UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 1999 > Jan > Jan 3

Re: Stephens & Art Bell Show

From: James Arthur <holy@sirius.com>
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1999 12:36:51 -0800
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Jan 1999 12:47:53 -0500
Subject: Re: Stephens & Art Bell Show

[Non-Subscriber Post]

Since Roberrt A.M. Stephens thought to foreward edited portions
of my E-mail to this List, with commentary, I thought it was in
order to post my E-mail in its entirety.

James Arthur


Subject: Art Bell show.
Date: Fri, 01 Jan 1999 22:06:51 -0800
From: James Arthur <holy@sirius.com>
Organization: Ethnomycology
To: sti3818@montana.com

Hello Robert. Now THAT was Radio! I thought it interesting that
RCH did not deny sending the e-mails that you mentioned. But
instead said something to the effect that What are you doing
with private mails, and how do you prove they are from whom you
say they are from. There was not (that I heard) any categorical
denial. You should post those E-mails with follow up statements
from those who have divulged to you that RCH has indeed done
those things.

One thing is for sure, you threw them for a loop. You blew them
away so bad that the only defense they could put foreward was
that they could not understand what you were saying. But when
asked for the evidence that RCH was a liar, that's exactly what
you did. This of course remains as well to be backed up by
supporting data (IE the actual E-mails with documentation
supporting their credibility).

Your attack on Hoagland smacks of another scandal unfolding,
Clinton refuses to admit he lied. Hoagland on the other hand did
not admit to sending those E-mails, yet did not exactly deny it
either. However, If he did send them, they seem to be of such a
personal nature that he may actually BELIEVE the possibilities
of this Nuclear strike to N.Y.

I've heard this rumor before (not that I believe it, or do not
believe it) but anyone who did believe it would certainly (if no
fear was present of making oneself a fool) advise a friend. A
public statement of this sort would surely draw incredible
ridicule. Suppose he did make it? The logical next step would
be, WHY? As "you" say, RCH wastes his time on frivolous crap,
and should swerve towards the more productive. Perhaps what he
DOES know only surfaces in private e-mails, while he loads the
airwaves with useless banter.

At any rate, it behooves you to solidify your statements with
supportable evidence. I have found your Scientific statements to
be severely lacking, yet your insider (in theory) information is
interesting and should be your focus. Art Bell is NOTORIOUS for
cutting people off just when it gets interesting. Thats a shame!

Sincerely, James

[It should be noted that this was a private E-mail and was not intended
for distribution to anyone except the person I sent it to, nor was my
permission given to distribute an edited version to anyone. IMHO RCH is
anything but useless banter (just clarifying the previous projected
statement) and he has always said there are things he can not talk
about, publicly.  James]

[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp

Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com