UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2007 > Sep > Sep 30

Re: Forged Documents

From: Greg Boone <evolbaby.nul>
Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2007 08:14:41 -0700
Archived: Sun, 30 Sep 2007 11:55:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Forged Documents


>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 15:01:41 EDT
>Subject: Re: Forged Documents

>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2007 09:26:14 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Forged Documents

>>>From: Gildas Bourdais <bourdais.gildas.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2007 14:55:34 +0200
>>>Subject: Re: Forged Documents

><snip>

>>>Bob Lazar may have told his story, more or less, as he
>>>remembered it, but his memory may have been altered, to feed him
>>>a dose of disinformation.

>>>Actually, he admitted that he may have been manipulated. In
>>>other words, he may have been a "useful idiot", as Jacques
>>>Vallee would say.

>>>But, if this is the case, it does not mean that all what he saw
>>>and 'learned' was necessarily false. We find the same intricacy
>>>regarding the MJ-12 documents - completely false, or half false,
>>>and then half true?

>>>The real world is not just black and white. It has many shades or
>>>gray.

>>Ordinarily, I respect your views and take them seriously, even
>>on those occasions when my own views may not be quite the same.
>>But this is just grasping at straws.

>>Why is so hard to believe that some people make up stuff? Why do
>>we have to continue to believe in the face of some pretty
>>clear-cut evidence that would lead any reasonable observer to
>>serious doubt? Good Afternoon, Jerry, List, All -

>I'm going to butt in here once again and comment on Jerry's note
>about people making up stuff. Although I think we have ample
>evidence in the UFO field, I might point us in a direction where
>we all should be able to evaluate the evidence in a more
>dispassionate arena.

>For those interested, take a look at the book Stolen Valor about
>those claiming Vietnam service and who, upon review, turn out to
>be making it up. Some do it so that they will be eligible for VA
>benefits that can amount to thousands of tax-free dollars a
>month, some do it to boost their prestige (such as Iowa Senator
>Tom Harkin who claimed to be a Vietnam Veteran until called on
>the point and changed his Senate biography to say Vietnam-era
>Veteran), some do it to impress friends and family and some do
>it to draw the spotlight to themselves.

>In the 1990 census, there was a question about service in
>Vietnam and some 13,000,000 people claimed such service. That
>was 9,000,000 more than actually served... there was no point in
>lying on the census form because no one was going to see it, but
>lie they did.

>So, I throw in with Jerry on this one. Some people just lie
>about all sorts of things for all sorts of reasons. In some
>cases we only need the black basket because the evidence is
>overwhelming. We need to realize that some issues are black and
>white.


Agreeing 100% with Kevin Randle. He was hit hard by one of the
best hoaxters ever in this field but Kevin bucked up and took
responsibility and provided data on how it was done and what we
can do to prevent it.

I had an earlier thread last week about prosecuting hoaxters.
Just following simple steps to a pre-emptive strike to avoid
passing on or encouraging fraud. I spoke to som lawyers about it
and in general it's a case by case basis, but if you have a
written agreement from the interviewee it's another ball of wax.

Criminal and civil but again a case by case basis. If someone
offers info to you, let them know that if they're lying or
perpetrating a fraud you will pursue criminal and civil charges
where warranted. I know that sounds heavy handed and may turn
some witnesses away but what's worse? More fraud or more
dedicated data. I'm not talking about people who are delusional
or have been tricked, I'm talking about out and out fraud.

Sixty years of this game and it's far past the hour of honor.

Evidence leads to proof or not. In UFOlogy we have an
overwhelming amount of evidence except irrefutable physical
evidence. That's where we need to focus our attention and
support.

Take the gorilla for instance. A legend, a myth until around
1902.

We know people have said they've seen one.
We see footprints.
We see stool.
We see broken and damaged plants that could only
have been done by a superstrong primate.
Suddenly, we have one in a cage, we have photos.

Up until the capture it was just smoke on the wind.

Same with this UFO stuff. Everything except that piece of metal,
body.

Video and pics we've got all over. Documents up the yin yang.

Don't even hope for disclosure from the press and government,
ain't gonna happen.

From now on it's hard nuts and bolts searching or we're just
adding on to an already towering pile about to collapse.

Best,
Greg
ufomafia.com


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