar in my scientific
specialty, the organizer asked me if I enjoyed the speaker and would I
please send him a memo so he could plan for next year's intramural
seminar series. I did as he requested, but my boss decided that
expressing the opinion that my and the speaker's area of expertise
was useful to the company was not part of my job.
Accordingly, I had to walk around to the office of everyone to
whom I had sent the memo, pick it up, and carry it to my boss's office
for shredding, lest it also be microfilmed and upset someone in
another chain of command in the future, if not immediately.
Hence, this document seems to be largely common sense advice
for surviving in large bureaucracies. The alternative is to 'retire
in situ,' a common strategy in the pharmaceutical industry in the
1970's, and I presume other large organizations.
RE the lost A-bomb theory: I was trying to keep my note short.
You are correct in reminding me that the author attributed the
crash of a plane with an atomic bomb to an unnamed source in
Washington, but I feel that speculation pretty much covers
the author's attitude and intention.
While I agree that such an accident would not be kept secret
now, bureaucratic inertia, elasped time, and lack of information might
contribute toward keeping an old event secret.
If the bomb casing were not breached, then no plutonium (or U235)
would have been released. If the high-explosive used to assemble and
contain the critical mass detonated, radioactive material could be
dispersed even in the absence of any nuclear reactions. However, modern warheads
seem to be relatively resistant to such events. As I recall,
a Titan missle went off in its silo and the warhead was thrown clear
with no release of either plutonium or tritium.
I would be surprised if any residual radioactivity remained in
the alleged NM sites, especially given the strenuous and expensive
decontamination performed in Spain in the 1960's(?) after a nuke was
lost from a plane and broken open, thus contaminating the ground.
It is possible to clean up such an accident.
-- John
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Michael.Corbin@p0.f428.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Lawsuit Against Nsa...
Date: 16 Aug 92 17:04:02 GMT
* Forwarded from "Fidonet UFO Conference"
* Originally from Ronald Courter
* Originally dated 01-01-80 01:29
Here's an interesting tidbit regarding a case filed against the NSA
for not releasing files pertaining to UFOs...Read on...
PRODIGY(R) interactive personal service 08/14/92 1:30 PM
HOMELIFE
TOPIC: OUTDOOR HOBBIES
TIME: 08/12 1:08 PM
TO: ALL
FROM: JEFF RICHTER (RCDH27A)
SUBJECT: UFO - NSA LAWSUIT
Thought I'd fill you in on a rather unusual approach to
getting info on the governments UFO files.
A friend of a Co-worker is currently involved in a federal
court Freedom of information act lawsuit against the NSA.
Topic is NOT, "What are your files on UFO's", but "Why are
files on UFO's classified on National Security grounds."
Interesting approach, hey?
For you documentation junkies, the current motion/case # is
filed in US district court for Western Wisconsin, Case #
92-C-318-S.
Current status is as follows. Original suit was filed for
an index of classified documents. Index which was recieved
was itself heavily censored. Current suit is attempting to
find out why the index was declassified. Judgement was
entered in Plaintiff's favor in Mid-jul, NSA has to provide
reasons for all deletions from the Freedom of Information
act response.
A few samples from the court document. (heavily paraphrased)
1: What is NSA definition of "National Security".
2: Who could cause "exceptionally grave damage" to
"National Security" of USA by having access to documents at
issue in this case.
3: What is projected declassification date for documents.
If none, why not?
4: Does NSA have knowledge or belief that some UFOs are not
terrestrial in origin.
5: What is NSA role in NASA SETI program.
6: Do some UFO have direct relation to origin of NSA and/or
organization, personnel, functions, activities, intelligence
sources, cryptology and installations.
There's more, but I'm not going to retype the whole thing
here. I got this because I mentioned to my friend that I
had been following the "loons" (no offense) on this board in
relation to UFO's. He mentioned the existence of this board
and my participation to Fred (oh, I forgot, the plaintiff is
Frederick M. Olsen III), who has since been passing various
information to me.
Those of you who remember my active participation in this
board a few months ago will know that I am a skeptic (but I
hope a respectful one, at least in most cases.) I would
like to keep more active in this board, but I just can't
commit the kind of time it takes to keep up!
But I like Fred's approach. I will certainly do my best to
keep you folks on this board apprised of anything I hear
from my 'source', if you don't hear it first through your
own mechanisms, of course.
Because I won't be able to check this board as often as I
would like, if anyone has responses they wish to be SURE I
receive, I would advise E-mail responses. I don't PROMISE
replies in all cases, but I will certainly do my best!
Jeff in Madison
RCDH27A 8-11-92 9:50 PM CDT
I'm sure there are a couple of you out there that will get a kick out
of that, at least..
-Ron
SLMR 2.1a Some are alive simply because it's illegal to kill them.
--
Michael Corbin - via ParaNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Michael.Corbin@p0.f428.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG (John Hicks)
Subject: newsletter
Date: 15 Aug 92 17:02:00 GMT
JS> _The Ufologist_ too and have the same reaction. Love those
JS> cartoons, too!
Terry told me a funny story a while back.....
He and Rex had gone to a meeting of the contactee group that Don Ware was
a member of (at Don's invitation). At the beginning of the meeting, someone
stood up and channeled the grand poo-bah or whatever, and the message from
the grand poo-bah was to stop smoking.
At that point, Terry and Rex made their way outside for a smoke... ;-)
jbh
--
John Hicks - via ParaNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Linda.Bird@f100.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG (Linda Bird)
Subject: Book blub
Date: 16 Aug 92 18:55:00 GMT
Hi everyone,
Here's a brief blurb about a new book on the market:
MARS, by Beb Bova
ISBN 0553078925
"Bova's big new novel is the story of Jamie Waterman, a Native American
(Navaho) geologist who wins that most coveted of all tickets: the first
mission to Mars. Bov's handling of the details of the Mars mission is
in the finest tradition of hard Sci Fi. But MARS is also about the
ruthless game of Big Science--with all its hardball politics, backroom
deals, and press conference power plays--and about the tangled lives of
25 men and women sent on the next adventure facing humanity!"
In a magazine interview I read, Bova tells about a Navaho creation myth
that states the Navahos came into this world from an earlier one that
was a world of red. They were driven out by a flood. (We suspect that
there was once a large amount of water on Mars.)
I'm picking the book up this afternoon from B. Dalton and will let you
know what I think of it as I read it. I have always been a fan of Ben
Bova when he used to write for ANALOG magazine.
Linda
--
Linda Bird - via ParaNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Linda.Bird@f100.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Peggy.Noonan@p0.f605.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Peggy Noonan)
Subject: Re: Sociopaths
Date: 17 Aug 92 23:05:01 GMT
>I haven't been on the board much this week or last - have been
>caught up in the Olympics. Rah Rah!
Hi Linda,
I know what you mean about getting caught in the Olympics!
Didn't get to see too much myself, though...too many
waiting jobs to catch up on, and busy stuff to do. Some of
it was really super, though. Everyone I know got awfully
sick of all the commercials and blather in between
events, and of the jerky way things were covered --
a little here, a little there...if you wanted to see
all the gymnastics, for instance, you'd better be glued
to your chair for the entire evening or you'll miss a
bunch. But it was still super to see.
>
>I'm going to catch Loren in a week minute (tomorrow) and he'll
>tell me what to do about that disc. He said something about
>"directory" and mumbled something else...never fear, I'll get
>it yet.
If you have any problem about that, let me know. I'll try to
help if I can.
>
>Trying to do a story for the monthly Arizona MUFON newsleltter,
>so I know what it's like to get Mental Block.
Wow--That's great! When will your story come out? Can you
talk about its topic yet or do you have to wait until it's
been published? I'd love to see a copy when it's ready.
Could you give me the address to write to and let me know
which issue to request? Thanks! And congratulations!
Which reminds me, have you seen Terry Ecker's publication
from Florida? Let me know if you haven't -- he was giving
a free copy to CI$ Paranormal Issues folks and I'm sure he'd
be glad to send you one too. (Thought of it because you
might like to write something for him, too.)
>
>Glad you have resurfaced again!
Yeah, guess I'm like the fever that comes with the
flu...comes and goes unpredictably!
Seriously, it's really been busy here but I'm still trying
to check in periodically, even if I don't take time to read all the
messages, at least I can catch some and not lose touch totally.
(Now, losing MIND totally is something else again!)
Don't fry in this heat!
==Peggy
--
Peggy Noonan - via ParaNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Peggy.Noonan@p0.f605.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG
*******************************************************************************
Submissions infopara@scicom.alphacdc.com
Administrative requests infopara-request@scicom.alphacdc.com
FTP archive grind.isca.uiowa.edu:/info/paranet/infopara
Permission to distribute Michael.Corbin@paranet.org
Private mail to Paranet/Fidonet users firstname.lastname@paranet.org
UUCP gateway {ncar,isis,csn}!scicom
*********************End**of**the**InfoPara**Newsletter************************
