NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/sci/physics/21838

Internet Message Format | 1992-12-29 | 6.8 KB

Xref: sparky sci.physics:21838 sci.skeptic:21787 alt.conspiracy:13495 alt.paranormal:2713 alt.alien.visitors:9452
Newsgroups: sci.physics,alt.sci.physics,sci.skeptic,alt.conspiracy,alt.paranormal,alt.alien.visitors
Path: sparky!uunet!well!sarfatti
From: [e-mail] (Jack Sarfatti)
Subject: The Sarfatti Papers 5
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 07:05:45 GMT
Lines: 127


Memorandum for the Record
Reprinted from Moscow, Russia News Magazine
ARGUMENTS AND FACTS INTERNATIONAL
Sept-Oct. 1992

SECOND THOUGHTS

While the much-ballyhooed Mikhail Gorbachev Foundation has carried out an
on-going media campaign to establish itself as a global think-tank, a clash
of cultures has emerged between Gorbachev and his US associates on one
side, ans on the other, a number of long-serving anti-Communist scholars
and policy experts at the Stanford-based Hoover Institute.

During this Spring's US tour, Gorbachev reportedly raised millions of
dollars for his foundation.  Now, the activities of the organisation and of
its US branch, The Gorbachev Foundation USA, are coming under scrutiny by
members of the California policy community that originally seemed to
support its creation.

PROJECTING FALSE IMAGES
'The Gorbachev Foundation is the propagation of a falsehood,' declared
Angelo Codevilla, a seven-year Hoover veteran, formerly with the US Senate
Intelligence Committee. 'They are giving the American public the impression
that the Cold War ended and the Communist regime fell because of Gorbachev
and his American friends, when he and they actually did everything possible
to keep the system going.

Codevilla described the Gorbachev Foundation as 'prtraying the end of the
Cold War as the product of meetings between US and Russian elite figures,
like-minded types who just decided it wasn't worth it anymore, when
Communism fell because of Russians in the street, not the elite.'

'Gorbachev is a superstar, and some people may be using him for their own
motives,' said John Dunlap, a nine-year Hoover senior fellow and expert on
Russian ethnic issues. 'I think Gorbachev's Western friends are sincere,
and that there is an objective basis for the adulation directed to him.  He
is perceived as the man who greatly reduced the danger of a nuclear
exchange, and therefore as a man of peace.'

But Dunlap continued, 'The irony is that Gorbachev continues to enjoy this
enormous esteem in the West while in his own country he is extremely
unpopular.  I think it's clear that the purpose of the Gorbachev Foundation
is not only to promote Gorbachev but also to promote the platform he stands
for, which is one of renewed socialism and the re-establishment of the
former Soviet Union.  I believe he remains a Marxist-Leninist, and that he
has yet to acquiesce in the formation of the Commonweathe of Independent
States.  These are the views promoted by the Foundation.'

PLAYING A DANGEROUS GAME
"Why isn't there a Yeltsin Foundation?' Dunlap asked. 'This is the man who
stands closest to the fundamental beliefs that we American adhere to -
pluralism, multiparty democracy, and a market economy in a Westward-looking
Russia.  Gorbachev is a man of the past.  He's a reform Communist in the
post-Communist age.  What's the point of a Gorbachev Foundation?'

'Gorbachev should be playing the role of an elder statesman, rather than
indulging himself in the delusion that, like Charles de Gaulle, he will be
recalled to power.  He is definitely playing a very dangerous game in his
attacks on Yeltsin,' Dunlap said.

The US branch of the Foundation - Gorbachev Foundation USA - based in San
Francisco, has received considerable media attention and anticipated large
donations thanks to support from individuals such as George Schultz, former
Secretary of State.

In addition to Shultz, the group claims the endorsement of no less than
Ronald Reagan, although some associates of the Foundation have continued to
attack Reagan and his policies.

'I just don't think Shultz really understands what's going on,' commented
another Hoover personality, who requested anonymity.

Prominent figures at Hoover have also criticised the involvement in the
Gorbachev Foundation of figures from California's 'new age' subculture,
symbolized by Foundation director Jim Garrison.

Garrison was a founder of the Christic Institute, which has been fined $1.7
million for filing a 'frivolous' lawsuit against the US government, and was
a long-time functionary of the 'hot-tub' Esalen Institute.

ALIEN SUBVERSION INFLUENCES?
The Foundation's 'new age' posture has led to an involvement with
individuals like Professor John Mack, a tenured faculty member in
psychiatry at the Harvard Medical School.

Mack, who acted as moderator at a recent San Francisco seminar on 'Esalen
Diplomacy with the Soviets, 1979-1992,' has publically affirmed his belief
that a 'huge, strange interspecies or interbeing breeding program has
invaded our physical reality and is affecting the lives of hundreds of
thousands, if not millions of people, and perhaps in some way the
consciousness of the entire planet.'

Mack claims this subversive plan is behind stories of UFO 'abductions' of
innocent Earthlings, and he told one observer at the San Francisco seminar,
physicist Jack Sarfatti, that people in 'the UFO community' beleive
Gorbachev himself had a 'contact experience with a UFO.'

Mack has been publically accused by nuclear physicist and Star Wars'
advocate Edward Teller of promoting a KGB campaign to unermine US science
and defence research.

In the view of Garrison, the Murphy's, and their cohorts, the 'new age'
approach was not only a motive force of Soviet change, its strategy was
successful because it was specifically counterposed to the tough policy
followed under Reagan.  That is, the hot tubbers 'kept the faith' and
defied the Reagan line of limited contacts with the Soviet regime, and
glasnost succeeded because the hot tub 'diplomats' were unafrid to
'embrace' the KGB.

'I am not at all surprised that Garrison would have a background with
something like the Christic Institute,' said Codevilla, 'But it is all the
more surprising to see establishment thinkers associating themselves with
such an enterprise as the Gorbachev Foundation.'

At the time of Gorbachev's most recent visit, there were already some bad
omens for the project.  They included a repudiation of the effort by Henry
Kissinger, whose name was listed as a sponsor of the tour, but who
reportedly said he knew nothing about it, except that he offered to hold a
small breakfast event.

The came a resignation from the sponsor's list by Ambassador Arthur
Hartman, the top US diplomat in Moscow during much of the early glasnost
period.  Hartman, who is well acquainted with the movers and shakers in the
Foundation, as well as Gorbachev himself, refused to support a money-
raising effort without guarantees as to how the funds would be used.