...White House "Rump Group" created the Vision...who were they???

We all know President Bush announced his Vision for
Space Exploration in early 2004. My question is who
came up with the idea? What was the pre-history of the
Vision that intends to guide our national space policy for
the next forty years or more?

All I have found so far follows...

"Surprisingly, much of the early work on the new policy was
made by a group of anonymous junior White House staffers
who, by the book's account, had a genuine interest in space
exploration and sought to create a new vision that would
reinvigorate the space agency. This "Splinter Group" spent
months meeting informally, reviewing white papers and
proposals, before inviting more senior advisers and, eventually,
NASA officials into the discussion. This led to the creation
of two "Rump Groups" that narrowed down proposals for a new
exploration plan, keeping in mind fiscal limitations that ruled out
any plan that required significant additional funding for NASA.
The result of these deliberations, spread out over most of
2003, was a plan the President approved on December 19
and announced to the world at NASA Headquarters
on January 14."
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/198/1


I would like to know who the ..."anonymous junior staffers"
of the 'Splinter Group' were. Who were the Nasa officials?
Who were the members of the 'Rump Group'?

Who put this idea into the head of our President?

I think we have a right to know, at the very least
we should know so we can gauge their competence
and independence of such entities as Lockheed etc.

Secrets are kept for a reason, generally bad reasons.
If the people here and at Nasa tend to defer to
authority, instead of thinking for themselves, we
should know who those authority figures are.


Jonathan


s

Jonathan wrote:
We all know President Bush announced his Vision for
Space Exploration in early 2004. My question is who
came up with the idea? What was the pre-history of the
Vision that intends to guide our national space policy for
the next forty years or more?

All I have found so far follows...

"Surprisingly, much of the early work on the new policy was
made by a group of anonymous junior White House staffers
who, by the book's account, had a genuine interest in space
exploration and sought to create a new vision that would
reinvigorate the space agency. This "Splinter Group" spent
months meeting informally, reviewing white papers and
proposals, before inviting more senior advisers and, eventually,
NASA officials into the discussion. This led to the creation
of two "Rump Groups" that narrowed down proposals for a new
exploration plan, keeping in mind fiscal limitations that ruled out
any plan that required significant additional funding for NASA.
The result of these deliberations, spread out over most of
2003, was a plan the President approved on December 19
and announced to the world at NASA Headquarters
on January 14."
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/198/1


I would like to know who the ..."anonymous junior staffers"
of the 'Splinter Group' were. Who were the Nasa officials?
Who were the members of the 'Rump Group'?

The Sphincter Group.

They couldn't sew it up, apparently.

--
The Tsiolkovsky Group : http://www.lifeform.org

My Planetary BLOB : http://cosmic.lifeform.org

Get A Free Orbiter Space Flight Simulator :

http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/orbit.html

On Mon, 15 Jan 2007 19:28:41 -0500, in a place far, far away,
"Jonathan" made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:


We all know President Bush announced his Vision for
Space Exploration in early 2004. My question is who
came up with the idea? What was the pre-history of the
Vision that intends to guide our national space policy for
the next forty years or more?

All I have found so far follows...

"Surprisingly, much of the early work on the new policy was
made by a group of anonymous junior White House staffers
who, by the book's account, had a genuine interest in space
exploration and sought to create a new vision that would
reinvigorate the space agency. This "Splinter Group" spent
months meeting informally, reviewing white papers and
proposals, before inviting more senior advisers and, eventually,
NASA officials into the discussion. This led to the creation
of two "Rump Groups" that narrowed down proposals for a new
exploration plan, keeping in mind fiscal limitations that ruled out
any plan that required significant additional funding for NASA.
The result of these deliberations, spread out over most of
2003, was a plan the President approved on December 19
and announced to the world at NASA Headquarters
on January 14."
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/198/1


I would like to know who the ..."anonymous junior staffers"
of the 'Splinter Group' were. Who were the Nasa officials?
Who were the members of the 'Rump Group'?

Who put this idea into the head of our President?

I think we have a right to know, at the very least
we should know so we can gauge their competence
and independence of such entities as Lockheed etc.

There is nothing in the VSE that intrinsically benefits Lockheed.
You're a conspiratorial idiot.

"Rand Simberg" wrote in message


There is nothing in the VSE that intrinsically benefits Lockheed.
You're a conspiratorial idiot.


You're kidding right? No company, except for maybe
Halliburton, has benefited from the war more
than Lockheed. A 'project' that seems to suffer
from the same difficulties in justification as
the Vision. Funny about that, it seems they
decide first, then come up with reasons ...later.

Now Lockheed takes over as the prime contractor
for the Vision. And even gets the much sought after
immigration security contract. When Bush was
governor of Texas, he even tried to get Lockheed to
take over the Welfare dept, of all things.


Lockheed Wins Contract to Build NASA's New Spaceship

By Renae Merle
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, September 1, 2006; Page A01

Lockheed Martin Corp. won a multibillion-dollar contract yesterday
to build a vehicle to replace NASA's space shuttles, put a
human on the moon for the first time since 1972 and be the
precursor to a manned spaceship to Mars.

It was a somewhat unexpected win for Lockheed, the Pentagon's
largest contractor. The other competitor, Northrop Grumman, was
considered the front-runner because along with its subcontractor,
Boeing Co., it has been involved with all of the country's manned
space programs. Lockheed also has had a long history with
NASA, though not entirely positive, and not predominantly
with manned vehicles.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...083101067.html




And more and more

Lockheed Team Ousts Sikorsky
for $6.1B Marine One Contract
Navy Official: 'No Political Influences" in Award
http://www.siteselection.com/ssinsid...t/sf050214.htm


Federal contracts up 86% under Bush; Halliburton rises 600%
Published: Monday June 19, 2006
Top contractor Lockheed got contracts larger than
budget of Congress, Dept. of Interior
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Re...nder_0619.html


Close Friend Of Bush At Center Of Coast Guard Contract Fiasco

Donald "Boysie" Bollinger, Chairman of the Board and Chief
Executive Officer of Bollinger Shipyards, "has been a friend of
George W. Bush for a quarter century." CQ Today reported in
2004 that "Bollinger has known Bush since 1980? and has
twice served as Bush's Louisiana campaign chair. In 2004,
Bollinger became a Bush "Super Ranger" after "bringing
in more than $300,000? for the campaign.

Bollinger Shipyards is part of an emerging scandal over the
costly Coast Guard fleet-building program. Four years ago, the
Coast Guard - "in an astonishing abdication of responsibility"
- handed off the $17 billion program to Lockheed Martin and
Northrop Grumman "to plan, supervise and deliver the new
vessels and helicopters." (The program is now "foundering" as
the estimated cost of the program has ballooned to $24 billion.
Continuing problems have "delayed the arrival of any
new ships or aircraft.")
Bollinger Shipyards is a business partner of the two military
contracting giants
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/12/15/bollinger-bush/

Making Money on Terrorism
William D. Hartung

In fiscal year 2002, the Big Three received a total of more
than $42 billion in Pentagon contracts, of which Lockheed Martin
got $17 billion,
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20040223/hartung




It's called corruption.

On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 23:13:02 -0500, in a place far, far away,
"Jonathan" made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:


"Rand Simberg" wrote in message


There is nothing in the VSE that intrinsically benefits Lockheed.
You're a conspiratorial idiot.


You're kidding right? No company, except for maybe
Halliburton, has benefited from the war more
than Lockheed.

You're kidding, right? The VSE has nothing to do with the war.

A 'project' that seems to suffer
from the same difficulties in justification as
the Vision. Funny about that, it seems they
decide first, then come up with reasons ...later.

Now Lockheed takes over as the prime contractor
for the Vision.

irrelevant new stories about Lockheed snipped

I guess you don't know what the word "intrinsically" means. Go invest
in a dictionary. Or learn how to look stuff up on line.

"Rand Simberg" wrote in message
...

Now Lockheed takes over as the prime contractor
for the Vision.

irrelevant new stories about Lockheed snipped

I guess you don't know what the word "intrinsically" means. Go invest
in a dictionary. Or learn how to look stuff up on line.


Yet again I must completely destroy your response.
And it's so easy.

Look at the 10 y chart of Lockheed. It has two clear
turning points. The first one is the ...minute...Bush takes
office...it tripled. The second is the ...minute...Bush
announced the Vision in Feb 04....it doubled.

The market clearly understands the /intrinsic/ value of
Lockheed when associated with Bush and Nasa.

Look at the facts....
http://bigcharts.marke****ch.com/qui...eq=2&ti me=13


And while you're at it, scroll down and look at the news
stories for Lockheed from only...yesterday. I count $1.3 billion
in contracts Lockheed signed....yesterday.

Sheez, I don't even have to look for this stuff, it just
pops up everywhere.

And if you still don't get it, take a look at how the
feeding frenzy works from this Lockheed story
also from .....yesterday.

This is just ..it's...it's...infamous!



US Rep. expects Congress to add extra ships to defense budget

WASHINGTON (Marke****ch) -- U.S. Rep. Gene Taylor, D-Miss.,
said Wednesday that lawmakers will try to add extra ships to
the Navy budget, in addition to whatever the Pentagon requests.

Taylor told Dow Jones Newswires that President George W. Bush
isn't fully focused on military needs as the White House prepares
its 2008 budget proposal. As a result, Congress ought to use earmarks
or other tools to step in, he said.

"We have to find a way to put more ships in the budget
than the President's requesting,"
"Remember, the President's request is more based on dollars
than the needs of the nation"

~ohmygosh ...Bush isn't focused on military needs...but on dollars.....gawd~

http://www.marke****ch.com/news/stor...MT&si d=14274




s

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 09:05:14 -0500, in a place far, far away,
"Jonathan" made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:


"Rand Simberg" wrote in message
...

Now Lockheed takes over as the prime contractor
for the Vision.

irrelevant new stories about Lockheed snipped

I guess you don't know what the word "intrinsically" means. Go invest
in a dictionary. Or learn how to look stuff up on line.


Yet again I must completely destroy your response.
And it's so easy.

laughing uproariously

Look at the 10 y chart of Lockheed. It has two clear
turning points. The first one is the ...minute...Bush takes
office...it tripled. The second is the ...minute...Bush
announced the Vision in Feb 04....it doubled.

And what happened to other space stocks, like Boeing? There's nothing
unique about Lockheed Martin. And we're still waiting for, you know,
*evidence* for your tinfoil hat theory that the president consulted
with LM before announcing VSE, and that this influenced the
announcement.

Rand Simberg wrote:
On Mon, 15 Jan 2007 19:28:41 -0500, in a place far, far away,
"Jonathan" made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:


We all know President Bush announced his Vision for
Space Exploration in early 2004. My question is who
came up with the idea? What was the pre-history of the
Vision that intends to guide our national space policy for
the next forty years or more?

All I have found so far follows...

"Surprisingly, much of the early work on the new policy was
made by a group of anonymous junior White House staffers
who, by the book's account, had a genuine interest in space
exploration and sought to create a new vision that would
reinvigorate the space agency. This "Splinter Group" spent
months meeting informally, reviewing white papers and
proposals, before inviting more senior advisers and, eventually,
NASA officials into the discussion. This led to the creation
of two "Rump Groups" that narrowed down proposals for a new
exploration plan, keeping in mind fiscal limitations that ruled out
any plan that required significant additional funding for NASA.
The result of these deliberations, spread out over most of
2003, was a plan the President approved on December 19
and announced to the world at NASA Headquarters
on January 14."
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/198/1


I would like to know who the ..."anonymous junior staffers"
of the 'Splinter Group' were. Who were the Nasa officials?
Who were the members of the 'Rump Group'?

Who put this idea into the head of our President?

I think we have a right to know, at the very least
we should know so we can gauge their competence
and independence of such entities as Lockheed etc.

There is nothing in the VSE that intrinsically benefits Lockheed.
You're a conspiratorial idiot.

That is well- known. Since Lockeed merely specializes
in stealing Department Of Transportation Crap.

And y'all think this is about going to the moon.


Executive Order: President's Commission on Implementation of
United States Space Exploration Policy

Sec. 3. Mission. (a) The mission of the Commission shall be to
provide recommendations to the President, in accordance with
this order, on implementation of the vision outlined in the
President's policy statement entitled "A Renewed Spirit of Discovery"
and the Presidents Budget Submission for Fiscal Year 2005
(collectively, "Policy").

(b) The Commission shall examine and make recommendations
to the President regarding:

(i) A science research agenda to be conducted on the Moon and
other destinations as well as human and robotic science
activities that advance our capacity to achieve the Policy;

(ii) The exploration of technologies, demonstrations, and
strategies, including the use of lunar and other in situ
natural resources, that could be used for sustainable human and
robotic exploration;

(iii) Criteria that could be used to select future
destinations for human exploration;
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0040130-7.html



President's Commission on Implementation of United States
Space Exploration Policy

Chairman

Edward C. Aldridge Jr.

has served in many top U.S. Defense Department and defense
industry jobs, including as the 16th Air Force secretary
from June 1986 until 1988.

From 1988 to 1992, he was president of the Electronic Systems
Company division of McDonnell Douglas, and later became
CEO of The Aerospace Corporation.

Aldridge was confirmed as the Pentagon's top weapons buyer ***
on May 8, 2001. As the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition,
Technology, and Logistics, he had responsibility for acquisition,
research and development, logistics, advanced technology,
international programs, environmental security, nuclear,
chemical, and biological programs, and the industrial base.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preside...oration_Policy




Guys just face it, the Defense Dept, and especially the
defense contractors, own Nasa, they own our space
policy and they are lining their pockets while
stealing our future.


s

Jonathan wrote:
And y'all think this is about going to the moon.


Executive Order: President's Commission on Implementation of
United States Space Exploration Policy

Sec. 3. Mission. (a) The mission of the Commission shall be to
provide recommendations to the President, in accordance with
this order, on implementation of the vision outlined in the
President's policy statement entitled "A Renewed Spirit of Discovery"
and the Presidents Budget Submission for Fiscal Year 2005
(collectively, "Policy").

(b) The Commission shall examine and make recommendations
to the President regarding:

(i) A science research agenda to be conducted on the Moon and
other destinations as well as human and robotic science
activities that advance our capacity to achieve the Policy;

(ii) The exploration of technologies, demonstrations, and
strategies, including the use of lunar and other in situ
natural resources, that could be used for sustainable human and
robotic exploration;

(iii) Criteria that could be used to select future
destinations for human exploration;
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0040130-7.html



President's Commission on Implementation of United States
Space Exploration Policy

Chairman

Edward C. Aldridge Jr.

has served in many top U.S. Defense Department and defense
industry jobs, including as the 16th Air Force secretary
from June 1986 until 1988.

From 1988 to 1992, he was president of the Electronic Systems
Company division of McDonnell Douglas, and later became
CEO of The Aerospace Corporation.

Aldridge was confirmed as the Pentagon's top weapons buyer ***
on May 8, 2001. As the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition,
Technology, and Logistics, he had responsibility for acquisition,
research and development, logistics, advanced technology,
international programs, environmental security, nuclear,
chemical, and biological programs, and the industrial base.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preside...oration_Policy




Guys just face it, the Defense Dept, and especially the
defense contractors, own Nasa, they own our space
policy and they are lining their pockets while
stealing our future.

I tend to agree with your well researched assessment.

I've never been much of a conspiracy theorist, but it appears to me NASA
simply does not want to facilitate the shift of manned space flight to
the private sector, nor do they appear to desire any civilian
colonization of space.

Just the throwaway design of the Ares demonstrates that, where you have
high energy core stages which cannot make it to orbit to be reused,
because they are carrying these tremendously heavy interplanetary
missions. Just switching to EELV TSTO or stage and a half will result in
the delivery of many core stages, upper stages and engines to LEO, where
any manner of craft and hotel resorts may be cobbled together by design.

NASA wants to explore with the big rockets, others want to sell seats.

NASA just needs to concentrate on the big rockets and Earth.

All that exploration stuff will come on its own time.

--
The Tsiolkovsky Group : http://www.lifeform.org

My Planetary BLOB : http://cosmic.lifeform.org

Get A Free Orbiter Space Flight Simulator :

http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/orbit.html