UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2007 > Sep > Sep 27

Re: Forged Documents

From: James Horak <jchorak7441.nul>
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2007 08:19:45 -0700 (PDT)
Archived: Thu, 27 Sep 2007 11:56:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Forged Documents


>From: Brian Ally <ufoupdates.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 12:47:17 -0400
>Subject: Re: Forged Documents


>>From: James Horak <jchorak7441.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 16:25:06 -0700 (PDT)
>>Subject: Forged Documents [was: 'American Spy Satellite Downed In Peru'?]

>>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2007 13:49:49 EDT
>>>Subject: Re: 'American Spy Satellite Downed In Peru'?

>>>If I might butt in here. What makes you think that the publisher
>>>cares if the documents are faked or authentic? What makes you
>>>think they even care?

>>Pardon me, Mr. Randle, let's try employing a little more power
>>of discernment, shall we? We're not talking about a shopping
>>list from the Dead Sea Scrolls, a birthday card alledged to have
>>been sent from Elizabeth Barret Browning to a lover while her
>>husband was still alive, or a new Lincoln letter firing his
>>Minister of War, Stanton, found in a box of Cracker Jacks.

>>We are talking about what has been alledged to be a forged
>>government document, published as authentic by the very person
>>to which it first-hand pertains and who has thus placed
>>themselves in direct conflict with both federal criminal
>>statute, civil liability and in short, having their behind hung
>>out to dry on just about every level future aspirations might
>>have.

>>And there are no criminal proceedings. (How little that would
>>take to convict _if_ Lazar was lying.)

>>And you're going to tell me a publishing house has no stake in
>>the veracity of what they publish?

>>Yes, a little more discernment, please.


>Mr. Horak, you seem to be working under two illusions here.

>First, that the government will always move to prosecute over
>any transgression of the law. This is not the case. Rather, they
>reserve the right, so to speak, to charge someone that they feel
>has transgressed the law should doing so be in some way
>beneficial (whether it's uncovering some obscure statute to be
>used to shut up some troublemaker, or simply prosecuting a
>common criminal to help keep society running smoothly). I
>imagine that civilisation would be paralysed were it to be
>otherwise.

First of all, forging government documents and publishing them
relates to far more than simple infringement on an "obscure"
statute. Not only that but this pertains to one of the heavily
secured areas designated by the government as protected in the
national interest. A place you can be shot on sight if caught
trespassing. And not one where those responsible for providing
that security wish to be publically humiliated and undermined by
such false representation.

It would hardly be allowed "in the national interest" to
allow such slight if prohibited by law.

The real point here is, how would Lazar know such
selective prosecution would turn in his favor? And
when all things are considered?

>In any case, Lazar's outrageous claims, IMHO, serve the
>government's interests.

Are you saying, "outrageous claims" because you won't credit
that recovery of alien craft and attempts to back-engineer them
is a possibility? If so, then I must absolutely disagree with
you and turn to a question that such incredulity begs: what are
you doing in ufology?

>They muddy the waters considerably. For
>those who undeniably are keepers of secrets - of aliens or
>merely mundane things like the latest in avionics or weaponry -
>people such as Bob Lazar are quite helpful. Just look at the
>confusion he has sown in the UFO community.

That could be true. But even then the experience is not wholly
devoid of value to anyone that reads closely and keeps abreast
of all sides of the issue... someone not given more to agenda
than truth-seeking. It might show, more than most else, that Bob
Lazar is part of a disinformation campaign and that something
highly significant is being hidden. It could be a wake-up call.

>Second (and, as someone who is well-acquainted with the
>publishing industry, i think i can certainly butt in here),
>publishers often play quite fast and loose with "the truth". By
>now, this shouldn't be a surprise to anyone who has given the
>offerings at the local supermarket checkout aisles the merest of
>glances. Lazar's publisher would, if pressed, respond that any
>documents they published are ones that *Lazar claims* to be
>authentic.

>And i doubt that "the government" gives a fig, one way or the
>other.

Well, there is an important point for which you and some others
have yet to account. That is to discern between how differently
everyone in the media, not just publishers, could be relied upon
to treat the revelations of whistle-blowers when their claims
impact back on top secret (and above) installations whose
protections are constantly granted newly legislated powers to
protect security. Sometimes secretly. As I told Mr. Randle, such
discernments are paramount.


JCH


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