UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 1997 > Oct > Oct 10

Re: Witness Anonymity

From: "C Hathaway & J. Presson" <earthwrk@doitnow.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 23:04:01 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 21:18:04 -0400
Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity

>>From: Penrose Christopher <penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp>
>>Date: Wed, 8 Oct 97 19:51:22 +0900
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity

>>>From: "Clark Hathaway" <earthwrk@doitnow.com>
>>>To: <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Witness Anonymity
>>>Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 20:30:40 -0700

>>>>From: Christopher Penrose <penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp>
>>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>>Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity
>>>>Date: Tue, 7 Oct 97 03:40:30 +0900

>>>>"Re: Witness Anonymity" is starting to look like this week's "thread
>>>>of shame" on the Area 51 mailing list.  UFOlogy is showing its best
>>>>face to the world.
>
>>>Well, wrong area.  This is not the Area 51 Mailing List, nor is it the
>>>"Linda List" either.

>(massive snip)

>>You are more interested in galloping into battle than communication.
>>This is what I criticize, and you have made me into a greater enemy
>>than I am.

>>Christopher Penrose

>Hey, did someone open a window? I can swear there is a hint of 'fresh air.'
>Hope it's not my imagination. Restoring a sense of 'communication' and
>information sharing/debating would be a welcome relief.

I hope it stays open so all the stuff piling up here can have some
place to. Yes you heard me.

You call your friends continued name calling and insults "communication"?

>There is absolutely no reason why -anyone- on this list should be
>'attacked' for any reason. (Self-defense excluded, righteous indignation
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>is just that, righteous!) you guys don't know how lucky you are to have
>access to some of the folks that participate on this list. Beginning with
>my battered friend Linda.

Your battered friend. :-) There ARE NO excuses for the flaming
Linda has been doing on this list since she started posted. She
flames anyone who does not agree with her and calls then names.

>Think how lucky you are that she (and others) have made themselves
>available for us to get to know, ask questions, and -communicate-
>with one another. She has shown what a gutsy and strong woman she
>is by responding to people whose character demonstrates that they
>are not worthy to shine her shoes.

We are lucky to see how dysfunctional Hopkins support groups are I
guess. As denial seems to be the BIG red flag of both you and
Linda.

We "crack pots" don't shine shoes. Weesss from the Noth.

When Linda starts communicating like an ADULT them maybe she might
be taken seriously.

>You'd be surprised how much people loosen up and talk and reveal
>themselves over a friendly cup of coffee or a glass of wine. How
>much do you get from someone that you are kicking and spitting on?

Sorry John, I don't drink and I do NOT have coffee with people who
make nasty below the belt pot shots at people I happen to like.

What I have noticed is you people have a real tight group and
there seems to be a "tude" that it is "you all against the world".
Sorry that is not the case. When I come in here and start reading
the childish name calling messages posted by Hopkins main
attraction, I say something. That is not what this List is for.
This is NOT IUFO, and Linda is not Rich Boylan.

As for the people on this List, why don't you take a poll and see
how many have left, or just stopped posting messages because they
are tired of putting up with Linda's childish rants. As well as
asking everyone how they like the continued rants of Linda.

If anyone questions her about her abduction she blasts them. If
they say they do not believe it happened she flames the crap out
of them. Now if you all think you are going to play censorship on
everyone in this List, you are wrong. Because that is exactly what
you are trying to pull. And it just is not going to happen.

As for Hopkins he does NOT do valid objective research PERIOD.
Does that make him a bad person no. Did he give out the film Linda
is wasting bandwidth about YES. What this means is Hopkins is the
one responsible for Linda's son being in the public eye. So
instead of wasting bandwidth trying to take the focus OFF the
person who let the video out. Maybe she needs to go to Hopkins and
call him, a user and pest, or a crack pot. That way the rest of us
can get back to some meaningful discussion.

Julie



Search for other documents from or mentioning: earthwrk | penrose

[ 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