Correspondence from Matt Wald, Helen Caldicott, Ellen Thomas, Judith Johnsrud (+ more, +responses)

At 07:46 PM 5/11/2003 , "Matthew L. Wald" <mattwald@nytimes.com> wrote:

SUBJECT: Re: take me off your mailing list, please.

====================================================

Dear Dr. Caldicott,

Yesterday, along with your two letters (shown below), I received the letter shown above.  I had put Mr. Wald on my list a few months ago, after he sent me a condescending response to something I wrote about one of his pro-nuclear articles.

I responded to his previous letter to me with what I figured was a tour-de-force, but received no response and of course, nothing was published in the New York Times.  Matt Wald, their writer on nuclear issues, unsubscribing from my newsletter is pretty low, don't you think?  Even if he never reads them, at least they'd be on his hard drive for searching and cross-referencing later.  Lots of people tell me they store every one, even categorizing them.  But Matt Wald of the New York Times -- "All the news that's fit to print!" -- doesn't need the full circle of available information!

Yesterday I also received the letter shown below from Ellen Thomas, about the same email you responded to.  (My response is also shown below.)  And just this morning, I received the wonderful response shown below from Dr. Judith Johnsrud.  (Letters were also received from Bob Nichols, Dr. Ed Siegel (he sent me the recent An Empty Energy Bill article, from (of all things) the New York Times, author unknown, May 12, 2003), and this morning, William Millar <wamillar@sympatico.ca> wrote: "The CD is on its way re Iraq Du Studies.  Peace Will".  He was responding to the SEVEN DISASTERS email I sent out on radiation crimes in Iraq by American forces (anyone reading this who wants a copy of his CD after it arrives here; please ask). And Marvin Lewis also chimed in.

Now, my question to you is, which of these many current events in my life do YOU think was the most important thing that happened to me (ignoring, of course, requests for copies of my software, which came in from Texas, New Jersey, Ohio, Walnut Creek, CA, Mount Tamborine, Queensland, Australia, and Singapore)?

I say that of all this correspondence, the most important is Matt's -- because if the media cuts us off, there is no hope of our message getting out.  The media are supposed to be the fact-checkers for the public, a go-between for the scientists, politicians, activists, and business people to reach the public.

If you agree with me that it's Matt's absurd "unsubscribe" letter -- or if you just want to help -- then I ask you to respond to Mr. Wald's "unsubscribe" and explain to him why he should stay informed on nuclear issues, and why you think my newsletters are a good source for him.  (If only because it is an EXCLUSIVE source for letters like yours, Ellen's, Matt's, and Judith's.)

In the past few days, an editor from a "local newspaper in Tasmania, Australia" also unsubscribed.  She and I exchanged polite parting words.

Personally, I think the nuke writer at the NY Times and your fellow Aussie should both be interested to hear you say to me: "I have respected your work and your passion and dedication for some time".  But unfortunately, they both unsubscribed in the past few days, so neither will hear about it, unless someone else tells them.

Every time you asked a question of the audience during your presentation in San Diego, only a few people raised their hand.  At one point, only two people raised their hands -- my wife (also a computer programmer) and I.  Gosh, we even know what the "football" is!  Did you expect so much naivety in that room?  I was shocked and dismayed. 

I've looked over your newest book quite carefully in the three days since I bought a copy -- it does look excellent.  Much of it is about a weapons system my software might be helping to control, for all you or I know.  (The software was originally written for civilian purposes, but it turned out to have military applications, too.)  I'd like to point out that the post-911 no-fly zones over U.S. nuclear power plants you mention on page xv of your book were temporary.

I know that in your book you state in no uncertain terms that the worst of the worst is a nuclear attack on a nuclear power plant.

So, of course, I was upset that you didn't come in and help destroy San Onofre for me, as only someone who has the stature of a Caldicott could.  Especially after I had sent you information prior to your arrival so that you would be aware of the local situation (reprinted below).

Yes, I disagree with your focus these days.  During your presentation in San Diego you essentially ignored South Texas Project, Davis Besse, and San Onofre's dangers in favor of the other battle -- the one against nuclear weapons.

Your clarity of vision is admirable, but not perfect.  Mine is not perfect either, but not so imperfect that I have missed Bruce Gagnon's actions.  He coddles people like you (the scientists and credentialed writers who have been published in major magazines, newspapers, and books) while abusing the little guys -- the activists who want to make a difference, but don't have much clout.

I'm not saying you have to agree with me on Gagnon, but you should at least open your eyes to the possibility that there is a problem.  Do you think I do this because it's fun?  Do you think there is an endless supply of infiltrators who have made it to the Gagnon level?  He's a very valuable commodity to the pro-nukers!

Do you know who Jim Hoerner is?  If not, you haven't been reading much, yourself.  He thinks he's famous because he runs the Know Nukes web site, and fights with me.

Do you know who Rochelle Becker is?  Rochelle Becker said of Dr. John Gofman, "He's been discredited".  She said it in front of my wife, myself, and another activist a couple of years ago in a private meeting at her request just a few WEEKS after I got involved in the San Onofre issue "big time" -- Summer, 2001.

What would YOU think if a major activist said that to you?  I presume you respect Gofman since he's on your new foundation's board.  I bet you'd be pretty suspicious of somebody who denounced Dr. Gofman, too!

But, Becker would NEVER try to discredit Gofman to YOU, would she?  But to an activist, like myself?  Well, she said it.

The next time I heard that phrase about Gofman was the attack by Dr. Robert Bourque of the DOE, who also said you were "worse than Hitler".

I believe you need to know this stuff.

And if you care to do anything that would help this activist accomplish our common goal, please write a letter to Matt Wald on my behalf.

Thanks in advance,

Sincerely,

Russell D. Hoffman
Carlsbad, CA

Prior correspondence with Matt Wald:
http://animatedsoftware.com/environm/no_nukes/2003/nytmatthewwald.htm

1) From Dr. Caldicott:
2) First response from Dr. Caldicott
3) Ellen Thomas, Editor, NucNews
4) Wind Mills Kill Birds (but it's nothing like Chernobyl)
5) Letter from Dr. Judith Johnsrud
6) My letter to Dr. Caldicott from last week (includes several documents)
7) Marvin Lewis on all the WMDs that haven't been found in Iraq
8) So where IS the San Onofre Unit 1 Reactor Pressure Vessel, anyway?
9) Also, this came in yesterday...
10,11) Closing quote, contact points

(Note: Long-time readers of my newsletters probably know that I usually correct minor misspellings in my contributor's efforts.  However, this time I have only added "(sp)" to Dr. Caldicott's letter, to indicate where I believe minor spelling corrections should be made.  This is to indicate to posterity that her letters were written, apparently, quite quickly without any second-thoughts. In this case, I think editorial integrity demands that I not make any modifications.-- rdh )

=====================================================
1) From Dr. Caldicott:
=====================================================

From: "helen caldicott" <hcaldic@bigpond.com>
To: "Russell D. Hoffman" <rhoffman@animatedsoftware.com>
Subject: Fw: On Dr: Helen Caldicott: "THAT WOMAN IS MORE DANGEROUS THAN HITLER!" -- Dr. Robert F. Bourque, DOE/LANL
Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 15:51:58 +1000

Russell,
Would you please send my note to you out to your lists, that would seem to
be the appropriate thing to do after this exchange between us and believe
me, if you asked me to an occasion to speak abput (sp) nuclear power, you would
get the whole fuel cycle covered and the medical effects related to each,
Sincerely,
Helen Caldicott

======================================================
2) First response from Dr. Caldicott: ======================================================

From: "helen caldicott" <hcaldic@bigpond.com>
To: "Russell D. Hoffman" <rhoffman@animatedsoftware.com>
Subject: Re: On Dr: Helen Caldicott: "THAT WOMAN IS MORE DANGEROUS THAN HITLER!" -- Dr. Robert F. Bourque, DOE/LANL
Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 07:25:34 +1000

Russell I have respected your work and your passion and dedication for some
time.
However I find it to be inappropriate for you to send this material out on
the net without first written to me about your concerns so that we could
discuss them with mutual respect.
If you have read NUCLEAR MADNESS which I assume you have, you will know
exactly how I feel about nuclear power and you are right they all need to be
closed down yesterday if not today, the risk they  pose is enormous.
However in 45 minutes I was unable to do justice to the everpresent (sp) nuclear
war threat let alone nuclear power, you surely with your degree of
intelligence must have realised (sp) that.
If I had had a similar amount of time to discuss the everpresent (sp) threat of
nuclear power, cancer clusters, meltdown, nuclear wastre (sp), the vulnerablility (sp)
of cooling pools etc I would have done so.
By the way have you read THE NEW NUCLEAR DANGER, to truly understand what I
was trying to get the audience to understand?
If you are upset Russell, talk or write to me because we fundamenatlly (sp) agree
and need to work together, not dilute our effect by lack of communication,
Sincerely,
Helen Caldicott

----- Original Message -----

From: "Russell D. Hoffman" <rhoffman@animatedsoftware.com>
To: "Dr. Helen Caldicott" <hcaldic@bigpond.com>
Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2003 3:20 AM
Subject: On Dr: Helen Caldicott: "THAT WOMAN IS MORE DANGEROUS THAN
HITLER!" -- Dr. Robert F. Bourque, DOE/LANL


> May 10th, 2003
>
> Dear Readers,
>
> Worrying about nuclear weapons in preference to nuclear power is
backwards.
>
> First, the nuclear power plants produce the material for nuclear
> weapons.  If we "cut off the spigot", eventually they'll be UNABLE to
build
> more nuclear weapons -- at least until they figure out a new source for
the
> bomb material.
>
> Second, nuclear power plants are protected by "rent-a-cops", and nuclear
> weapons are protected by Marines.  If you were a terrorist, which would
you
> rather fight your way past?
>
> Third, nuclear weapons are stored in hardened facilities in the middle of
> nowhere, while nuclear power plants are in the midst of population centers
> (the industry calls nuclear power plants "hardened", but it's just a
> spin-doctored term and has no real meaning).  Because the weapons
> facilities are isolated, they're much more difficult to approach.  Sure,
> you could crash into a missile silo with a 777, but the actual warheads
are
> deep underground and probably would not be damaged.  A spent fuel pool is
a
> much more vulnerable target.
>
> Fourth, nuclear power plants are a "force multiplier" for nuclear weapons,
> since the most devastating target for a nuclear weapon is a nuclear power
> plant and its spent fuel pool.
>
> Yet, despite these facts, most of the so-called anti-nuclear leaders
> concentrate nearly all their energy on banning nuclear weapons, and pay
> relatively little attention to shutting down the world's 430+ nuclear
power
> plants.
>
> I know that Dr. Helen Caldicott is well aware of the dangers of nuclear
> power, but she only touched briefly on the subject a couple of times
during
> the presentation she gave recently in San Diego, California.  Her focus
was
> almost entirely on nuclear weapons.
>
> Afterwards, in a conversation with one of the other attendees, I was told
> she is "more dangerous than Hitler" because of her inaccurate statements
> (he could not, however, nail down one of those inaccurate statements for
> me).  He turned out to be a "Pressure Safety Officer" in the Health,
> Safety, and Radiation Department at Los Alamos National Labs, Dr. Robert
F.
> Bourque.
>
> Dr. Caldicott did make one inaccurate statement, saying that California
has
> "three" nuclear reactors -- in fact we have four operating reactors (two
at
> San Onofre, two at Diablo Canyon).  But overall her assessment of the
> dangers we face from nuclear weapons and nuclear power was chillingly
accurate.
>
> She said that she is founding a new organization to take on the
"Right-Wing
> Think Tanks" which has several goals, including eliminating nuclear
weapons
> and nuclear power within five years.
>
> Why wait?  Our nuclear power plants are unlikely to last five years!  The
> chance of a meltdown before then is high.  I do not believe Dr. Caldicott
> actually has anyone qualified to speak about the dangers from nuclear
power
> plants on her new committee.
>
> What a crazy world!  On the one hand, I have to spend half an hour
> listening to a vehement pro-nuker denounce Caldicott as "worse than
> Hitler", and tell me that Wind, Wave, Tide, Solar, Geothermal,
> Hydroelectric, and OTEC (Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion) have EACH been
> proven ineffective, and on the other hand, Dr. Caldicott is paying little
> more than LIP SERVICE to the problems of nuclear power generation -- the
> source of all that radiation, and the far larger national industry and
> financial institution!
>
> The pro-nuker told me that windmills kill birds.  What does he think
> happens around Chernobyl?  Does he think it's a bird sanctuary?  He also
> told me that Dr. John W. Gofman had been debunked years ago.  "Is he still
> alive?" he asked.  "Yes," I replied.  "He must be very old."  "Yes, but
> he's still active" I replied, and asked, "When was he debunked?  Who
> debunked him?"  I got no answers. The pro-nuker then went over to talk
> directly to Caldicott, who had just finished signing books for a long line
> of people.
>
> It's clear she's dealt with hecklers like him many times.  She asked me if
> I worked at Los Alamos too, since I was standing next to him and had
walked
> over to the table with him (but at least, I had a copy of her book in my
> hand to be signed!)  "Oh, you know me, Dr. Caldicott! " I replied, and
> handed her another copy of my TALKING POINTS ABOUT SAN ONOFRE document.  I
> had passed out around 150 copies of the Talking Points document just prior
> to the start of the presentation.  I had printed it on bright yellow
paper,
> so I could see that a copy had reached Dr. Caldicott within a few minutes.
> (Once she knew who I was, Dr. Caldicott was very encouraging about my
> writing, which I greatly appreciated, because of my own respect for her
> efforts.)
>
> During the lecture, someone had submitted a question about San Onofre and
> she said something like, "Russell must have submitted that!", evidently
> thinking that in a room of nearly 400 people in San Diego, California,
> nobody else would ask about San Onofre -- and that they would all know me
> by just my first name!  I hadn't submitted it, actually, and didn't know
> the answer.  She suggested we should ask the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
> if we want the answer to questions like that (where is the San Onofre Unit
> 1 Reactor Pressure Vessel being stored right now?).  AS IF the NRC answers
> any but the most trivial and obvious of our questions (or was that Dr.
> Caldicott's point?)!
>
> We can't ask anything from the nuke power plant owners, either!  Aside
from
> the fact that Ray Golden, San Onofre's spokesperson, doesn't return my
> phone calls, the nuke plant spokespeople are not required to tell the
> truth, anyway!  The following was in a letter sent to me by the Nuclear
> Regulatory Commission last year: "Statements made by the public affairs
> officer of a NRC licensee are not regulated activities.  Therefore, the
> veracity of such statements will not be investigated by the NRC."
>
> That's a license to lie.
>
> Dr. Caldicott claims she plans to get the plants closed within five years,
> but as far as I can tell, there isn't a single person on the masthead of
> her new foundation dedicated to that topic -- NOT ONE.   Judging from
their
> biographies, none of them even has specific expertise about, or focus on,
> nuclear power plants!  None are former plant workers or concentrate their
> efforts on stopping nuclear power.
>
> We need to close all the world's nuclear power plants TODAY!  We will NOT
> "freeze in the dark" as the nuclear industry claims will happen.  These
> plants simply aren't VITAL.  Right now, the fact is that the nuclear
> industry considers itself beleaguered and unable to expand, because of a
> perceived negative political environment.  They think that will change
some
> day.  It will -- it will get much worse -- because every accident makes
> their "political" environment worse. Every scientific study which shows
> low-level radiation -- especially internal radiation -- is more harmful
> than government "experts" have been claiming -- makes it harder for the
> nuclear industry to release radiation and pretend it's safe.  Nuclear
power
> is doomed.  It's just a question of when, and how many people will die
with
> it.
>
> The nuclear industry's current plan is to keep the plants which are
already
> operating online, at a terrible risk to the public, but at great financial
> gain to themselves.  No U.S. nuclear power company is investing in the
next
> generation of nuclear power plants, which shows how little confidence they
> have in their own future.  But in the meantime, the plants are lurking
like
> terrorists in our midst, ready to meltdown and explosively release their
> contents, thus killing tens of thousands, or even millions of people who
> live downwind.
>
> Between the so-called California energy crises of 2000 - 2001 and now
(May,
> 2003), California has built nearly TWICE AS MUCH GENERATING CAPACITY --
all
> of it non-nuclear -- as is produced by our four nuclear power plants even
> when they all are running.  The fact is, that ALL of that new generating
> capacity could have been from renewable energy systems.  But one way or
> another, we COULD shut down all the nuclear plants in California TODAY,
> with no impact on services.  The rest of the nation and the world could do
> so too.  Instead, California alone is creating 1000 lbs per day of high
> level radioactive waste, stuff so dangerous and useless that we cannot
> safely store it, ship it, process it, or dump it.  50 tons of "spent fuel"
> are created around the world each day.
>
> I believe Dr. Caldicott is being seriously misled by infiltrators and
> government handlers such as Bruce Gagnon.  Rochelle Becker often takes on
> this role in California. I don't know if Dr. Caldicott has a working
> relationship with Becker or not, but my guess is that she does.  I'm sure
> Dr. Caldicott has more than enough evidence to be cautious of Bruce
Gagnon,
> but instead, she finds him "prophetic" and her new book, titled THE NEW
> NUCLEAR DANGER, is -- believe it or not! -- actually dedicated first and
> foremost to that SPY.
>
> What a crazy world!
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Russell Hoffman
> Bearing witness to an eminent disaster in America from
> Carlsbad, CA
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *************************************************
> ** THE ANIMATED SOFTWARE COMPANY
> ** Russell D. Hoffman, Owner and Chief Programmer
> ** Visit the world's most eclectic web site:
> ** http://www.animatedsoftware.com
> *************************************************
>
> IF YOU RECEIVED THIS EMAIL IN ERROR AND/OR DO NOT WISH TO RECEIVE ANY MORE
> EMAILS FROM US FOR ANY REASON, PLEASE CONTACT RUSSELL HOFFMAN AT:
>
> rhoffman@animatedsoftware.com
>
>


======================================================
3) Ellen Thomas, Editor, NucNews:
======================================================

At 06:57 PM 5/10/2003 , "nucnews" <editor@nucnews.net> wrote:
Russell, would you please resubmit this to NucNews without the ad
hominem attack against Bruce Gagnon?

I'd be interested in hearing your indictment in a personal email, but
I won't sanction character assassination on NucNews, not without a
whole bunch of proof. 

I know Bruce personally, and have read his emails for years, and I
have no reason to think of him as a spy.  So please leave that off
this otherwise interesting message.

Incidentally, in case you now start thinking of me as a spy, I've been
helping to keep the antinuclear vigil going outside the White House
since 1981.  We talk about nuclear power as well as weapons.  I agree
that nuclear power must go.  I respect your passion on the subject.
But I'm dismayed by personal attacks.

Ellen Thomas
NucNews editor

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------


May 10th, 2003

Dear Ellen,

Thank you for your email (shown below).  I'm sure you speak for many who don't know the Gagnon I've seen.

However, there is no reason for me to comply with your request.  Why not?  Because I have already posted, online, and have already kept there for years, oodles of proof about Gagnon -- times, dates, events, people involved, other witnesses to the events, and much more.  IT IS NOT a personal attack on Mr. Gagnon -- [Heck], I think he's [extremely] good at what he does!   Thus, it is not an "ad hominem" attack, or character assassination.  It is a simple statement, as true (to the BEST of my knowledge) as anything else I have ever written.  I have studied him for nearly a decade now, and closely for the first two or three years of that time.  If he's not a spy, he owes me an apology, and he owes many other people I've seen be affected by his negativism towards them an apology too.  But apologies are not, of course, the point.  It's all about dropping the ball at the crucial times, misleading the media about what the real concerns are, and generally turning right when the movement needs to turn left, or left when it needs to turn right. 

Below is a URL where I've linked to other past infractions by the man.  However, you can be sure that it is a very delicate game he plays, and you won't be able to believe it from one or two or maybe even three little incidents.  That's why I spent so much time documenting every little thing.  Because the big picture is clear.   Gagnon is a spy - a psy-ops guy.  He is misleading Dr. Caldicott now, you can be sure of that, and he has misled Karl Grossman for more than a decade.  

When I think of how hard the CIA, NSA, FBI etc. must be laughing at all this, and at all his followers deep faith in him, it breaks my heart -- and I'm sure they also laugh at all the grief he's caused me in particular.  But I think we'll have the last laugh, eventually, Ellen -- truth will come out.  Please support my effort to make the head of the CIA an elected position!  Anyone with that much political power should be elected by the people.

Sincerely,

Russell Hoffman
Concerned Citizen
Carlsbad, CA

================================================

From: http://www.animatedsoftware.com/cassini/nltrs/nltr0252.htm (January 18th, 2000)

(4) Bruce Gagnon: A history of disinformation:

This newsletter was originally founded in part because the author learned "the hard way" that the environmental organization which was handling space issues was utterly corrupted at the top, and it was impossible to join them and speak out effectively. So I went out on my own with this newsletter. The name of the most utterly corrupt environmentalist/activist?

Bruce Gagnon.

And now, nearly three years and over 250 issues later, we see that corrupted power still rules the movement against nukes in space (but it really is no surprise; corruption rules in Government and just about everywhere else).

We expect a lot of our readers have no idea what happened between Gagnon and this editor, having not had a chance to read all the issues of this newsletter which discuss it. Even a brief summary would be difficult, but readers can see the following newsletters (and others) for details:

#28: Bruce cuts links to our STOP CASSINI web site
#35: Shrimp boat protest (guess who wouldn't want to get involved?)
#38: DC Press Conference (guess who wasn't invited!)
#58: Gagnon's utterly absurd defense of his actions
#87, #88, #90, #92, #93: Back-and-forth regarding Gagnon's activities
#102: "The Spook who acts like a kook"
#103: Ross McCluney responds to #102
#133: Cassini protest schedule with incorrect/missing information
#147: Real activists aren't satisfied by simply raising the flyby height
#173: "The black hole of anti-Cassini information"
#190: Gagnon's most ridiculous protest ever?
#221: Stupidity wins out in the United Nations
-- rdh

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

==================================================
4) Wind Mills Kill Birds (but it's nothing like Chernobyl):
=============================================

------------------------------------------
At 10:33 AM 5/10/2003 , NonukesHW@aol.com posted:
just for the record:

the "bird kill" rap against wind power is bullshit based on bad stats from
altamont, which is in a narrow migratory canyon. 

bird kill at industrial sites in flat regions and offshore is negligible. 
it's been very thoroughly studied and the conclusions are inescapable. 

----------------------------- Yahoo! ------------------------------------

Hi!

I was in shock and awe that a supposedly intelligent person would be telling Dr. Caldicott and I that bullshit!

Thanks!

Russell

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: NonukesHW@aol.com
Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 14:19:24 EDT
Subject: Re: [EF!] On Dr: Helen Caldicott: "THAT WOMAN IS MORE DANGEROUS THAN HITLER!"...
To: rhoffman@animatedsoftware.com

the right has put out actual "studies" denouncing wind power.  they take the number of bird casualties, at altamont, multiply by the number of windmills worldwide, and then show that wind power will denude the planet of birdlife.  shock & awe indeed...


[An excellent and recent Harvey Wasserman article was included which we had previously distributed. -- rdh]

================================================
Letter From Judith Johnsrud:
================================================

To: "Russell D. Hoffman" <rhoffman@animatedsoftware.com>
Subject: Re: [DOEWatch] On Dr: Helen Caldicott

Russell:

This is a long-standing problem.  Helen does much that's superb.
I keep hoping that some day, before nuclear winter arrives, we can
succeed in bringing nuclear power and nuclear weapons opponents
together.  It's a long, long overdue marriage.  I've been try for nearly
40 years.  The success is minimal.  Keep up your grand efforts!

JHJ

=================================================
6) My letter to Dr. Caldicott from last week:
=================================================


At 05:32 PM 4/30/2003 , "Tanja Winter" <twinter@san.rr.com> wrote (salient clip):
> Dr Helen Caldicott in person. Great Anti-nuclear activist!
> Kroc Peace & Justice Center, USD, May 8, 7pm - Free -
> Call for reservations: 619-260-7873

-------------------------------------------------------------

May 6th, 2003

Dear Dr. Caldicott,

I'm delighted you will be coming to speak again in San Diego, CA.  My wife and I expect to attend (as we did last time you spoke [in the San Diego area]).

I plan to hand out copies of my recent "Talking Points About San Onofre" document, created at the request of a lawyer/friend/fellow activist (whom I hope will also attend).  I previously handed the document out at the San Onofre annual hearing, and also at Earth Day in Balboa Park, San Diego, last week.

Should you wish to review the document (and perhaps offer any enhancements, clarifications, or suggestions) it can be found online here:
http://www.animatedsoftware.com/environm/onofre/2003/20030403nrcmeeting.cfm

Recently, I also wrote a San Onofre "quiz" and have posted it online, too:
http://www.animatedsoftware.com/environm/onofre/2003/quiz20020430.htm

If you have the time to review the Quiz and the Talking Points, I feel you will know the local situation better.  Reporters are confused, the nuclear spokespeople lie without fear or shame, and the truth is at least 1000 times worse than even the local so-called "Environmental" Health Organizations could ever imagine.  Of course, these documents don't talk about the 30 to 70 or so military nuclear reactors in San Diego Bay on any given normal day (subs and aircraft carriers), which I'm sure you'll be concentrating on along with nuclear "bunker busters" and other WMDs, including depleted uranium, and whatever else you have in mind -- but PLEASE don't forget those awful giants just up the coast, and the two in Diablo Canyon, as well!  San Diego gets about 20% of its electricity from those nukes, but yet the local (city of San Diego) activists feel it's outside their jurisdiction.

California's nukes, when/if they blow, will spread their radiation across America!  What a deadly swath it would create for this country!  Worse (for America) than if an East Coast plant blew, because of the direction of the prevailing winds.  Yet the local activists just can't get their backs up about it.  It seems like everyone around here knows it's basically a bad, dangerous thing, but yet it's as if no one around here really understands that collectively, they actually DO have the power to stop it -- and the responsibility, too!

By the way, the above-mentioned Quiz riled up one of the most rabid pro-nukers on the Internet, Jim Hoerner.  He even followed me onto the EF! forum I'm on just to respond to it ~ it's nice to know I've scared them!  I've enclosed what Bob Nichols of OK had to say about the whole affair.  Hoerner does actually have a "correction" of sorts, evidently my "over two million pounds" of spent fuel could be upped to three million, (1500 tonnes" and he even cites an article!).  He also says that I could hold my share in my hand, and wishes I would.  THAT's pretty rabid, eh?

Last time you spoke here, it was a powerful and moving experience.  I have the deepest admiration for your work.

At the beginning of this email, and below, are the two notifications I received regarding your event.  How does it feel to be called an "anti-nuclear activist"?  Isn't that a rather grotesque over-simplification, considering your scientific background and the technical quality of your presentations?  And this, even by those who obviously THINK they're on your side, and think you're "great"!  You see what I mean about the local political situation?  The national and international situation is no better, of course.

Sincerely,

Russell Hoffman
Carlsbad, CA

-----------------------------------------------------

To: "Russell D. Hoffman" <rhoffman@animatedsoftware.com>
Subject: FOR PUBLICATION Re: Ho Hum:  Jim Hoerner libels Russell Hoffman AGAIN (Re: SAN ONOFRE NUCLEAR QUIZ (humor?))

 
FOR PUBLICATION
 
Mr Russell Hoffman,
 
I'm impressed! You are a true celebrity now!
 
I'm a fan and have been reading your brilliant exposes of the lies and outrageous claims of the nuke boys and girls now for years. Lets all remember that it's not the sharpest tools in the shed that hold the management jobs for utility companies. They are just glad they have a j-o-b. Know what I mean?
 
Your relentless and admirable campaign against these 103 really, really big stationary nuclear weapons produced at least one nutball stalker - that Hoerner dude. Probably one of those weird brother-in-law deals that the corrupt utilities get into all the time.
 
Do you think San Onofre pays the Hornster to make these vague threats against you about some vague "higher power?" I guess California is just full of nutcase stalkers who live vicariously on the fame of others. At least it seems like it.
 
Congratulations on creation of your questionnaire. I've circulated it all over Oklahoma and gotten enraged responses to it questioning why any sane person would build a nuke power plant; much less run them in these times.
 
By the way, folks, people in Oklahoma are united on one thing. We've killed two attempts to build nuke power plants here and killed several attempts to put what is now called Yucca Mountain here.
 
Please continue your courageous efforts, Mr. Hoffman. We all are in your debt. By the way, I HAVE read about pumps and statistics on your site: www.animatedsoftware.com
 
Best definition of Chi Squares around! If you're using statistics or taking [an] advanced
mathematics or statistics course, you will do yourself a favor if you check out the site.
 
Regards,
 
Bob Nichols
Oklahoma City, Ok
bobnichols@cox.net
 
-------Original Message-------
 
From: Russell D. Hoffman
Date: Friday, May 02, 2003 10:37:10
To: (Recipient list suppressed)
Subject: Ho Hum: Jim Hoerner libels Russell Hoffman AGAIN (Re: SAN ONOFRE NUCLEAR QUIZ (humor?))
 
May 1st, 2003

Mr. Hoerner, if you want to waste my time, at least DON'T tell me I'm
against wind power or am an "anti-power Luddite". NOTHING could be further
from the truth.

Why don't you READ some of the pro-technology documents I've written before
you put your foot in your mouth again? Or use some of my laser guidance
software. Or study my pump tutorial. You're not funny, you're not
accurate, and you're certainly not polite. What you are is a waste of
everyone's time who has to deal with you. I've yet to see one document of
yours that's of any use to anyone.

And what precisely do you mean, telling me I have to "watch out"? Your
threats, your libel, and your misrepresentations won't stop the truth.

Lastly, if you're forwarding my QUIZ to other people, the least you can do
is include my WHOLE document, unedited.. I've appended it below, for the
sake of anyone who happens to want the whole truth (and is willing to put
up with your pack of lies to get to it).

Russell Hoffman
Carlsbad, CA

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Note: The URL for the San Onofre Quiz is give above. -- rdh

==================================================

At 12:32 PM 4/23/2003 , "Tanja Winter" <twinter@san.rr.com> wrote:
> She is one of the great truth tellers!
>
> Helen Caldicott, MD
> President, Nuclear Policy Research Institute
>
> “The New Nuclear Danger”
>
> Please Join Us!
> May 8, 2003
> 7:00 ­ 9:00 PM
>
> Joan B. Kroc Distinguished Lecture Series
> Dedicated to creating new knowledge about how to prevent conflict
and
> violence
>
> Dr. Helen Caldicott comes to the Institute for Peace & Justice as a
> leading spokesperson for the antinuclear movement. This lecture
offers
> a unique opportunity for members of the community to hear Dr.
> Caldicott’s unflinching views on how to prevent the manufacture and
> use of weapons of mass destruction ­ nuclear weapons­ in these
> volatile times. Raised in Australia, Helen Caldicott trained as a
> physician and devoted herself to the treatment of children.
>
> But it was in the political turmoil of the 1970s and 1980s that she
> found her true calling. Resigning from the faculty of Harvard
Medical
> School, she helped to found and was the first president of
Physicians
> for Social Responsibility (PSR) and Women's Action for Nuclear
> Disarmament, two organizations at the forefront of the
nuclear-freeze
> movement.
>
> Over the next fifteen years Caldicott brought her message to world
> leaders, to the media, and to audiences of thousands whom she roused
> to action with singular eloquence. In 1985, PSR's umbrella
affiliate,
> the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, was
> the recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize. Today Dr. Caldicott is
> President of the Nuclear Policy Research Institute, headquartered in
> Washington, DC.
>
> Joan B. Kroc Institute for Peace & Justice Theater
>                 University of San Diego
>
> A Reception and Book Signing will follow the Lecture  - FREE -
>    Please RSVP by May 5
>             619.260.4236
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------


==================================================
7) Marvin Lewis on all the WMDs that haven't been found in Iraq:
==================================================

To: rhoffman@animatedsoftware.com
Subject: Re: [NucNews] YOUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK: This really happened,