UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2003 > Dec > Dec 11

Re: Mr. Roberts Of The "Unknown-Unknown"

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 12:56:22 -0600
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 14:14:34 -0500
Subject: Re: Mr. Roberts Of The "Unknown-Unknown"

>From: Andy Roberts <aj.roberts@blueyonder.co.uk>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
>Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 15:56:20 -0000
>Subject: Re: Mr. Roberts Of The "Unknown-Unknown"

>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
>>Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2003 15:12:55 -0600
>>Subject: Re: Mr. Roberts Of The "Unknown-Unknown"


>Al wrote...

>>Arrogant, elitist, and huffy,

>Yes thanks Alfred.

Those were indictments, Mr. Roberts, not complements. Your
malfeasance has so corrupted your meager powers of reasoning I'm
not surprised you fail to be -able- to tell the difference.

>>You could abandon ufology and cyberspace... sir, that will
>>handily solve your mailbox difficulties, and I trust this was
>>concise enough for you?

>The current (and there's been many) attempt to hound me out of
>ufology because I annoy believers and get results continues to
>amuse those in the know. Why would you want to do this Alfred?

You make too much of yourself once again, Mr. Roberts. I
suggested you abandon cyberspace and ulfology to cure your
'distressing' E-mail problem. Hounding you from it was the
furtherest from my mind... you're much too good an example of a
bad example to be allowed to disappear completely! Although I
must admit that the suggestion is not entirely repulsive and
probably inevitable at some point, especially as others get
tired of your desultory ufological smirks. We'll see.

>>But re-establishing focus (something I'm sure you're loath to
>>do, Mr. Roberts?),

>I think you'll find Alfred I have never shunned 'the focus',
>everyone else seems to have. Thanks for bringing it back.

Oh - I live to serve, Mr. Roberts. You're most welcome...

>>In "The Usual Suspects," Mr. Burns iterates how Mr. Andy Roberts
>>(et. al.) works to suppress information at its source and how he
>>gets a false story accepted. Burns underscores methods used to
>>undermine witnesses. Burns goes on to show how UFO research is
>>attacked directly, how the researcher is attacked in a similar
>>fashion, and how communication is suppressed to facilitate these

>I know exactly what Max wrote.

I'm not convinced, sir, that you know what _you_ wrote. The
truth is easy to remember. It's the confabulations that get

>As I've said before, much of the
>information in there is factual. Equally, much isn't.

That's fine! Why don't you write a 'cited' article for
'publication' the way Mr. Burns did, instead of making these
less than stirring (and even less convincing) proclamations of
verity. I'm sure any lies Mr. Burns (and Dr. O'hara) have
proffered are actionable and you can set the record straight for
us at last... you will be taking civil action of course!

>What is
>completely wrong is the join the dots way Max has formed
>conspiracy where none exists.

Yeah well... you'll pardon me if I don't take_you're_ word for
that. I'm sorry, but as it regards you, "...such is so..." is a
day late and a pound short! No, you don't have that kind of
idiosyncratic credit with me.

>Now Alfred, let me ask you a question:

Well - you know, actually I'm not here to answer _your_
questions as much as you are here to answer that ones you have
provoked yourself with your admitted ufological malfeasance and

>Where, in Max's article, does it state I 'intimidated' a
>witness? I don't think it does. And do you know why not? Because
>I never interviewed any witnesses in this case. Please read
>things _properly_ and learn how to comprehend them.


Max Burn's writes:

"Matthew Williams made this observation: 'Another interesting
fact is how all Max's witnesses change their stories after you
and Andy [Roberts] got to them [Hello!]. You then made big
claims about how you could show that Max Burns had lied about
witness testimonies and that the witnesses were claimin g their
words had been twisted. However, the truth of the situation, as
you well know, is that Max Burns played a tape recording of one
witness who states that he was happy to allow Max to use his
name and details of his statement and claimed that the man that
he had encountered stank of aviation fuel. After you got to the
witness the story changes [HELLO!] to the witness having not
given permission to Max to talk about his case, and that Max had
twisted his words..."

Well, Mr. Roberts - forgetting that there _is_ a name to chew
on in there, the question is begged! What is it that you have to
-do- to get a previously taped witness to change his story and
pointedly damn Mr. Burns with the same breath. I can think of
two things only... you can threaten or you can bribe... I don't
think a polite request would do it. Hey! Maybe Burns intimidated
the witness to begin with and you were just setting things
aright... right...? Flatly, this is no stretch. What _is_ the
nature of your documented influence over Burns' witnesses?

...and case... shm-ase, as it can be demonstrated vis a vis this
printed article in NFB (with citation) that you have -some- kind
of effect on Burns' witnesses it remains only, given your
already -admitted- distortions, how many witnesses you HAVE
bribed, threatened, or otherwise intimidated, and -who- they
are... over a period of -how- many years?

>>Mr. Burns is eloquent with regard to witness intimidation and
>>how that process (of isolating individuals open to different
>>ideas) works.

>Again Alfred, a question:

>Who exactly am I supposed to have 'intimidated' - please answer
>'cos I'm dying to know Again, get your facts right..

Asked and answered sir... drag your rheumy, furtive and beady
little eyes downstream a few inches and read it again.

>>He chronicles the process of "hoaxing to order"
>>to facilitate hidden agendas and how hypocrisy is used to
>>destroy the independence (and efficacious interdependence) of

>And once more with feeling Alfred - who exactly am I supposed to
>be 'hoaxing to order for'? Please answer. In English. I'd love
>to know. I hoax for my own amusement.

Oh - _not_ in the interests of quality research, good science,
and saving ufology from itself as you have indicated before? I
find this revelation par and seriously underwhelming. Moreover,
it's suggested in Burns' piece that you don't take the orders
referenced in the phrase... as much as give them! Or - how -
else- did Tim Mattews/AKA Hepple show up at a Burns lecture,
tape recorder in hand, to document bogus evidence that you had,
I understand, planted yourself? You should amuse yourself in
more constructive ways, Mr. Roberts. Let me recommend a jar of
cocoa-butter and a warm hand towel...

>>All in all a pretty damning account, Mr. Roberts, given
>>that he's published in a periodical of _some_ respect... (at
>>least you haven't yet thought to try to destroy the
>>reputation of that periodical too), and has provided almost 60
>>citations to support his contention.

>I'm afraid that Nuts From the Borderland is written by a man
>_so_ crazed that he used to search through people's dustbins
>looking for information.

This is a day late and a dollar short, Mr. Roberts, you should
have ripped on Dr. O'Hara when the NFB thread started! Moreover,
this sounds like serious investigative field-work to me... it's
a long string of criminals, cheats, and scalawags who've been
arrested, tried, and convicted as a result of what has been
found in their dustbins, sir. That's why intelligence agencies
and military organization are very careful with regard to what
makes it to the trash!  I'm astonished that this is news to you!

>Larry runs a very small circulation
>para-political journal read only by those who see sonspiracy
>round every corner. As I've said before listers - buy it, read
>it and make

Type "Notes from the Borderline" into your search engine, Mr.
Roberts, to discover that the aggregate take on that humble
little rag is something more than you indicate here... but like
I said earlier... you're a day late, and a dollar... no, I think
_two_ dollars, short. Next!

>>Its no wonder that you won't
>>answer Mr. Burns challenge to a public debate... it's pretty
>>obvious you're all about _nothing_ and more comfortable standing
>>in your duplicitous and destructive shadows doing your 'work'
>>such that it is.....

>Alfred, please, calm down.

Yes sir! By this time I would imagine that you _would_ want me
to calm down!

>Why would I wish to debate in public
>with Max?

LOL. I would imagine that this is the _last_ wish on your list
of wishes.

>I didn't investigate this particular case. I'm happy
>to debate with Max in public the accusations he raises against
>me in the article, but that's all I can do.

Right! I won't hold my breath for -that- debate, either.

>I spoke at length
>with Max when I was lecturing at the BUFORA conference. We got
>along quite amiably.

Oh - two peas in a pod and snug as a bug exchanging thank-you
notes, scones, and tea-cozies, I'm sure.

>He still doesn't agree with my version of
>events, and I certainly don't agree with his. Please read the
>article again and answer my questions above, with quotes and
>page numbers.


>Fact is Alfred, you can't.

Yeah? Perform that little downstream exercise for beady eyes

>>In closing (and until you stick your head up over the berm
>>again) let me remind you publicly that your pissy little
>>personal notes to me in E-mail are unwelcome, forgetting that
>>they don't have the effect on me you'd like to think they have.

>I email you privately in an attempt to get you to understand
>just how stupid you are.

How _pathetically_ unclever of you, sir.

>Clealy it doesn't work. You'll be
>rooting through my dustbins next!

Somebody should. I'd be real careful what you put in the trash
from now on. I don't care enough to invest in the airfare, but
somebody local might have been given an idea regarding something
less than risible. <LOL>

>>I'm neither amused nor entertained.

>Well, boo-hoo.

Fret not, Mr. Roberts. I've considered the source and just
gotten used to it.

>>I've been warned by others that this is a tactic that you (et
>>al) use to needle and intimidate and control... Forgetting for a
>>moment how pathetic and ineffective they are, at present they
>>only increase my desire to rip off your literary head and use
>>your bubbling throat for a field toilet. I hope I've been
>>abundantly clear. Thanks.

>Sadly Alfred, you're rarely clear. Go through this email again
>and answer my questions. Go on, off you go.

It was no problem at all, sir, glad to oblige!

>And to the others involved in Max's little game.

This is not about Burns or any others, sir. I know the spotlight
gets hot, but you've called for it yourself. Moreover, there are
no others... I'm not to blame... you're a victim of karma catch-
 up, is all. Get used to it. Better, own up to it!

>Instead of
>wasting Errol's List with your nonsense, why not get together by
>email, come up with a list of clear and concise questions and
>post them here. I promise to answer each one as fully as I can.
>Then you can all crawl back under your stones until the next
>conspiracy comes along.

I think it unlikely that anyone will be taking directions and
suggestions from you, Mr. Roberts. You've lost any right to
dictate terms in this exercise, if you had them to begin

>Are you organised enough to do this? I very much doubt it.

>Ufologists eh?

A middle-schooler with a website of old Billy Meier photos is
more ufologist than you are sir, whatever the capabilities of
the rest of us. You're -not- the measure you pretend to be.

>Happy Trails

Happier and happier, eh Mr. Roberts? The trail fun-meter is -


EXPLORE "AlienViewGroup" at its HostPros URL.

JOHN FORD RESTORATION FUND - John will be released eventually.
He'll need a tax free cash stake to get on his feet. Let's put
one together for him; the bigger it is - the more attention he
gets. It could have been you. E-mail for detail. $450.00 pledged
- $200.00 collected!

"I cleave the heavens, and soar to the infinite. What others see
from afar, I leave far behind me." - Giordano Bruno, scourged by
the scabrously specious scurrilous.