UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 1997 > Oct > Oct 11

Re: Witness Anonymity

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 04:27:08 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 10:13:23 -0400
Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity

>From: "C Hathaway & J. Presson" <earthwrk@doitnow.com>
>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity
>Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 23:04:01 -0700

>>>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)

Hello (unfortunately) again Julianne,

You spat,

>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

Jeez, we are feeling judgemental (again) today aren't we? Get up
on the wrong side of the web again? <VBG>

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

"Crackpot" is a term I've never used but I accept that you apply
it to yourself! <G>

>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.

Then what in Hell do you call what _you've_ been doing? In every
case with Linda the flame started with someone else! From what
I've seen she has reacted (granted poorly at times) to sucker
punches initiated by others.

>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.

"You people!!!" Are _you_ for real? We're not "negroes" from the
old south Julie. And please, don't ever tell me that some of your
'best friends' are abductees! (ROFLMAO) Your comment is a really
good example of what I meant by people 'revealing' themselves.

Again you demonstrate profound prejudice and ignorance by calling
us a "tight knit group" We don't have a "group!" Budd assembles
fifteen or twenty folks three or four times a year (different
folks each time) there is always someone there from the
'counselling trade' and afterwards we split up and each one goes
their own way. I only have two or maybe three people (that I've
met through Budd) that I stay in touch with.

Your rather 'racist' and extremely insulting insinuation about us
shining Budds shoes is so low and off base that I'm not even
going to dignify it with a response. I'll just let it stand as
the pure stinking turd that it is.

>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.

I'm 48 Julie and I've been out of high school for many long
years. I don't conduct 'popularity polls' my name is Velez not
Roper! _You_ take a poll and we'll all hold our breath waiting
for the results, OK?

>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.

What's really nice is that I've always been perfectly honest and
candid in ALL of my posts and I am confident that the only one
who thinks I'm trying to "pull something" is you! (And maybe your
crony Mr Magoo!) <G>

>As for Hopkins he does NOT do valid objective research PERIOD.

Opinions are just that - opinions

>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 if you can call ANYTHING that has come out of _you_ on this
thread "meaningful" my hat is off to you. <EG>

John (nobodys fool) Velez

                              John Velez

Search for other documents from or mentioning: jvif | 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