UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2007 > Nov > Nov 15

Re: Larry King Live UFOs Now Friday Night

From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul>
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 17:20:57 -0500
Archived: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 14:59:35 -0500
Subject: Re: Larry King Live UFOs Now Friday Night

>From: John Velez <jvelez49.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 02:10:20 -0500
>Subject: Re: Larry King Live UFOs Now Friday Night

>>From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 12:26:44 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Larry King Live UFOs Now Friday Night

>>>From: John Velez <jvelez49.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2007 19:02:06 -0500
>>>Subject: Re: Larry King Live UFOs Now Friday Night

>>>>From: John Velez <jvelez49.nul>
>>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>>Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2007 01:08:22 -0500
>>>>Subject: Re: Larry King Live UFOs Now Friday Night


>>>I have heard from a couple of trusted associates who inform me
>>>that Steve Bassett and his PRG have absolutely nothing to do
>>>with this effort. I was confused by the "official" PRG
>>>promotional posts that make the whole thing sound like its a PRG
>>>project. Bassett doesn't make this clear in his posts. Granted,
>>>it is a 'grey-area' attempted rip-off, but it is a rip-off

>>>Bassett has a lot of balls trying to put his exopolitical spin
>>>on this event. To usurp the work of others by sticking his own
>>>version of the "disclosure project" label on it is simply self-
>>>serving and dishonest. Nowhere in his post does he acknowledge
>>>or give any credit to Kean or Fox. He leaves the impression
>>>(maybe intentionally,) that this event is a PRG effort.


>>Knowing this fact, it can be demonstrated to various leaders
>>that agencies which release a few hundred pages of documents are
>>not being forthcoming. Also, orginating agency documents found
>>elsewhere in other agencies' files show there are, at the very
>>least, record keeping problems, but more likely a lack of
>>candor. Demonstrating this to decision makers makes more sense
>>than a lot of unsupported claims and contentions that
>>information is withheld.

>>Jan Aldrich

>Hi Jan, (long time no speak!)

>I left in your every word. It's all good, Jan. Your educated and
>helpful suggestions and comments make perfect common sense.

>The "problem" is... it will fall on deaf ears.


>Great to see a post from you, Jan. I miss your contributions
>here. Please give my very best to my old bud, John Stepkowski
>next time you communicate with him. John, along with yourself
>and many others are among the unsung heros of ufology. Keep up
>the good work brother-man.

>Warmest regards, and many thanx for the thoughtful response,
>hope it actually ends up doing some good.

Hi John, sure you're right, anything I say does fall upon deaf

I don't want to rain on the Kean and Fox parade here, but it has
been done before (the latest verison is much professional and
better than before.) Your comments about former attempts to
mobilized ufology failing because the sponsors added other
political agenda items to their presentation are well taken.

However, ufo fans have over and over again poisoned the well. To
wit, sending all congressmen copies of the MUFON Journal with
articles on alien skeletons, cloned prostitutes, and the like.

My comments of lone wolf ufologists apply here to the latest
presentation! We have here an impressive list of witnesses with
interesting stories. I certainly applaud such efforts. However,
now what!?

After a few stories in various media around the world, then the
subject again slips back into obcurity.

Let's review the bidding here. The Sturock Panel issued a report
which essentially overthrew the Robertson Panel. The new panel
said there might be some reasons to consider serious information
in ufology. My question to ufology at that time was, "so we have
this opening, what next?" The silence was deafening! The only
replies I got were from bomb throwers who were unhappy that the
panel did issue a sweeping endorsement of ETH.

The ABC Peter Jennings presentation was a mixed bag. The Lords
of American Ufology wanted Jennings and his staff turned over
the Grand Inquisitor so they could be tortured into confessing
their sins against Roswell before being burned at the stake.
Actually, Jenning on ABC Evening News presented to a long
positive segment to the public, an airing of the 1968 Minot AFB
B-52 case, one of the most impressive and well documented
military cases available. It was again presented with even
greater detail in "Seeing Is Believing."

Another opporunity handed to ufology, but instead all we got
were internal complaints as how Jennings had messed up the
Roswell sandbox or disrespected Bud Hopkins. Talk about looking
a gift horse in the mouth!

Some ufologists say they want a scientific investigation of
UFOs. For the most part what they really mean is they want
scientists to swallow whole one the hundreds of cracked brained
conspriacy theories about UFOs and wild theories about ET.

One may ask, "Okay smart guy, what's your grand scheme?"

Well, we generally don't know what will capture and retain the
public's and the media's interest in the subject. Maybe this
dust up in the Democratic Debate will. At the very least the UFO
Research Coalition and others should meet to consider how to
exploit a situation in which both public and press become
interested. What are the next steps ufologists want to take?
Congressional hearings, presentations to decision makers, a new
funded transparent investigation? Maybe the best idea is to
review the old NICAP goals in this area.

Specific proposals for further action might be:

Search of govt files for all UFO info (ala the Kennedy
assassination investigation.)

Review of various radar and other sensor systems records for
unknown objects.

The initiation of a program to probe UFO events and learn more
about them.

Analyze any artifacts, traces and secondary effects associated
with UFOs.

From personal experience some Congressmen seem to be interested
in the national security aspects involved with UFOs such as
reports of UFOs in or near nuclear facilities, and apparent
interference with nuclear weapons or delivery systems. This
might be a good angle to start with and compile all known
information involved here. Information such be persented in a
scheme going from the info considered the most reliable and well
documents to incidents which might be complete or have some
questionable info.

Once such a political action program were established, lone
wolves should be invited to cooperate with the political action
agenda, before springing their presentations on the public. We
obviously can't do anything about a network news presentation
like Jennings' except be prepared to present our the proposals
to the public afterwards.

Jan Aldrich

Project 1947
P. O. Box 391
Canterbury, CT 06331, USA
(860) 546-9135

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



[ 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