UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2003 > Dec > Dec 12

Re: sTARBABY & A New CSICOP Coverup? - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 00:55:24 EST
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 15:49:57 -0500
Subject: Re: sTARBABY & A New CSICOP Coverup? - Gates

>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
>Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 16:19:48 -0800
>Subject: Re: sTARBABY & A New CSICOP Coverup?

>>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@earthlink.net>
>>To: <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
>>Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 16:27:17 -0800
>>Subject: Re: sTARBABY & A New CSICOP Coverup?

>>>From: William Scott Scherk <wss@uniserve.com>
>>>To: <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
>>>Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2003 18:28:54 -0800
>>>Subject: Re: sTARBABY & A New CSICOP Coverup?


>>The USAF came out with their infamous "Case
>>Closed" time-traveling crash dummy explanation for alien bodies,
>>and Col. Philip Corso also came out with his equally infamous
>>"Day After Roswell", supposedly "pro-Roswell," but possibly a
>>case of stealth debunkery because it was so full of obviously
>>inaccurate BS and exaggerated claims.


>Source: http://www.caus.org/membercomments/mc062900.shtml

>Blunders do not make a hoaxer or a liar. Col. Corso would have
>to be both if he didn't seed alien technology into US business,
>as he says he did. The *Day After Roswell* is about that fact
>and is not intended as a history of the cold war and shouldn't
>be read in that way. It comes down to whether you believe he was
>trying to tell the truth, not whether he produced a mistake free
>document. Col. Corso's testimony is primary source material and
>should be treated as such, just as we use diaries and old
>letters to understand the dynamics of the Civil War. There's
>absolutely no reason to believe that Col. Corso is a liar.

>He may have make numerous mistakes, but his testimony concerning
>the seeding of alien technology is a lie or it's the truth. It
>is certainly not a "mistake". Was he telling the truth about
>that or wasn't he? If he wasn't, then he's a liar and a fake.
>It's that issue that we all need to wrestle with. It's not
>enough to insist that he made some mistakes, therefore he
>shouldn't be believed. The mistakes have become red herrings
>pulled across our path to distract us from the important
>information Col.Corso has bravely given us.

The question allso boils down to allegedly what technology was
seeded into the private sector? Meaning what specific technology
did Corso and Army FTD give to companies which allowed them to
make some technological leap that they hadn't/couldn't have made