UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > May > May 1

Re: Wow! Exempt & Beta Together - Bishop

From: Greg Bishop <exclmid.nul>
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 11:55:10 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Sun, 01 May 2005 09:36:47 -0400
Subject: Re: Wow! Exempt & Beta Together - Bishop


>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 21:51:35 -0400
>Subject: Wow! Exempt & Beta Together

>I just read Exempt from Disclosure (Collins and Doty) and then
>Project Beta (Bishop).

>My head is swimming. Definitely a brain-scambling event! What to
believe? Whom to believe?

I have a feeling that only time and some gumshoe work will tell.
I have only just ordered Collins' book. Recently, I have been
talking with Moore and others about these events. Some of this I
wish I had known when I was writing the book. Yes, the events do
go deeper than I revealed in Project Beta, but my hands were
sometimes tied by requests to use their information, but not in
the book. I was also under a deadline.

>Are these guys crazy, or is they actually putting a hole in the
>"iron (cover-up) curtain?"

I hope I'M not crazy, but studying these things can drive you in
that direction!

>Where these books intersect (Bennewitz, Moore) there are slight
>differences in the history, but the quandary come clear in both: who is
telling the truth? And, if someone is, can we handle the
>truth? Actually the typical reader will be in more of a quandary after
reading EfD (Exempt....) because it goes far beyond PB
>(Beta).....

I only wish that Collins had released his book before mine, as I
could have expanded on many issues raised in Project Beta,
especially since he has apparently "outed" many people who I was
assured would never talk about this period. Perhaps they talked
to Collins because he was a compatriot. Even Doty has opened up
a bit more as of late, but of course I have to sit on and
investigate his revelations, and those of others who were
involved.

>Here, for the first time anywhere (in publication, as far as I
>know) are the names and activities of _living_ men who claim to
>have first hand knowledge of AFC (alien flying craft) and alien
>technology and alien bodies and... live aliens!

After looking at this subject for many years and talking to a
few of the principals involved, I get the feeling that the UFO
subject is of great interest to many in the intel world, but the
only "operational" status that is given to the subject is how it
can be best used to cover up very earthly (albeit cutting-edge/
black budget ) technology. The people who instigate the
"covering up" are very interested however, in where the UFO info
originates in the first place, and have made many attempts to
find out where this is coming from, who knows what, and what
"it" is. The "UFO Working Group" (i.e. John Alexander et al)
from Howard Blum's "Out There" is one organized example. These
are very compartmentalized subjects. One physicist I talked to
was a frequent visitor to WPAFB in the 1950s and '60s, and knew
Hynek well. He said he couldn't figure it out even with all his
connections. Some of the personnel from (the former) NIDS are
still looking.

>On the first page of the book (pg 3) the reader gets a flavor of the
openness of the presentation in the lst f names associated
>to the investigation as it began almost 20 years ago. Some names are
recognized immediately, along with their Aviary (bird)
>names:

>Bill Moore
>Jaime Shandara

They of course have no "bird" names, as they were the ones who
came up with the "Aviary" moniker. Shandera disappeared in late
1999, but is still living in the L.A. area. Before he dropped
out he told me that he had seen something that convinced him
that there was an alien presence on this planet and that he knew
this to be true because of something he had been shown on a
secret trip to either Washington or somewhere in the Southwest.
I have my suspicions as to what he saw, but no cofirmation as of
yet.


>Two names are less well known (the book authors)
>Richard Doty (Falcon stand-in)
>Robert Collins (Condor)

I believe Doty was also known as "Sparrow."


>Three names that are known from a totally different history
>(deceased):

>James J.Angleton
>Allen Dulles
>Richard Helms

Possible identites for "Falcon?"

>And a name unknown to most UFO investigators:

>Ernie Kellerstrauss (Hawk).

>Ernie Kellerstrauss? Who ordered him, you say? He is a source
>for a sizeable fraction of what is in the book.

Damn. I was told he wouldn't talk. He was the man who told Moore
and Shandera where to find an underground facility off base in
the foothills above Albuquerque, among other things.

>And then a few pages later we find:

>Dale Graff (Falcon?)
>Kit Green (Blue Jay)

I believe that they were in the loop because they had some
official capacity in monitoring the effects of the disinfo and
how it was protecting the Kirtland projects, but also because
they were very interested in the UFO subject and any truth that
could be gleaned from assisting in or at least monitoring the
project.

>In the following weeks and months I expect this book to stir up
>a controversy comparable to that over the Roswell case, but with a
difference: now there are people who have gone public - and
>some that have been 'outed' whether they want it or not - so now we will
see who has the fortitude to stand behind their claims
>or will collapse in the barrage of attacks that are sure to
>come.

We must be careful who we accuse of lying. These people may be
looking for the same thing we are, but have to overcome their
pasts to find out what they were using to cover up military and
intel operations. Many are very good at keeping what they know a
secret, while finding out what you know. If you approach them
with good information (instead of  suspicions and accusations)
you may be rewarded with another piece of the puzzle. There are
of course some who cannot change their mindset.

Also, former military and intelligence people are only under
oath not to reveal anything that might impinge upon national
security. I think that they know the difference, and if not, are
quick to check with someone about it. Some may still be involved
in a coverup (wittingly or not) and we do ourselves a disservice
by throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Corso, for example
had a long history of intelligence and counterintelligence, but
the UFO community was ready to welcome him with open arms
because his first foray into the field told us all what we
wanted to hear, even though I have heard of no evidence to back
up his claims. When Doty was on Coast to Coast, the reaction was
just the opposite, even though he too was confirming the reality
of the Roswell crash as an ET event. I recently asked a
prominent researcher about his opinion in light of Doty's
confirmation, and he changed the subject very quickly. I don't
take anyone's revelations at face value unless there is some
sort of relatively reliable evidence to back it up. Take what
you find and file it away. If it matches up with something else
down the road, you're a step closer.

Disinformation is a game with rules. The rules unfortunately
dictate that there will be a lot of lies mixed with a little
truth. Some of these retired agents, etc. have part of the truth
(whatever that is, and it's probably not what we expect) and
should not be ignored if we want to dig deeper into what a small
group knows about any non-human contact. Believe it or not, I
think some of them want to know the reality behind the lies as
well.


Greg Bishop



_________________

In the midst of the cold war, the U.S. Air Force and the NSA
drove a man mad and created an alien invasion! Read "PROJECT
BETA: The Story of Paul Bennewitz, National Security, and the
Creation of a Modern UFO Myth" from Paraview/ Pocket Books.
available at your local bookstore or from Amazon.




[ 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