UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2007 > Sep > Sep 4

Re: New Revelations On The Origins Of MJ-12

From: Gerald O'Connell <gac.nul>
Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2007 15:44:49 +0100
Archived: Tue, 04 Sep 2007 12:53:08 -0400
Subject: Re: New Revelations On The Origins Of MJ-12

>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2007 04:51:00 EDT
>Subject: Re: New Revelations On The Origins Of MJ-12

>>From: Gerald O'Connell <gac.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sun, 2 Sep 2007 23:57:47 +0100
>>Subject: Re: New Revelations On The Origins Of MJ-12

>>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Sun, 2 Sep 2007 16:39:06 EDT
>>>Subject: Re: New Revelations On The Origins Of MJ-12

>>>>From: Gerald O'Connell <gac.nul>
>>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>>Date: Sun, 2 Sep 2007 15:24:54 +0100
>>>>Subject: Re: New Revelations On The Origins Of MJ-12

>>>>- Why in hell, if they wanted serious investigation of the MJ-
>>>>12/Roswell issue, whistle-blowers wouldn't send their stuff to
>>>>Len Stringfield instead of to a cast of characters who belong in
>>>>a made-for-cable comedy about wannabe government agents?

>>>You've got to be kidding? Stringfield? Why in hell wouldn't
>>>genuine leakers (there is no wrongdoing involved so no "whistle-
>>>blowing") go to the NY Times??

>>I take your point as to the distinction, but I'm assuming that
>>some breach of secrecy would be involved in any major
>>revelation, and that this would constitute wrongdoing in the
>>legal sense.

>Whistleblowers aren't blowing the whistle on their _own_ alleged
>"wrongdoing" of revealing secret info. Whistleblowers blow the
>whistle on crimes and misdeeds of their employers.

That's right, 'crimes and misdeeds'. But you should say 'crimes
or misdeeds', because some misdeeds are not readily captured by
existing statute.

>Leaking alleged stories of saucer retrievals is a leak, not
>blowing the whistle on some crime. What crime under the law is
>it for the government to cover up UFO info when the government
>can claim national security laws and state secrets privileges?

It's not a crime, it's a misdeed. If the government conceals the
truth and lies about the true nature of an event, then it is a
misdeed. In the eyes of some government employees it should not
do such things, or is unjustified in so doing, therefore these
people become whistleblowers when they act so as to draw public
attention to the perceived misdeed. In my reference to
whistleblowers there was an implicit assumption that the
documentation was genuine. I was suggesting the most plausible
course of action for a whistleblower to take under such an

>This distinction is deliberately confused by disinformers who
>want some measure of credibility to attach to the liars who put
>forth this drivel, which sounds better if they are labeled
>"whistleblowers" performing some service to society possibly at
>some personal risk. Whereas "leakers" sound like gossipers and
>snitches, a rather different connotation.

I think you push the distinction way too far here. After all,
whistleblowers leak information when they make it available to
others not authorised to receive it. 'Leaking' is the act of
passing on the information, whereas 'whistleblowing' describes
the broader context in which leaking can occur.


>A genuine leaker would be insane to go to some fringe UFO
>personality to leak his info. What the hell would be the point?
>That's like throwing the info in the trash.

A whistleblower leaking genuine documents might very well avoid
journalistic outlets if he thought that the likelihood of
finding corroborative records were minimal. Journalists look for
corroboration, preferably documented, and usually drop the story
if they can't find it. Ufologists, bless them, driven by
stubborn paranoia and similar investigative virtues, tend to
keep on keeping on, even when the mainstream laughs in their

Given a reasonable assessment of what would be required to
corroborate the MJ-12 documentation, I think it quite sensible
to leak it to the right sort of Ufologist(s). I don't think it
would be fair to characterise Len Stringfield as 'some fringe
UFO personality' in this connection.

Gerald O'Connell

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