UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2001 > Nov > Nov 8

Re: Psychological Trauma - Mortellaro

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 07:22:43 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2001 08:40:54 -0500
Subject: Re: Psychological Trauma - Mortellaro

 >Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2001 16:05:02 -0500
 >To: ufoupdates@home.com
 >From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
 >Subject: Re: Psychological Trauma

 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2001 11:24:19 EST
 >>Subject: Re: Psychological Trauma
 >>To: ufoupdates@home.com

 >>>Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2001 05:12:50 -0500
 >>>To: ufoupdates@home.com
 >>>From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Psychological Trauma

 >>>>Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2001 09:12:37 -0600
 >>>>To: UFO Updates <ufoupdates@home.com>
 >>>>From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >>>>Subject: Re: Psychological Trauma

 >>>>>Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2001 10:01:42 -0500
 >>>>>To: ufoupdates@home.com
 >>>>>From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
 >>>>>Subject: Re: Psychological Trauma

 >>>>>>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>>>>>Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 09:54:33 EST
 >>>>>>Subject: Re: Psychological Trauma
 >>>>>>To: ufoupdates@home.com


 >>>>>My Lord man, can't you see why
 >>>>>I'm always jumping on you with both feet?

 >>>>I can't speak for Jim, but it seems pretty obvious to me why
 >>>>you're always jumping on him. You insult the intelligence of the
 >>>>rest of the List when you try to disguise your _personal_
 >>>>problem_ with Mr. Mortellaro in the cloak of abductee

 >>>Well Hello again Ms. Felder,

 >>>This 'thread' between Mr. Mortellaro and myself is about his
 >>>"claim" that all of the abductees that Hopkins, Jacobs, & Mack
 >>>have hypnotized, collectively agree with the individual
 >>>researchers viewpoints on the phenomenon.

 >>Dear All, Errol,

 >>Actually, this thread is not at all about any claim that _all_
 >>the abductees that Budd, John and David have hypnotised
 >>collectively agree with the individual researchers' view points.
 >>That is _your_ contention. My contention is that as three
 >>groups, they have differing viewpoints, generally. You've
 >>already been asked pointed questions about this matter in
 >>another post. I await your response withall.

 >I'll respond with your own statement. Let's see 'who' is making
 >'what' "contentions" eh.  "

 >>Having said all that, I find it fascinating that those regressed
 >>by each, each group, Budd's and Dave's, seem to share the same
 >>reasoning regarding the intentions of the alien abductors. Dr.
 >>Dave's clients share the opinion, generally, that the aliens are
 >>evil in their intent. Budd's groups shares another less benign
 >>view over the alien abductors.

 >See Jim, as Alfalfa told Spanky; "You can fool some of the
 >people some of the time, but you can't fool Mom!"  ;)

 >It was _you_ not me that made those remarks.

 >I was "responding" to your inaccurate generalizations.
 >Generalizations that make the many -hundreds- of
 >people/abductees that you are referring to sound like mindless
 >drones without an original thought of their own among the lot.
 >"As if" they _all_ shared the same point of view as the
 >researcher they went to for help or information.

 >Just as it is _always_ wrong to make sweeping generalizations
 >like "all blacks are thus and so" or "All Latino's are thus and
 >so" you are _wrong_ to make the kind of broad-brush claim that
 >you have made above about such a _large_ group of individuals.

 >>>I contend that he doesn't know what he's talking about because
 >>>he has never known or interviewed enough of them to make such an
 >>>outrageous and unfounded statement. Not just Mortellaro,
 >>>_no_one_ has taken such a poll.

 >>Wonderful then, as I have interviewed a large enough sampling of
 >>each for my book. And of course, I don't tell you everything. I
 >>hope you don't mind. There is no poll. Read David's book. Then
 >>speak with his clients. Then do the same with John and Budd's
 >>clients. A pattern will emerge. Clearly so.

 >You're kidding here right? Of course there is "no poll"! That's
 >what I've been saying to you over and over in this thread. Yet
 >in spite of the fact that a "poll" of Budd, David's and John's
 >clients has _never_ been conducted, you 'presume' to make the
 >statement you've made about them _anyway._


Dear All, Errol,

Some day you will learn the truth about everything. A sort of
Unified Field Theory of 'what it is'.

In the interim, I shall stay with the subject at hand and the
debate on thread. To get down, dirty and personal on this List
is not only counter-productive, it is a waste of good bandwidth.
Errol is not the fool. Or he would have canned one of us long

The data which I've accumulalted is statistically correct
according to the standards of the manual for statistics and
quality control, a book which my father helped write. Whether
one agrees with it or not is a matter not of one's
openmindedness, but of one's ability to read and think.

Last, when all is said and done, and the debate has reached a
level of "well, das is alles, ain't no more to say..." then only
a child will go, "I'm gonna tell your daddy on you!" and stamp
off with only personal invectives as the argument.

No one here or anywhere else on this planet, had the absolute
truth. Not a one of us. And when it comes to matters of such
import as those which inject personal trauma, such as the
abduction phenomena, there is more reason to search for truth,
whatever it might be. To close one's mind is counter to the
integrity of the intellect.

And I presume that integrity is something you respect?

Good, then use it and can the personal juice. It tells only of
children who have not as yet learned to interact with one the

Jim Mortellaro

[ Next 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