UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2007 > Sep > Sep 10

Re: 'All The News That's Fit To Print'

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 13:18:10 +0000
Archived: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 17:15:08 -0400
Subject: Re: 'All The News That's Fit To Print'


>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2007 16:17:57 -0400
>Subject: 'All The News That's Fit To Print'

>>From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sat, 08 Sep 2007 16:57:01 -0400
>>Subject: Re: 'All The News That's Fit To Print'

>>>From: Carol Rainey <csrainey1.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2007 13:53:56 -0400
>>>Subject: Re: 'All The News That's Fit To Print'

>>>First, it could be a career-killer, revealing the reporter as
>>>credulous. Second,they don't want to be ridiculed by their
>>>fellows.

>>>I find those all perfectly adequate explanations for reporter
>>>reluctance - no conspiracy theory needed to explain it.>

>>I find the first and second reasons fairly _scream_ a
>>conspiracy, of silence. You have a field, UFOs, with lots of
>>physical trace cases, radar evidence, multiple witness cases,
>>and the like, and reporters have to _fear_ talking about it?

>>If that isn't a symptom of conspiracy, I don't know what is!

>With all this discussion of why the major press doesn't get
>seriously involved, no one has thought to mention the most
>fundamental cover-up: what I term the 'self-cover up'.

>This is a subject that most people don't want to be true. Yet
>the available data, sightings, etc., point toward a 'particular
>conclusion' - you can guess what that is.

>So, to avoid the conclusion they avoid tha data. Each person
>makes their own choice as to whether or not to avoid the data.
>Most apparently choose to avoid it - or disparage it by making
>it look silly - and thus perpetuate the 'self-cover up'.

In psychological terminology it is called denial. I agree with
Bruce that it plays a very big and underappreciated role in what
other people take to be a vast conspiracy. People who have
commented on government control and power loss also have a
point, but I perceive that they tend to think of it as a
conscious decision. I think it's more subtle than that.

If we accept that `it' is real then we lose control of normalcy;
nothing remains the same. So we tend to deny to ourselves that
it could be real. I doubt seriously that it is a conscious
decision to suppress an established truth, except in some
isolated specific cases. In those cases it comes down to
thinking, if I release this to the public they will take it as
proof of UFOs and that can't be so. Obviously there must be some
explanation that I (we) haven't figured out yet. Air Force files
are full of examples of this kind of thinking.

The major exception, of course, would be Roswell...if true.


 - Dick



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