Pentagon effort seeks to retain U.S.’s technological edge http://wapo.st/1wLYSlq via @washingtonpost
But not long ago regards there was this big issue on leaks of technological edge:
FBI probe of defense tech allegedly leaked from NASA stonewalled, sources sayhttp://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/02/22/nasa-missile-defense-tech-leaked-to-china-sources-say/
For the record here is the House Science Committee Hearing on NASA Export Control http://youtu.be/5VxONFHtuOw
So reminder this blog is focused on NASA dealing with National Security and accusations of leaked secrets "DOJ Nix US Weapons Tech Espionage Probe": http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2013/03/did-obama-doj-nix-u-s-weapons-tech-espionage-probe/ …
Well, Congressman Frank Wolf indicates the Whistleblowers were right http://spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=45638
Same time in the press.. The Defense Authorization bill for FY15. Here's some interesting language in it: TITLE XII-MATTERS RELATING TO FOREIGN NATIONS ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST http://docs.house.gov/meetings/AS/AS29/20140430/102126/BILLS-113HR4435ih-U1.pdf
Looks like the NASA OIG pulled off a coverup? Note that if you research Paul Martin the NASA OIG Director, he comes from the DOJ OIG previously? Hummmm.. Check and balance issue?
Additional Reporting on the Transfer of International Traffic in Arms Regulations Controlled Missile Defense Technology to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration In the committee report (H. Rept. 113-102) accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014, the committee directed the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), to provide a briefing to the congressional defense committees, the Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation of the Senate, and the Committee on Science, Space and Technology of the House of Representatives, not later than August 1, 2013, that responds to certain questions concerning reports of the illegal transfer of Missile Defense Agency (MDA) developed technology.
The committee is troubled that the stated agencies have thus far been unable to respond to those questions. Therefore, the committee directs the Inspector General of the Department of Defense to investigate whether MDA technology was transferred to NASA other than by the Department's policies and procedures for the protection of classified and International Traffic in Arms (ITAR) controlled technology; whether classified technology was involved; whether it was retransferred beyond the control of the U.S. Government and, if so, whether any damage to the security of the United States resulted by that transfer; and who had access to that technology, including foreign nationals. The Inspector General is further directed to provide a preliminary report to the House Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology of the House of Representatives not later than November 31, 2014. In the event a final report is not complete by November 31, 2014, the Inspector General should brief the initial findings to the House Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology of the House of Representatives. The committee expects NASA to provide unfettered access to MDA technology and related documents, personnel, and any other matters requested by the Inspector General of the Department of Defense. The Inspector General should immediately report to the committees any non-compliance or impairment with this direction. In the event the Inspector General finds that such transfer(s) did occur, the committee directs the Inspector General to review the Department's compliance with its transfer policy and procedures department-wide and to provide an interim report to the House Committee on Armed Services on its plan to undertake this review not later than November 1, 2015.
Simon Pete Worden says in Feb. 15 statement to SpaceNews, said that "LADEE uses “100 percent commercial technology.” http://www.spacenews.com/article/civil-space/33704nasa%E2%80%82center-director-decries-inaccuracies-in-itar-allegations
Was he totally honest with the press? It appears that Congress is pressing the Defense Department on the transfer of classified tech, that was potentially part of this LADEE?
The NASA IG met with Rep. Wolf et al a few days ago to tell them all that there is nothing to the IG's knowledge to substantiate the reports about ITAR issues and espionage at ARC. Yet Rep. Wolf continues to link these claims about ARC to China even after the Justice Department and the NASA OIG state that there is no "there" there. http://nasawatch.com/archives/2013/03/bad-research-by.html Articles come out with OIG stance on this http://www.spacepolitics.com/2014/02/27/nasa-ig-finds-no-evidence-of-intentional-export-control-violations-at-ames/ But in 2014, OIG had to tuck in their tails from the NAPA Report http://www.spacepolicyonline.com/pages/images/stories/NAPA%20Executive%20Summary_R.pdf and GAO findings http://www.gao.gov/assets/670/662557.pdf!!
Then OIG comes out later with a report (now it is removed) but many law specialist caught on http://tradelawnews.blogspot.com/2014/03/do-as-we-say-not-as-we-do-inspector.html - Still lame with 'all were in an argument of what was ITAR, and there was no intent??
There are stories out on the internet suggesting that the DOJ has been blocking and/or Nixing investigations? A while back a close colleague of one of the accused in a NASA leaked secrets case above, Stewart Nozette, was arrested for attempted espionage via an FBI Sting http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2011/September/11-nsd-1142.html He only got 13 years, because it was a sting, Judge said he actually didn't transfer to Israel? Earlier they only showed a short part of the video in the media, wherein he agrees to sell to Israel, but in this recently revealed FBI video FOIA'd. Well it contradicts what the DOJ indicated to the public on this case obviously: FBI survelliance video via FOIA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKaL-adh1T4&app=desktop
Does this latest FOIA'd Sting video shows that the DOJ covered up some of this case, in this video does Nozette admit to transferring to Israel already? He only got 13years, yet it appears that there was more to all this? I thought Espionage of this kind was a "Life in Prison"? Is this a favor servered from DOJ? Is there a bigger picture, prompting an overall coverup and nix'ing further investigations surrounding appearances of espionage surrounding Air Force and NASA with other countries?
Here we have an article where they emphasize President Xi Jinping to the Chinese air force to "speed up air and space integration and sharpen their offensive and defensive capabilities." In other words, militarize space. http://washingtonexaminer.com/examiner-editorial-a-rising-china-shadows-obamas-asia-trip/article/2547583?custom_click=rss&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
Yet we know that some in WH, NASA, NASA commercial partners, etc. appear to have wanted to help them via many open source news releases? http://intelcrosstheline.blogspot.com/2013/02/more-white-house-croynism-itar-scandal.html
April 8, 2014 There was a Congressional Hearing on the below NASA Security Issues and also some addressing the other issues posed on Dare To Speak Site:
Congressional Hearing "NASA Request and Oversight of NASA Security: http://youtu.be/ctJnOHwBmU8
All happening while Russia and China deepen Space Projects, this includes EU role as well.
How NASA OIG responded to the scandal out of the Congress on "NASA Leaked Secrets" during the time of NASA Launch Program with USAID. Well, the results of OIG report came out in a page and half http://oig.nasa.gov/Special-Review/Ames_ITAR.pdf. It is mostly withheld.
The claim that all the issues were just 'ignorance' of policies and handling of ITAR and EAR?
Sad, the NASA OIG came from the DOJ OIG, and we can see how well they did their job there - see: Hundreds of Justice Dept Attys Violated Rules, Laws, or Ethical Strds http://www.pogo.org/our-work/reports/2014/hundreds-of-justice-attorneys-violated-standards.html … via @POGOBlog .
And recently even the new DOJ OIG is surfacing that Holder's DOJ is protecting the corruption of the Bankers and not protecting the real government (the people, the taxpayers). Can it be true that Banks & Corporations have taken over the US government and turned it against its own people?
Yet, the experts of Export Laws have this come back to the NASA OIG Report laid out above:
Is this what FOX George Will is concerned about? "Surrendering America" regarding our Space Capabilities? http://www.examiner.com/article/george-will-criticizes-nasa-human-space-flight-on-fox-news?CID=examiner_alerts_article
Dr. Worden states in a blogger's interview: "I still maintain that the solution to the Middle East crisis is the information war, where we should have the advantage of high technology and communications. [Then Secretary of Defense] Mr. [Donald] Rumsfeld repeatedly said that and said it to me when he gave me the job [at the Office of Strategic Influence] and the money to do it … [shakes head].
I’m not an information warrior in the classic propaganda sense. I think we put together a pretty good program [at OSI]. I was brought in as an iconoclast. They wanted to have a different approach. Meanwhile, I had always been an internal critic of our space effort. I felt that space was a medium that ought to be at the heart of security, not a supporting element. Furthermore, one of the phrases I find most unpleasant is “support the warfighter,” which I think is a stupid strategy. Our job is to prevent war. To go back to Sun Tzu, it’s to win without fighting. Space is never going to be more than a supporting element of warfighting. On the other hand, it’s a primary element of war prevention. The Europeans call it “soft power.”
My view was that space should be a central element of collaborate security arrangements, but that also meant space needed to be affordable. I’ve been a real zealot for affordability. They also need to be do-able inside your opponent’s decision cycle. That clearly was not well received by my space colleagues. The way an officer got to be a senior space officer was to get along, go along."
Can be found at: http://www.warisboring.com/2007/04/04/space-warrior-part-one/
The Pentagon runs Office of Strategic Influence through NASA ARC? But many of us observing all know “It's all in the Words”.. Do some Googling and you will find that Simon Pete Worden & team of Rendon Group contractors (note contractors don't directly work for the Govt. COTR, and they even play with words like that to keep at bay). These are (black propaganda experts) come from the DOD Office of Strategic Influence (OSI) defined by Rumsfeld, prior to his coming to be Center Director of NASA Ames Research Center
Yes. “The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting…All warfare is based on deception.” – Sun Tzu, The Art of War
OSI's operations were to do more than public relations work, but included contacting and emailing media, journalist, and foreign community leaders with information that would counter foreign governments and organizations that are hostile to the United States. In doing so, the emails would be masked by utilizing addresses ending with .com as opposed to using the standard Pentagon address of .mil. and hide any involvement of the US government and the Pentagon. The Pentagon is forbidden to conduct black propaganda operations within the American media, but is not prohibited for conducting these operations against foreign media outlets. The thought of conducting black propaganda operations and utilizing disinformation resulted in harsh criticism for the program that resulted in its closure in 2002. “
And the lackadaisical attitude or carelessness are from the Leadership, the OIG, and more? So, we all have to ask why?
The National Academy of Public Administration came out with their report:
New - China Seeks NASA Secrets III http://www.topsecretwriters.com/2014/02/china-seeks-nasa-secrets-%E2%80%93-part-iii/
Query on above article: Lackadaisical attitude or carelessness? It's all in the Words..
“The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting…All warfare is based on deception.” – Sun Tzu, The Art of War
So, White House and DOJ why did the case get blocked? http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2013/03/did-obama-doj-nix-u-s-weapons-tech-espionage-probe/
Well with a little homework, we find the following activities that seem to have the same folk that want to work with China and also have helped usher out the State Department USAID /NASA Launch Program? The same characters easily found in forums discussing the need to start business in Isle of Man and the initiation of the Institute for International Space Commerce - cutting a deal with the Isle of Man where US taxes and international sanctions can be avoided? George Abby, who used to the the NASA Johnson Space Center Director also Senior Fellow for Space Studies from the Baker Institute at Rice University, Texas, with Michael Simpson, of the International Space University and now Director of the Secure World Foundation, said: "Among the many countries interested in the commercial possibilities presented by outer space, the Isle of Man stands out as a place where people have that rare ability to both dream big dreams and close a solid business plan. We look forward to a long and productive partnership with the island and its people in the years to come."see: http://www.isunet.edu/news-archives/459-isle-of-man-business-school-opens-the-international-institute-of-space-commerce
Now State Department OIG indicates that USAID cannot account for 6B?
http://goo.gl/L1LGV5 USAID shell company schemes? http://www.financialtransparency.org/2014/04/04/when-you-want-secrecy-all-you-need-is-a-shell-company/ & http://intelcrosstheline.blogspot.com/
And is most of all SOFT POWER: DOD psy ops, State Dept USAID's info ops intended to influence local populations - http://www.phantomreport.com/soft-power-pentagons-psychological-operations-state-department-and-usaids-information-operations-intended-to-influence-local-populations ? Was this to help the Oligarchy that has taken over US Democracy per this article? Does this confirm some of this international view? http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-u-s-is-not-a-democracy-it-is-an-oligarchy/5377765 Scary.
George Abby is on the Board of Directors with Art Dula, President of Isle of Mann Excalibur Almaz that cut a deal with Isle for Space Tourism. Yet, Art Dula has a scandal, which we all wonder how it got cleared up? There was a claim against this Space Tourism Company indicating it was a scam http://www.iomtoday.co.im/news/isle-of-man-news/claim-against-manx-space-firm-in-texas-1-4949818
"Claim alleges Mr Dula defrauded claimants out of $300,000 by claiming his company had a ‘special rocket engine’ to ‘travel in space to a distant asteroid and mine precious metals’. In the claim, it alleges claimants were induced to advance $300,000, and later purchase an investment in Excalibur Exploration Limited, with the ‘fundamental false representation’ that the company had the technical expertise and associations to develop a business to fly the first commercial prospecting space flight to an asteroid." Is this why the NASA agency is now pushing hard for an Asteroid redirect mission? Because they got Dula, Abby, et al into this idea of mining asteroids, Google into mining asteroids, and more? Also Art Dula, George Abby, and even an ex Kennedy Space Center Director are involved with another company based on the Isle of Man Odyssey Moon.
Meanwhile Art Dula and Todd Stott have been working with the Isle of Man on drafting laws to help them get out of the ITAR tangle.
"US space law luminary Art Dula along with Isle of Man honorary space counsel Christopher Stott (both now based in Houston) will come before the Parliament within the next six months.
The proposed legislation does not appear to be available online yet -- although I do see Manx Space Law Initiative information on ManSat's website, along with the UK Outer Space Act " see: http://spacelawprobe.blogspot.com/2006/01/isle-of-man-in-space.html
All the while....
- Europe pressures US on Arms Trade with China, but was it really Europe and UK that did this? Or a certain group of Space Enthusiasts surrounding ISU, Space Adventures, Secure World Foundation, some in Navy Post Graduate School, and Stanford Nuclear Security Project (Sam Nunn, Kissinger, Perry, etc.)? http://www.aspistrategist.org.au/europes-arms-trade-with-china/
It's noted in below findings that Abby, Leory Chiao of Excalibur Almaz want to be able to do business with China. They work with the UK companies that already perform business with China and the EU have negotiated manned missions with China. Secure World wants to have Space Business with China, hence the below group who have found back channel ways to find ways to work with China in Space.
War in the Heavens as it is on Earth?
It appears that there are some in the Rice University, Baker's Institute that are working hard to support the efforts of International Space Commerce. Many I see, have even started the USAID, NASA, Engineers without Borders Launch Program out of the Houston Tx. area of Johnson Space Center for International Space Commerce? Leonard Yowell, has an article talking about this State Department outreach program called Launch. http://livebettermagazine.com/article/nasas-social-innovation-concept-human-development-space-exploration/ Leonard not only talks about USAID/NASA, but also mentions how it is part of the U.N. Millennium Development Goals (MDG) that present a well-accepted summary of global needs and challenges – food, poverty alleviation, health, sustainable energy, clean air and global partnerships. So, between this whole State Department program and the initiatives of Dula, Abby, Simpson, etc. how does it fit with doing business with China? They all seem to be interconnected somehow?
Thanks to NASAwatch "Back Channel ways for NASA to talk with China" http://nasawatch.com/archives/2014/01/back-channel-wa.html Transparency surfaces finally!!!! NASA Bolden finally acknowledges they (NASA, State Department - Launch Program, and International Academy of Astronautics (http://www.iaaweb.org/) were indeed working on Space Cooperation with China (working around Congress). Which means they probably did have possible violatiion in laws due to transfer of information: "NASA, China Meet On Possible Cooperation" http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=%2Farticle-xml%2Fawx_01_16_2014_p0-655430.xml#.UtllDVeEVsU.twitter The WH, State Dept were working with China! Is this where US Corporations are tired of China stealing candy from them, and that they prefer to to by pass laws (being held hard in Congress) to ensure that China indeed enables them to profit verses it being stolen and proliferred to other US sanctioned countries? Just looking for an open explanation and/or dialog of what is transpiring.
And now they are just going around laws put in place over language!
Now they switch it all over to The U.S. National Academy of Sciences (NAS) and the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) will hold two meetings in 2014 as part of the first CAS-NAS Forum for New Leaders in Space Science.
"Language in the newly enacted FY2014 Consolidated Appropriations Act (colloquially referred to "the omnibus") continues prohibitions on NASA and the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy with regard to discussing or engaging in bilateral space cooperation with China unless certain criteria are met. Those restrictions do not affect other government or non-government organizations, however. (NAS is a non-government entity.)"
Per article on now: U.S. and Chinese Academies of Sciences Create Forum for Space Science Interchanges
Obviously they understand the need for following Export Laws, violations of the http://www.isu.edu/policy/7000/7040-ISU-Export-Controls-and-Working-with-Foreign-Nationals-Policy.pdf and http://www.cavendishtrust.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/SM_May2012_26-29.pdf International Space Adventures, and more. Interested in those working around international sanctions and tax evasion.
Obviously we have ISU and Art Dula behind this, note blog below. If you missed it, Jeff Foust reported on the April 17th, 2007 on Space Investment Summit in New York City, Opening wallets, closing windows. (The Space Review, April 30, 2007) And here Jeff overviews industry concerns highlighted by straight-talking Art Dula, Esq. (who is always quoteworthy):
Dula also pointed out that while the US has the best-developed space law of any country, there are still a number of key uncertainties in space law and treaties. "We don’t have any definition of where space starts. We don’t have any definition of what, for example, a ‘celestial body’ is. We’re not exactly sure what a ‘space object’ is; it’s not well defined," he said. "So there’s a great deal of law that we’re going to have to rework over the next few years as this becomes a real business."
The problem posed with engagement with China is the issue found in an OIG report on investigation of a Chinese National having access to NASA Center and computer. What I noted immediately in reading the report that there may be many in the agency that doesn't understand the differences between Fundamental Research vs. Sensitive But Unclassified Data:
So, we ask, does NASA have checks and balances on insuring that staff understands the differences between Fundamental Research vs. Sensitive But Unclassified Data? There appears that NASA has yearly IT security training that touches on some of this in working with IT Security Plans for their IT system per FISMA and the NASA Policies on the technology managing the data, but not to the extent of helping each center determine how to identify what is fundamental research vs. Sensitive But Unclassified data (export or ITAR). NASA has indicators of wanting to protect this technology, but do they educate the staff on how to identify the data?
Does NASA have a fully engaged Information Assurance Program working this issue of science (basic and fundamental) vs. Engineering (export technology issues)? A program that works to help the staff and contractors on how to identify the differences and properly handle all the types of technology data? Does NASA have someone in charge of the actual training, monitoring, and audit of this information & technology identification processes working hand in hand and reporting to DHS, OPM, and OMB in the projects for the physical handling (e.g., Sensitive But Unclassified Corp. proprietary, export, solicitation data, trade secrets, ITAR, etc.)? There are policies, and there are IT Security pointers to identify the data for IT Security controls on IT Systems using the FIPS 199.
Also, back in 2010 FBI Director Robert Mueller told Congress that Chinese espionage was a growing problem for the Bureau. http://www.hanford.gov/c.cfm/oci/ci_spy.cfm?dossier=115
So, why is the State Department, USAID working so hard with the Canadian Foreign Services to exchange with China, our space system assets? Is it this above mentioned International Academy of Astronautics main sponsors? Airbus Defence Systems (was EADS) - Astrium a-child company and Lockheed Martin Systems political influences on White House and State Department?
As we can see, it seems as if it is all the USAID Global Development initiative and TPP that are diligently working towards working with China in Space Cooperation. The same department with a large scandal with Benghazi (failure) and now they are working on this cooperation while not asking China to curb is corruption of theft, cloning, and hacking of US National Security items and technology? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lapAacvI8_E
So, why is this a State Department vs. Congressional issue? They blame just Frank Wolf, but I bet in reality it is more that Wolf, or just even only Republications that are concerned about who in the White House and State Department are pushing this?
It appears that someone is working on an arms trade global initiative to level out the playing field? Are they working with George Soros Open Society, who "wrote a column calling for a new Bretton Woods event, to recreate the one that helped design the post-WWII economy. Only he wants this one to knock America down a peg or three." "wants to begin changing the global economy in one event." Found in article http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/04/06/george-soros-events-weekend-aim-remake-financial-order-media-wheres-reporting/
Is it possible Obama's picks for Ambassadorial positions show an ignorance and deception (a competence issue) dancing side by side enabling a Soro's design of strategic goals with strategic positioning & psyops (cognitive dissonance)? See: Under legal fire, State Dept. hands over docs on 'competence' of ambassadors http://washex.am/1lk6i70
George Soros funds Center for American Progress (CAP) founded by John Podesta who advises and staffs the White House.
Those of us in this forum, have heard that several folk under suspicion with the below mentioned ITAR scandal are Open Society Foundation supporters, which is also primarily sponsored by George Soros. These folk appear to have the mantra "Change the World" and "the Globe needs to be a fair playing ground" meaning that US National Security weapons and arms need to be distributed to enable the fair playing ground.
The 2010 Executive Order for Global Development has the Millennium Challenge Corporation lead Adviser who is a Director in the Open Society Foundation.
Has Obama swept to power on the promise of change, yet so far there has been only anarchy of Arab Spring and now possibly Crimean-Russian Spring towards the three Superpowers going at it hard beyond just economic war? Is this because his administration is filled with Wall Street bankers?
It's very apparent his top officials leave to join the banks, the big new final frontier of Space Tourism, and other new energy innovations as his budget director Peter Orszag recently joined a big bank, his OSTP staff and Space Policy Advisor left for Google Planetary Resources that are taking advantage of Federal resources John Olsen and Peter Marques. Obama appears to primarily be ready to serve the interests of the rich and powerful, with no line in the sand, no limit to “compromise.”
Please send me comments, edits, and more to the below blogs. I am only trying to piece this together from a perspective I see rolling out. If I am misunderstanding the below perspectives, and blog perspectives, especially anyone below mentioned who has a better perspective, please comment, work to correct our observations!
The latest Wolf letter to NASA Administrator Bolden, basically easily ties both below blog inquiries together highlighting concerns on the appearances of WH and Administration cronyism by intently by passing federal ethics laws & Federal Acquisition Regulations in order to favor those who tax evade and have intent to by-pass international sanctions on National Security technologies (i.e., including International trade of Arms Regulations (ITAR) being violated). http://news.sciencemag.org/sites/default/files/media/Wolf%20Letter%20PDF_0_0.pdf
Follow up responses to Wolf's public letter to Bolden:
Bolden responds publicly http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/oct/11/nasa-chinese-scientists-conference-ban
Astronaut Leroy Chiao of Excalibur Almaz, that started to work agreements with China 2003 (but can't go forward until ITAR Laws change)? Is the US passing the Space Flight baton to China http://www.space.com/23206-is-the-us-passing-the-spaceflight-baton-to-china.html
Are there violations of the Logan Act going on? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logan_Act Over all looks like work already happened between US and China per Chinese article:
Wow, did the Chinese removed this above site!
And all thanks to NASAwatch & SpaceRef keeping us informed on this cronyism and behavior of by passing the federal ethics laws.
New breaking news! Okay we have more questions on this White House OSTP, NASA push to work with Chinese: What can be easily seen in history of events:
Re: pressure to work with China from NASA officials and OSTP... did they initially plan on cutting deals with European Union that had announced going to work with China on manned missions? See:
Obama's agenda? Today wants to put an end to inequality in US economy, but pushing through the 'Free Trade' with Trans Pacific Partnership are only annals of self-negation. One of these agendas will negate the other. Read "Free trade and the loss of U.S. jobs" http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/harold-meyerson-free-trade-and-the-loss-of-us-jobs/2014/01/14/894f5750-7d59-11e3-93c1-0e888170b723_story.html?wpisrc=nl_headlines
It appears that between Holdren and Obama - they are really pushing the US into some type of regime. The rest of the Globe, i.e., China and Russia can see this, but the general taxpayer is not really seeing it (they all are bedazzled by the bobbles of smart phone and pad media).
Here is the latest article on
Coincidence of carelessness or blantant open government / badge less environments? Flat ground, for sharing any tech become the norm today in our areas of sensitive technology/national security? In SDI "Worden also instituted and championed innovative management and engineering techniques while at BMDO, including rapid prototyping, "build a little test a little", a "badgeless" work environment, and a flat organizational structure. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pete_Worden
Also in SDI, and later NASA with his close colleague Simon Pete Worden, Stewart Nozette was arrested for attempted espionage via an FBI Sting http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2011/September/11-nsd-1142.html
Pete Worden's friend, Stewart Nozette's FBI survelliance video via FOIA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKaL-adh1T4&app=desktop
This latest FOIA'd Sting video shows that the DOJ covered up some of this case, in this video Nozette admits to transferring to Israel! He only got 13years? Espionage of this kind should be "Life in Prison"!!!! This is proof of DOJ cover-up and corruption, bust whistleblowers Drake and Kirkou for reporting and waste, abuse and crime (and then only give a real espionage/treason case only 13 years). This is outrageous!
"The Pentagon's Strategic Defense Initiative Organization (SDIO) funded the Clementine Mission to the Moon and a near Earth asteroid, largely due to the efforts of Dr. Stewart Nozette and Col. Pete Worden. The mission discovered ice in a lunar polar crater but the probe failed enroute to the asteroid Geographos when a software bug on the spacecraft caused it to suddenly burn away all its maneuvering fuel. This mission was manufactured and launched after considerable political maneuvering and on a shoestring budget." http://www.permanent.com/government-history-space.html
International Space University (with Simon Pete Worden as one of the main trustees) has extended it's foot in Asia just recently. http://www.isunet.edu/news-and-media-center-2/1314-isu-extending-its-footprint-in-asia
Regardless of the laws, NASA leadership and International Space University (ISU) leadership are pushing for US Space business with China. Is this an attempt to Just by-passing the GOP, the laws, and appear to go to the Isle of Man to do so? On the ISU board of directors is a representative of the Isle of Man (where sanctions can be by-passed).
Should we all send thanks to ISU, Simon Pete Worden, the Baker Institute policy experts Art Dula, George Abby, and George Abby Jr. for showing our commercial space companies how to find loop holes in laws to just by pass US laws, snub nose at GOP, and possibly risk the US National Security apparatus, and more for forcing our final frontier of weapons technology into the international front?
See Board of Trustees: http://www.isunet.edu/EN/29
Mind you our California Representatives have a lot of interest with Chinese though..
Can we consider that some of this is surrounding Hilary Clinton, USAID, potentially influence from both Bill Clinton's and Feinstein's Husband's interest in China, via COSCO chinese shipping and more?
State Department loss of 6B unaccounted dollars - per State Department OIG after Clinton leaves. A mess with USAID Launch and working with appearances of shell companies tied to Isle of Man to trade Space Arms? Is this possible?
We also have the Harry Reid working with Chinese Solar Company to steal the Nevada Bundy Ranch! http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/04/bombshell-senator-harry-reid-is-behind-nevada-bundy-ranch-land-grab/
http://goo.gl/L1LGV5 USAID shell company schemes? http://www.financialtransparency.org/2014/04/04/when-you-want-secrecy-all-you-need-is-a-shell-company/ & http://intelcrosstheline.blogspot.com/
See below and let me know if there is any any connection here?
Overall speculation: With the recent Leland Yee arrest on arms smuggling, and his CA Senate and Congressional colleagues reaction of surprise e.g., Feinstein, Boxer, Eshoo, this now makes some sense if we all go back to the mid to late 90's to reflect on the past scandals. See Congressional Record regarding Bill Clinton's election and influence with Chinese money Cosco a COMMUNIST CHINESE-OWNED COMPANY (House of Representatives vs. Clinton April 15, 1997) http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/1997_cr/h970415-cosco.htm
Well, it says in this Congressional Investigation that Feinstein's husband Richard Blum of SF Blum Capital supposedly started all this business with Cosco. General Haig, who used to be Secretary of State was an adviser of Cosco back then with the Southern Navy Yard, secured by Clintons.
Yee was earlier firmly supported by Reid and Pelosi
Note from above Congressional Record: "Is there a conflict of interest between payments to the DNC, to the White House, and to the takeover of a Communist-controlled COSCO in Long Beach Naval Shipyard, a company again that shipped in AK-47's, a company that is owned by Communist China. Another company that actually made the arms, owned by Communist China. Another company that directs the sales of those and delivery of those arms owned by Communist China. All three corporations, their CEO is Communist China. And what future developments could we have by Communist China completely controlling and having access to Long Beach Naval Shipyard?"
Leland's case also involved AK-47's, gun running, arms running, and more. All also involved a Navy Ship Yard. This latest NASA case involves Joan Johnson-Freese, U.S. Naval War College and she is part of Space Security Framework with Secure World Foundation
http://swfound.org/events/2012/the-future-of-space-security-framing-the-development-of-tcbms-in-parallel-multilateral-fora/… She wrote a counter article on media articles surfacing Simon Pete Worden's involvement with possible leaked secrets? Is there a relation between the NASA scandal and this past explosive issue that Congress went after with Clinton in 1997? Hilary Clinton was in charge of the State Department USAID during this time, and they formed the USAID/NASA Launch Program? Was this strategic disruption similar to all the Global Spring movements too?
Have the Chinese penetrated our Democratic Senate and leaders? And pose future White House Presidency control, if Hilary Clinton indeed runs? Have they already highjacked the Senate Intelligence Committee Chair Dianne Feinstein via her Husband's business with them?
Navy involvement with Chinese mid 90's to now? Michael Krepon, director of South Asia and space security programs at the nonpartisan Stimson Center think tank
Michael Kepon co-authored paper with Julia Thomson at Stimson, who also worked with non other than John Logsdon: She works closely with Joan Johnson-Freeze who defended Pete Worden on a news article after Aviation Weekly put out the ARC ITAR Scandal. He works closely with Clay Moltz of NPS, Joan Johnson-Freese and Brian Weedon of Secure World Foundation. All surrounds Space Weapons: http://www.stimson.org/images/uploads/Anti-satellite_Weapons.pdf
Here is how they all connect: http://www.spacepolicyonline.com/events/u-s-china-space-cooperation-stimson-center-12-30-pm-et-dc
Here is Joan Johnson-Freese twitter bet on Worden from Aviation Article: https://twitter.com/JohnsonFreese/status/300033472993566720
She is on ISU Faculty: http://www.isunet.edu/latest-news/47-academics/faculty-and-lecturers/38-isu-faculty
She works for US Naval War College http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lh_SakoTRnU - Her expertise is Space Militarization and Global Security
Here is what she wrote about ISU and Pete Worden: http://itsnotmeright.com/tag/international-space-university/
http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/20/opinion/freese-china-space - Joan is part of the SWF Organization - http://swfound.org/about-us/our-advisory-committee/dr-joan-johnson-freese/
"The government of my country snubs honest simplicity, but fondles artistic villainy, and I think I might have developed into a very capable pickpocket if I had remained in the public service a year or two." -Mark Twain http://www.twainquotes.com/Government.html
- Roughing It
More indept detail at: http://intelcrosstheline.blogspot.com/2013/02/more-white-house-croynism-itar-scandal.html
So, after collecting all the open source information above, trying to piece this whole story together on how it all makes sense..
I first wonder if should first summerize Worden's OSI-Softpower statements to the blog http://www.warisboring.com/2007/04/04/space-warrior-part-one/, and speculate on whether this statement kind of ties together an interesting perspective? A goal of changing the World in one blow? Does it enlighten that maybe possibly that Obama's new Global Development Program, advised by a Open Society Leader (Soros funded) worked the Pentagon to back in Worden's OSI to work to help direct both financially awarded Google Anarchy works (Movement.org and Change the World crap) worked cleverly via Hilary Clinton (for Bill Clinton's Global agenda), which all started supporting Iran, Libya, and Egypt in the Middle East anarchy towards going viral, global, via United Nations Global Development Program, possibly entangling the State Department USAID (which Google Jared Cohen was in charge of with help of Eric Schmidt's influence in White House) ; and all the while working another angle with creating a big Space Tourism movement for reason of collaborating "Soft Power" space assets across the globe via International Space University (ISU) and United Nations founded organization the UN Space Generation Advisory Committee? Let's not forget to speculate on the child of ISU, the Secure World Foundation, and more that is UN focused as well? Maurice Strong has parlayed his personal enthusiasms and connections into a variety of huge U.N. projects, while punctuating his public service with private business deals. Is both Strong and Soros helping to spawn off some arrogant young experts trained by the trustees of the likes of International Space Univerity, founding a competition prize org., X-Prize run by Peter Diamandis, with Google joining and the Heinlein Prize directed by Art Dula whole was a major broker of Russian & Chinese weapons, and finally with the diligent push from those (including Dula, et al.) in the Rice University team in Houston TX usher in the Launch Program (NASA-USAID)? Everything seems to point to China's benefit and China's $$$$$, investments, and more?
Feintein's Firewall and note the hubby's Chinese Internet Biz: Diane Feinstein's husband has a lot of investment in China. http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Husband-invested-in-China-as-Feinstein-pushed-3051244.php
"companies headquartered in Hong Kong: Kerry Properties, a realty firm that is building highrise hotels and apartment complexes in China; and Asiacontent.com, which is establishing U.S.-style Web sites for Internet users in China. Another is IAsiaworks of San Mateo, which hopes to wire China for the Internet.
Three others are partly owned or founded by the government of China: Zhongxing Suntek Data Communications Corp., a joint venture involving one of China's leading telecom manufacturers; China Civilink Ltd., China's biggest dot-com; and North Dragon Iron & Steel Works, a Manchurian mining operation."
Well.. did they usher in a soft power of treason?... Possibly paid for by the combination of Isle of Man Commerce SOHO Trade and Banking Brokered deal, Maurice Strong, and Soros? http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/matthew-vadum/panicked-soros-bankrolls-obama-campaign/..
Chairman, Odyssey Moon Ltd - Founded by Bob Richards
Independent Director, SOHO China Limited
Chairman, Board of Trustee
The International Space University, Strasbourg, France
Ramin Khadem, formerly Chief Financial Officer of Inmarsat and executive Board member, is Chairman of Odyssey Moon Limited a company dedicated to creating a lunar enterprise business.
His other activities include chairmanship of the Board of Trustees of the International Space University in Strasbourg, France and serving as non-executive on the boards of a number of other enterprises. He serves as independent non executive director on the Board of SOHO China and acts as Chairman of its Audit Committee. SOHO China is a listed company on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange. He also serves on the Board of Mansat Ltd.
SOHO China - SOHO China Limited (SEHK: 0410), founded in 1995, is the largest prime office real-estate developer in China, with corporate headquarters in Chaowai SOHO in Chaoyang District. The company is incorporated in Cayman Islands. The founders are Pan Shiyi (潘石屹), a former Oil Ministry employee, and his wife Zhang Xin (张欣), a former Goldman Sachs employee. The couple ranked the 21st richest 'person' in China a Forbes ranking in 2012.
Did the White House and State Department really know about this SOHO China LTD. involvement? Is this were all those US housing interest go, that no one can afford?
Maurice Strong in the background of this? No better place to hide from American justice than China http://www.canadafreepress.com/2006/cover080206.htm Maurice Strong, born in Canada, lived in New York, and now exiled in China, but still the power behind Obama and the liberal House and Senate of America. To start to understand this man and his influence read his statement below to a group of reporters.
“In order to save the planet, the group [GIM] decides: Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring this about? This group of world leaders [GIM] forms a secret society to bring about an economic collapse.”
Maurice Strong - regarding Generation Investment Management LLP
Barrack Hussein Obama is the one out in front talking about “Change we can believe in”.
We already know from the Internet that Soros has gone a long way to bankroll Obama’s campaign.
And let's not forget that Obama's pick for Office of Science & Technology Policy, John Holdren want's a Planetary Regime. All I can say is "Wow", is this real??? We think we are getting cognitive dissonance.. this can't be real, right?