From: owner-skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com (skunk-works-digest) To: skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com Subject: skunk-works-digest V8 #110 Reply-To: skunk-works@netwrx1.com Sender: owner-skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com Errors-To: owner-skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com Precedence: bulk skunk-works-digest Thursday, November 4 1999 Volume 08 : Number 110 Index of this digest by subject: *************************************************** F-117 shot down in Kosovo Laugh of the day... Re: F-117 shot down in Kosovo We need Home Workers! U-2 flight, safety stats Re: F-117 shot down in Kosovo Re: F-117 shot down in Kosovo Re: Laugh of the day... B-2 pix Re: F-117 Color URGENT Request Re: URGENT Request Re: F-117 Color Re: F-117 Color Re: URGENT Request Lockheed NF-104 book 1966 Bolivian U-2 Crash F-22 001 100th mission... 200 % better Re: It's here, just in time for X-mas, Guaranteed Credit Cards!!! *************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 18:04:17 -0400 From: "James P. Stevenson" Subject: F-117 shot down in Kosovo I keep hearing about a second F-117 shot down in Kosovo. I spoke with one person who had it from two different source: (1) a mother of a pilot in the squadron and (2) from some Russians who were in Serbia. This second F-117 was not the one that got shot up and limped home. Anyone have anything one way or the other? Jim Stevenson ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 15:21:57 -0700 From: "Corey Lawson" Subject: Laugh of the day... >Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 19:09:30 -0700 >From: Dan Zinngrabe >Subject: Re: Bio/Chem weapons >>Not totally Skunkworks related (well not at all related really) but a B-52 >>weapons guy told me this summer that one of the reasons the B-52 is still >>heavily funded as it is, is because its still the only bomber in the >>American fleet thats qualified for sea mines, chemical and biological >The US does not have chemical or biological weapons in it's >inventory- thus if US forces are attacked with antrax, etc. the >standard response to to counter with the only weapons of mass >destruction available to US forces- nukes. buahahaha. We still have lots of warehoused chem & possibly bio weapons. OK, so we're *slowly* destroying a lot of them, there is still quite an amount of them sitting around at Umatilla Depot & other places. The destruction programs are "eye candy" to make good politics. We'll still keep a few up our sleeves... Plus, we have the production facilities making lots of consumer-grade neurotoxins, er, pesticides, right now, but mostly for export to agriculture outside the US... It wouldn't seem to be outside the realm of possibility for the chemical engineers at Ortho, Dow, Monsanto, et al. to just flip a switch, as it were, to start pumping out VX instead of malathion... Too bad the Military-Industrial Complex never figured out a consumer version of the Tomahawk cruise missile, maybe as an advertising sign tug. Maybe if Sony, Toshiba & Matsushita were making them down here in Tijuana we wouldn't be going through the grief of running out of them. >weapons and other "special" weapons. Are there any plans to migrate these >munitions to other bomber platforms? My view is that its a politically sore >area because migration would show political commitment to weapons the public >hate, however retiring the B-52 would leave a gap in the weapons arena. > >Gavin > > >IIRC the mine laying role is being moved to the B-1 and possibly the >B-2. And there's always subs for laying Captor mines. >Dan Hmm... you sure this mission has not been tasked to the F18E/F program? Why not, everything else seems like it has been in NavAir. Next thing boeing will announce for it will be a COD package for it, a mini DSS-like dish for it to replace E-2's, etc... - ----------------------------- Corey Lawson clawson@ucsd.edu ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 23 Oct 99 00:47:34 GMT From: betnal@ns.net Subject: Re: F-117 shot down in Kosovo On 10/22/99 3:04PM, in message , "James P. Stevenson" wrote: > I keep hearing about a second F-117 shot down in Kosovo. > > I spoke with one person who had it from two different source: (1) a mother > of a pilot in the squadron and (2) from some Russians who were in Serbia. > > This second F-117 was not the one that got shot up and limped home. > > Anyone have anything one way or the other? > > Jim Stevenson > The info I have heard, which has also appeared in Avweek is that the second a/c shot down was an F-16. Art ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 02:40:18 From: mohwoc@att.com Subject: We need Home Workers! Dear Future Associate, You Can Work At Home & Set Your Own Hours. Start earning Big Money in a short time NO Newspaper Advertising! Your job will be to stuff and mail envelopes for our company. You will receive $.25 for each and every envelope you stuff and mail out. Just follow our simple instructions and you will be making money as easy as 1… 2… 3 For example stuff and mail 200 envelopes and you will receive $50.00. Stuff and mail 1000 and you will receive $250.00. Stuff and mail 2000 and you will receive $500.00 and more Never before has there been an easier way to make money from home! Our Company's Home Mailing Program is designed for people with little or no experience and provides simple, step by step instructions. There is no prior experience or special skills necessary on your part, Just stuffing envelopes. We need the help of honest and reliable home workers like you. Because we are overloaded with work and have more than our staff can handle. We have now expanded our mailing program and are expecting to reach millions more with our offers throughout the US and Canada. Our system of stuffing and mailing envelopes is very simple and easy to do! You will not be required to buy envelopes or postage stamps. We will gladly furnish all circulars at no cost to you. We assure you that as a participant in our program you will never have to mail anything objective or offensive. There are no quotas to meet, and there no contracts to sign. You can work as much, or as little as you want. Payment for each envelope you send out is Guaranteed! Here is what you will receive when you get your first Package. Inside you will find 100 envelopes, 100 labels and 100 sales letters ready to stuff and mail As soon as you are done with stuffing and mailing these first letters, your payment will arrive shortly, thereafter. All you have to do is to order more free supplies and stuff and mail more envelopes to make more money. Our sales literature which you will be stuffing and mailing will contain information outlining our highly informative manuals that we are advertising nationwide. As a free gift you will receive a special manual valued at $24.95, absolutely free, just for joining our Home Mailers Program. Plus you will get your own special code number, so that we will know how much you are to get paid. And to make re-ordering of more envelopes, that our company supplies very simple for you. We are giving you this free bonus because we want you to be confident in our company and to ensure that we will be doing business with you for a long time. Benefits Of This Job: 1. You do not have to quit your present job, to earn more money at home 2. You can make between $2,500 to $4,500 a month depending on the amount of time you are willing to spend stuffing and mailing envelopes 3. This is a great opportunity for the students, mothers, disabled persons or those who are home bodies. To secure your position and to show us that you are serious about earning extra income at home we require a one-time registration fee of $35.00. This fee covers the cost of your initial start up package, which includes 100 envelopes, 100 labels and 100 sales letters and a manual, your registration fee will be refunded back to you shortly thereafter. Money Back Guarantee! We guarantee that as soon as you stuff and mail your first 300 envelopes You will be paid $75.00 and your registration fee will be refunded. Many of you wonder why it is necessary to pay a deposit to get a job. It is because we are looking for people that seriously want to work from home. * If 3.000 people told us they wanted to start working from home and we sent out 3.000 packages free to every one. And then half of the people decided not to work, this would be a potential loss of more than $60,000 in supply's and shipping that we have sent out to people that don't want to work We have instituted this policy to make sure that you really want to work and at least finish your first package. To Get Started Today Please Enclose Your Registration Fee of $35 Check Or Money Order and fill out the application below and mail to: MOHW Co PMB 11054 Ventura Blvd #126 Studio City, CA 91604 Name_____________________________________________________ Address___________________________________________________ City____________________________________ State______________ Zip Code________________ Telephone Number(s)_________________________________________ E-mail Address______________________________________________ For all orders, please allow seven (7) days for delivery and up to 10 days. Money Orders will result in faster shipping of your package. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 10:15:39 -0500 From: "Allen Thomson" Subject: U-2 flight, safety stats Probably this is old news to the folks here, but if not... http://www-afsc.saia.af.mil/AFSC/RDBMS/Flight/stats/u2mds.html ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 12:35:14 -0400 From: "James P. Stevenson" Subject: Re: F-117 shot down in Kosovo on 10/22/99 8:47 PM, betnal@ns.net at betnal@ns.net wrote: > On 10/22/99 3:04PM, in message , > "James P. Stevenson" wrote: > >> I keep hearing about a second F-117 shot down in Kosovo. >> >> I spoke with one person who had it from two different source: (1) a mother >> of a pilot in the squadron and (2) from some Russians who were in Serbia. >> >> This second F-117 was not the one that got shot up and limped home. >> >> Anyone have anything one way or the other? >> >> Jim Stevenson >> > > > The info I have heard, which has also appeared in Avweek is that the second > a/c shot down was an F-16. > > > Art > > Yes, I heard that as well. But I have a serious and credible source who claims that a second F-117 was shot down. What makes this all the more interesting is the response from an Air Force general. When a journalist friend was interviewing him about the one F-117 that the Air Force acknowledges, he asked him about the one that got shot up but limped back to base. The Air Force general said, "I'm not going to talk about it." It seems odd that he would speak somewhat freely about a kill but clam up about one that made it home. Jim ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 23 Oct 99 19:49:55 GMT From: betnal@ns.net Subject: Re: F-117 shot down in Kosovo On 10/23/99 9:35AM, in message , "James P. Stevenson" wrote: > > > Yes, I heard that as well. But I have a serious and credible source who > claims that a second F-117 was shot down. > > What makes this all the more interesting is the response from an Air Force > general. When a journalist friend was interviewing him about the one F-117 > that the Air Force acknowledges, he asked him about the one that got shot up > but limped back to base. The Air Force general said, "I'm not going to talk > about it." > > It seems odd that he would speak somewhat freely about a kill but clam up > about one that made it home. > > Jim > Ah, if we only still had the Battleships! Art ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 23 Oct 99 20:07:22 GMT From: betnal@ns.net Subject: Re: Laugh of the day... On 10/22/99 3:21PM, in message <014c01bf1cdb$daf35960$dee5ef84@clawson.ucsd.edu>, "Corey Lawson" wrote: > buahahaha. We still have lots of warehoused chem & possibly bio weapons. > OK, so we're *slowly* destroying a lot of them, there is still quite an > amount of them sitting around at Umatilla Depot & other places. One of the problems is that while everyone wants them destroyed, everyone also wants them destroyed using some other method than whatever was selected and somewhere else than wherever they plan to do it. The lawsuits fly freely on this, as well as whereewhere evertransit through on their way to be destroyed. > The > destruction programs are "eye candy" to make good politics. I know for a fact that hundreds of millions od dollars have been spent to build brand new facilities that are doing nothing but destroying these puppies. > We'll still > keep a few up our sleeves... No doubt we will, but probably only enough for a quick emergency. Thing is, these things, like nukes, deteriorate over time. > Plus, we have the production facilities making lots of consumer-grade > neurotoxins, er, pesticides, right now, but mostly for export to agriculture > outside the US... It wouldn't seem to be outside the realm of possibility > for the chemical engineers at Ortho, Dow, Monsanto, et al. to just flip a > switch, as it were, to start pumping out VX instead of malathion... It's not that easy, although it's theoretically possible. You can actually produce a lot of them in ice cream factories if you want to. In fact, the use of these agents is part of the defense plan of a number of Nordic countries. One thing playing in to this is that since we unilaterally stopped testing nuclear weapons, we don't have a real good handle on the state of our warheads, whether they're going to react as we think they will or whether what we're designing will even work. > Too bad > the Military-Industrial Complex never figured out a consumer version of the > Tomahawk cruise missile, maybe as an advertising sign tug. Maybe if Sony, > Toshiba & Matsushita were making them down here in Tijuana we wouldn't be > going through the grief of running out of them. Depends on how many times you need to divert the press' attention. > > > > > > >IIRC the mine laying role is being moved to the B-1 and possibly the > >B-2. And there's always subs for laying Captor mines. > > >Dan > > Hmm... you sure this mission has not been tasked to the F18E/F program? Why > not, everything else seems like it has been in NavAir. Next thing boeing > will announce for it will be a COD package for it, a mini DSS-like dish for > it to replace E-2's, etc... > No, first there's ASW, then troop transport (one at a time), ballistic missile launch, SEAL team insertion (one at a time) and taxiing around with the Naval Academy Band standing on its wings. They've still got some bugs to work out for the VERTREP role, but the Skunk Works is feverishly engaged in producing a prototype of a marinized, stealthy 200 foot catcher's mitt. Art ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 15:51:37 -0500 From: "Allen Thomson" Subject: B-2 pix Interesting pictures-of-opportunity of a B-2 at low altitude and moderate range -- good examples of what pictures of real Funny-Looking Objects look like: http://home.att.net/~janjeff/localb2pic.htm ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 24 Oct 1999 00:29:10 -0700 (PDT) From: Wei-Jen Su Subject: Re: F-117 Color On Thu, 21 Oct 1999, Gunman and Jacks wrote: > I recall reading someplace (maybe on the list), that the original color > scheme for the F-117 was different shades of gray, to give it daylight > stealth ability (ie not as easy to pick out against a blue or white sky). > But, for some reason, the color scheme was changed to black. > > Is there a website, or someplace that documents this? and explains why the > color change? Since no one answer this message yet, but I am sure a lot of people in this list know a lot more than me in this topic, I will try to answer it. I read somewhere that Ben Rich mention the best color for camuflage is some type of light pink color. But, some generals complained that we don't want any stealth airplane with that color, we want it black... It is interesting to mention that remember I told you I got a pretty good picture shot of the SR-71 flying at 80,000 ft. and Mach 3.2 using my 300 mm. zoom camera? Well, from that picture you can see the shape of the SR-71, but it looks light gray instead of black :) Anyone can explain this? May the Force be with you Wei-Jen Su E-mail: wsu@cco.caltech.edu - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ "Here were gulls who thought as he thought, for each of them, the most important thing in living was to reach out and touch perfection in that which they most loved to do, and that was to fly." Richard Bach (Jonathan Livingston Seagull) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 10:27:10 -0500 From: "Robert S. Hopkins, III, PhD" Subject: URGENT Request Colleagues, Forgive the short-notice nature of this request. I have been asked to account for the recent cancellation of a UAV program. I don't have access to my stockpile of AvLeak and my memory doesn't work in "Instant Recall" mode for UAVs (pilot that I am). Can anyone quickly help me? What program? When? Why? Or is this all merely the contents of an old in-flight box lunch? Thanks DrBob ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 11:42:19 -0400 From: Joe Donoghue Subject: Re: URGENT Request At 10:27 AM 10/25/99 -0500, you wrote: >Colleagues, > >Forgive the short-notice nature of this request. > >I have been asked to account for the recent cancellation of a UAV >program. I don't have access to my stockpile of AvLeak and my memory >doesn't work in "Instant Recall" mode for UAVs (pilot that I am). > >Can anyone quickly help me? What program? When? Why? Or is this all >merely the contents of an old in-flight box lunch? > >Thanks > >DrBob Darkspot, I mean Darkstar? That's the only one I can think of that has been cancelled recently (Within this calendar year, I think.) I don't pay much attention to the darned things either. I think it was too small to do the job they wanted it to do and that was given as the reason (or one of the reasons) for cancellation. Joe Donoghue ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 12:11:44 -0700 From: Larry Smith Subject: Re: F-117 Color Gunman and Jacks wrote: >> I recall reading someplace (maybe on the list), that the original color >> scheme for the F-117 was different shades of gray, to give it daylight >> stealth ability (ie not as easy to pick out against a blue or white sky). >> But, for some reason, the color scheme was changed to black. Wei-Jen Su replies: > Since no one answer this message yet, but I am sure a lot of >people in this list know a lot more than me in this topic, I will try to >answer it. I read somewhere that Ben Rich mention the best color for >camuflage is some type of light pink color. But, some generals complained >that we don't want any stealth airplane with that color, we want it >black... I think you're confusing the original pink color of the X-15A-2's thermal coating with a statement on a F-117A Wings video by Lockheed's Alan Brown, about the best color for night operations not being black, but a pastel color. Also, the published photos of HAVE BLUE show a camo pattern which would be useful in hiding from fighters looking down from above. > It is interesting to mention that remember I told you I got a >pretty good picture shot of the SR-71 flying at 80,000 ft. and Mach 3.2 >using my 300 mm. zoom camera? Well, from that picture you can see the >shape of the SR-71, but it looks light gray instead of black :) Anyone can >explain this? It's pretty simple actually. What is between the SR and your camera? How bright is it on a sunny day? What mixes with black to get grey? Larry ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 15:36:04 -0500 From: "Tom C Robison" Subject: Re: F-117 Color Larry wrote: "I think you're confusing the original pink color of the X-15A-2's thermal coating with a statement on a F-117A Wings video by Lockheed's Alan Brown, about the best color for night operations not being black, but a pastel color. Also, the published photos of HAVE BLUE show a camo pattern which would be useful in hiding from fighters looking down from above." I remember reading somewhere also, that Lockheed recommended multi-colored camo pattern that was predominantly a "dusky rose" color. An artists rendering made the aircraft look pink, and of course AF said 'we ain't flyin' no pink airplanes" or words to that effect. Lockheed warned against a dead-black finish, but AF knows best, of course. This story was either in Kelly Johnson's book or Ben Rich's book. Can't remember which. Tom ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 14:56:29 -0500 From: "Robert S. Hopkins, III, PhD" Subject: Re: URGENT Request Hej! Thanks for the update. This is exactly what I was looking for, and it couldn't have arrived at a better time. Maybe I should have had less fun in the '60s---my memory would be better today. Again, my sincere thanks for your helpful reply. DrBob >At 10:27 AM 10/25/99 -0500, you wrote: > >Colleagues, > > > >Forgive the short-notice nature of this request. > > > >I have been asked to account for the recent cancellation of a UAV > >program. I don't have access to my stockpile of AvLeak and my memory > >doesn't work in "Instant Recall" mode for UAVs (pilot that I am). > > > >Can anyone quickly help me? What program? When? Why? Or is this all > >merely the contents of an old in-flight box lunch? > > > >Thanks > > > >DrBob >Darkspot, I mean Darkstar? That's the only one I can think of that has been >cancelled recently (Within this calendar year, I think.) I don't pay much >attention to the darned things either. I think it was too small to do the >job they wanted it to do and that was given as the reason (or one of the >reasons) for cancellation. > >Joe Donoghue ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 09:09:21 -0500 From: G&G Subject: Lockheed NF-104 book I'm passing this on from a posting in r.a.m. : > > Subject: Lockheed NF-104 book and web site > Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 06:14:01 -0700 > From: planeguy@hughes.net (Tony) > Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military > > For all who are interested, there is a new book about to be released on > the NF-104A Aerospace Trainer. This is another in Steve Ginter's Air Force > Legends series and from what I have seen it looks to be another winner. > The expected release date is currently scheduled for early December but if > things go well it may be sooner. For a brief glimpse of what the book > contains check out the web site at: > > http://fp3.hughes.net/~fotodude/images/nf1041.html > > Tony - -- %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% %% %% %% Reality is for People Who %% %% Can't Handle Simulation %% %% %% %% habu@airmail.net %% %% habu@cyberramp.net %% %% srcrown@flash.net %% %% gdfieser@hti.com %% %% %% %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 20:23:12 -0400 (EDT) From: George Tucker Subject: 1966 Bolivian U-2 Crash Picked up Frank Edwards' old book on UFO's for a dime last weekend titled Flying Saucers Here and Now. He mentioned a U-2 crash on July 29, 1966 in Bolivia. Was very similar to the Lear accident in that the pilot seemed to have lost consciousness and continued on past Cuba till it crashed. I check online and it was #6712. The reason Edwards mentioned it was that radar at the Air Rescue Center in the Canal Zone (according to a release from the Southern Command Headquarters) spotted an unidentified object approaching the U-2. Of course Edwards assumes it was a flying saucer, but he got me thinking. Is it possible some aircraft was sent up to check out the situtation as was done with the Lear? If so what could it have been and where could it have been based? Or am I way off base here and it is impossible another U-2 or YF-12 could have scrambled on such short notice. I assume that no YF-12's were based near Cuba and that the YF-12 would not have been able to fly at anything like the U-2 air speed. I am only a casual mil aviation fan so forgive what may be a silly notion. PS. I did get to share the hanger with ER-2 and X-34 this spring and that was quite a treat. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 23:30:19 +0000 From: John Szalay Subject: F-22 001 100th mission... Notice any thing strange on the left rudder of 001 in this image ? http://www.af.mil/news/Nov1999/n19991103_992031.html :) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 19:05:20 -0500 From: "Joan" Subject: 200 % better *** URGENT *** ACCEPT CREDIT CARDS FOR YOUR BUSINESS AND INCREASE YOUR PROFITS 30%-50% ! INTERNET STOREFRONT HOMEBASED OR MAIL ORDER BUSINESSES WE SPECIALIZE IN HELPING THE SMALL BUSINESS OWNER! AND YOUR FIRST AND LAST MONTH LEASE PAYMENT IS FREE YOU CAN GET STARTED FOR ONLY $9.95 !!! IF YOU CALL IN THE NEXT FIVE DAYS YOU WILL RECEIVE: NO APPLICATION FEE NO PROGRAMMING FEE DON'T FORGET TO ASK ABOUT OUR WEB HOSTING AND DESIGN PACKAGE !!! CALL (888) 264-9272 OUR HOURS OF BUSINESS ARE 9AM - 6PM MST ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// / Please remove at mailto:dackg@uymail.com?subject=remove ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ------------------------------ Date: 03 Nov 99 9:11:03 PM From: qn8SSY5G8@www.lg.co.kr Subject: Re: It's here, just in time for X-mas, Guaranteed Credit Cards!!! >>> Guaranteed Credit Card Approval For The 1st 500 New Applicants <<< This special invitation is offered on a "first come" - "first serve" basis and is only available to the first 500 new applicants. You and your family will have the best Christmas ever with Credit Express. Get the things you really need and want. Don't go another holiday season stressed out because you don't have enough money. Now, you can qualify for two of the most widely used credit cards in the world today... GUARANTEED!!! We're ready to give you the credit you deserve!!! For a LIMITED TIME ONLY, anyone, and we do mean anyone can qualify!!! It is not a luxury, it is a necessity!!! To better function in today's credit society, a major credit card offers you the following advantages: + Avoid carrying cash + Cash a personal check + Guarantee a hotel room by phone + Cash advance when short on cash + Stretch payments to over 36 months + Order sports or show tickets by phone + Order mail order products by phone + Use as an excellent source of identification Used intelligently, our Credit Express program will help you increase your standard of living and eventually, your net worth. You'll be happy to know that we have the solution for people seeking a major bank credit card, even if they have been turned down by other banks! YES, it's true! You can qualify even if you have: + No credit history + Previous or current credit problems + A low income + A new job + Judgements and liens + Had a divorce + Age (you must be at least 18 years old) And, best of all, you will be eligible for an IMMEDIATE CREDIT LIMIT of up to $4,000. Find out in advance if you qualify by answering these two simple questions: 1 - Do you currently have a source of income of at least $95.00 per week? 2 - Are you at least 18 years old? By answering YES to these two questions, you can qualify to receive your very own Visa or MasterCard, even if you are a student (enrolled in college), have bad credit, had a bankruptcy, divorce, or have no credit at all. >>> YOU GET INSTANT CREDIT WITH "NO" SECURITY DEPOSIT <<< Company's are scrambling for new customers and taking risks like never before. Their aggressive marketing strategy is great news for you!!! You will receive a "PRE-APPROVED" credit card application. As a Credit Express member, all you do is fill out this special application and mail it in. You are "GUARANTEED" a card with a credit limit of $4,000. Remember, YOU CANNOT BE REFUSED!!! This credit line is PRE-APPROVED!!! >>> YOU ARE ALSO GUARANTEED UP TO$10,000 IN CREDIT <<< You'll receive our exclusive "by invitation only" list of 4 sources that offer their own in-house merchant cards. You will obtain instant credit from these company's and you can purchase up to $10,000 in merchandise next week, with absolutely NO CREDIT CHECK and NO SECURITY DEPOSIT!!! *** 100% MONEY BACK GUARANTEE *** You get an iron-clad, risk free money back guarantee: If you should be denied a major credit card, we will promptly refund your membership package. You have nothing to loose and much to gain by enrolling today!!! /=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/ PLEASE NOTE: We have the capacity to accommodate up to 500 new clients. This invitation is offered on a "first come", "first serve" basis and will be cancelled once our 500 new members have been accepted. /=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/ No, the Credit Express program is NOT what you have received many times before through snail-mail. This is NOT another application-only program. Our Credit Express program is both PROVEN and GUARANTEED!!! Remember, the holiday season is right around the corner. DON'T WAIT TO GET STARTED... here's what to do: - - - - - - - - - - CUT HERE - - - - - - - - - - ** >>> Mail, Fax or Call-in Order Form <<< ** ** Credit Express Guaranteed Credit Card Program ** ** [Money Tips Subscribers remember, only the first 500 new accounts ** will be accepted for this program. Please do not call our office ** requesting your enrollment package after November 12th, 1999.] ** ** Your complete Credit Express Program is just $28.75. ** ** Enclosed is ____ $ 28.75 ** ____ $ 30.58 (UT Members Only) ** ** Payments using your PERSONAL or BUSINESS check must be mailed ** or faxed. Orders using a check payment, will be shipped after check clears. ** ** Ordering Option #1 ** Print, then fax your completed credit card or check order to one of our ** call centers below: ** ** Fax Order Centers: ** New York (212) 504-0866 ** Miami (305) 437-7626 ** San Diego (619) 374-1901 ** Calif. Area (559) 851-7273 ** ** PRINT or TYPE CLEARLY & FAX the complete order page with your ** check made payable to: Network Innovations for $28.75. ** ** Ordering Option #2 ** Place your credit card order on our toll-free voicemail server: 1-888-681-4206 ** ** Ordering Option #3 ** Mail your payment and order form to: ** Network Innovations ** Post Office Box 893 ** Sandy, Utah 84091-0893 ** U.S.A. ** ** Authorization Code: CCXPRS-01 ** ** Your Name: _________________________________________ ** ** Your Address: _________________________________________ ** ** City: _________________ State: __________ Zip ___________ ** ** Your E-mail Address: ____________________________________ ** ** Method of payment: [ ] Visa [ ] MasterCard [ ] American Express ** [ ] Discover/Novus ** ** Credit Card#: ** Exp Date: ** ** YOUR SIGNATURE HERE:_______________________________ ** We cannot process your credit card payment without your signature! "Products & Services For Doing Business On The Net" REFUNDS: You are purchasing an exclusive, " invitation only", opportunity to take advantage of a new credit card program. The only refunds that will be issued are to those who send us proof that they were not approved for their credit accounts listed above. Complete refund instructions are included with your Credit Express package. DISCLAIMER: We will not be held responsible for any misuse or abuse of the credit lines issued to new members from the Money Tips subscriber base. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-REMOVE INSTRUCTIONS-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= While the Internet is public domain designed for communication, we sincerely respect your choice to not receive email from our EZine subscriber list. To be removed from our list server database, enter your email address at the address below. http://fupwes.gruskoze.uk%668key=965895210index=A21r7P6qW%403631583639/remove/21268.htm If your browser will not load this link please feel free to leave your email address on our toll-free voicemail server. 1-888-681-4206 If you are completely opposed to any and all commercial email, ask your Internet Service Provider to make your email address unlisted. Your address cannot be harvested if it is a non-published address. Your ISP is bound by the U.S. Federal Privacy Act and must comply with your request if you are paying for their services. ------------------------------ End of skunk-works-digest V8 #110 ********************************* To subscribe to skunk-works-digest, send the command: subscribe in the body of a message to "majordomo@netwrx1.com". If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-skunk-works": subscribe local-skunk-works@your.domain.net To unsubscribe, send mail to the same address, with the command: unsubscribe in the body. Administrative requests, problems, and other non-list mail can be sent to georgek@netwrx1.com. A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "skunk-works-digest" in the commands above with "skunk-works". Back issues are available for viewing by a www interface located at: http://www.netwrx1.com/skunk-works/ If you have any questions or problems please contact me at: georgek@netwrx1.com Thanks, George R. Kasica Listowner