UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2007 > Jul > Jul 1

Re: Mantle To Speak In Roswell - Yturria

From: Santiago Yturria Garza <syturria.nul>
Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 18:09:01 +0000
Archived: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 17:47:42 -0400
Subject: Re: Mantle To Speak In Roswell - Yturria


>From: Philip Mantle <philip.nul>
>To: ufoupdates <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sun,  1 Jul 2007 10:40:17 +0200 (CEST)
>Subject: Mantle To Speak In Roswell

>>From: John Rimmer <j.rimmer.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 18:11:23 +0100
>>Subject: Re: Mantle To Speak In Roswell

>>>From: Philip Mantle<philip.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 17:25:04 +0200 (CEST)
>>>Subject: Mantle To Speak In Roswell>

>>>My presentation in Roswell will be 'Alien Autopsy Inquest' and
>>>will be an in-depth look at this most controversial of films...

>>As the film is now admitted by all concerned to be a fake, what
>>exactly is controversial about it?

>Hi John,

>As "all" those involved are not known and Shoefield and Santilli
>still stand by their original story of how they allegedly came
>across the film and 'restored' it, I'd like to know how you come
>to the conclusion that "all" involved have admitted is was a fake?

>For example, Volker Spielberg is the money man in the whole
>Alien Autopsy affair but I have seen no statement of admisssion
>from him.

>I met with Santilli and Shoefield just recently and they still
>stand by their story, they even showed me frames of film with
>image. I cannot vouch for the authenticity of these frames but
>they are still adamant that they met a former US military
>cameraman and bought film from him.

>The full details of this will be in the next issue of UFO DATA
>magazine.

>There are those who still support the authenticity of the film
>and those who are of the opinion that it is one big fake. As yet
>neither camp can conclusively prove their point.

>There are those who have accused me personally of helping to
>fake it, of even being an 'accomplice'. If that is not
>controversial enough for you it is for me.

>With the greatest of respect John may I suggest you read my book
>'Alien Autopsy Inquest' and then study the history of this film
>and then tell me it's not controversial.


Philip,

With all due respect I agree with John Rimmer.

The Alien Autopsy Film controversy ended with the confession of
both Santilli and Schoefield plus their accomplices in the fraud
John Humphreys and the fourth one whose name I don't remember.
All of them appeared on public TV confessing the hoax including
the faked cameraman interview with such cynisism its clear they
should not be trusted in any way ever again.

Their 'restoration' is as false as the film itself and I don't
think there is now a single individual who still belives what
this couple claim. Santilli and Shoefield commited a fraud for
money and that's a fact that can't be denied.

I've seen the film frames that you mentioned, two frames
actually. One is a poor quality blurred image saturated in blue
color of an alleged autopsy room where the alleged alien's head
is almost visible. I find this image very similar if not
identical to the black and white faked film but just blurred and
colored blue. Very bad evidence if this is intended to prove
anything at all.

The second film frame is worse. Just a black and white image of
two alleged navy officers faces, that's all. No additional
information about this one. I ask you, how does this single
frameprove anything related to their story? Film frames may
be provided from any source from any time period and still will
prove nothing. But you are trusting Santilli again and now you
will try to revive this dead for good faked Alien Autopsy story
just to sell your new book am I right?

I belive you are a contradictory man yourself, Philip Mantle.
Sometimes you accuse Santilli of being a cynical cheat but now
you are releasing your new book you propose Santilli may have
been telling a true story after all? Very convenient.

I don't believe Santilli and Shoefield and I don't believe you and
your book. I don't believe this alleged 'new evidence' of the two
provided film frames. I don't believe the even worst argument of
the "film restoration" and certainly will not believe any
subsequent story additions, updates, new revelations, etc. etc.

The Alien Autopsy-Santilli-Shoefield affair will remain in
history as an infamous act of fraud perpetrated by a group
of individuals.

Think about it.




Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast

See:

http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/


[ 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