From: Katharina Wilson <K_Wilson.nul>
Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2004 16:53:13 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2004 08:08:07 -0500
Subject: Re: Tracing The Flow Of The Gulf Breeze Money -


>From: Kenny Young <ufo.nul>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2004 19:19:58 -0500
>Subject: Re: Tracing The Flow Of The Gulf Breeze Money

>>From: Robert Gates <RGates8254.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 00:40:06 EST
>>Subject: Re: Tracing The Flow Of The Gulf Breeze Money


>>Quite honestly I am still waiting for the evidence of these
>>allegations and all I have heard is stories and tales. At this
>>point Ed Walters pictures are more credible then tales and
>>allegations about MUFON and Bruce M.

I agree 100% with your statement. If there is any proof at all
to support these allegations, then the "paper trail" should be
included and/or posted on one of these people's Web sites
to substantiate their claims.

Mr. Black and Kenny Young - where is _your proof_?
Personally, I think the people on this list are tired of your
unfounded and unproved personal attacks against Bruce Maccabee.

For those of you who were not there: Rex Salisbury _infiltrated_
our MUFON-backed abductee support group, passing himself
off as someone who _cared_ and who was supposedly an
_investigator._ He was _neither_. His wife also attended, but
I am unsure of what she was pretending to be at the time.
I know, because I was _there_.

These allegations are based on the memories of Rex Salisbury,
who - from the very beginning, had his own personal agenda.
He _infiltrated_ several abductee support groups. He passed
himself off as someone he wasn't. He _lied_ from the beginning.

Why should anyone believe anything he has to say now?

>You have got to be kidding. How can anyone realistically look at
>the hokey Ed Walters pictures, knowing the history of Ed
>Walters' photo trickery, the Hyzer photo analysis which shoots
>down this case as doube-exposing frauds and all the reported
>'money issues' from the beginning... how could any rational
>observer not think that this current remark about the photos
>having more credibility than contrary information refuting this
>case is a zany comment?

Although I disagree with every one of your unfounded statements,
people should realize that even without Ed Walters' photographs,
The Gulf Breeze Case still stands as a solid case. Many, many
other people saw the same craft that Ed Walters saw during the
same time period.

I personally know two people who saw this same craft, and I
did not get to know them through email, innuendo or through
third parties. I went to their homes. I met their wives and/or
husbands and children. These are_real_ people with _real_
lives. They don't even want people to know about they saw, and
I can't blame them after what Ed Walters and his family endured.

Don't you remember? Someone even poisoned The Walters' family
dog because they saw and photographed a UFO. How sad and
pathetic for the _debunkers_ and for the weak-minded people who
just can't deal with the truth.

If you don't want to believe that Ed Walters' really saw and
photographed the craft he did, then fine. However, you have no
right to accuse everyone and anyone of photo trickery or of being
paid off for their analyses of the photographs, or for their support
of the case, especially when you do not have one shred of proof
to back up your claims.

Give me a break: You got this information when Rex Salisbury
was "researching his memories"? Did he use hypnosis to "research
his memories?" Did he have dated, documented notes? Did he
have recordings of conversations? Did he give you copies of the
front and back of the _alleged_ checks?

>I am to be faulted for having no more tolerance for this tired
>issue. Jerry Black is right when he says this case is an
>embarrassment to the UFO subject. This Ed Walters case is a sham
>and I think most of the people on this List know it. It is my
>concern that the chief promoter, Dr. Bruce Maccabee, knows full
>well this case is a sham in spite of his defense of the case,
>and he has promoted and played off of this hoax for many years
>now, to his benefit.

Dr. Bruce Maccabee was _not_ the chief promoter of this case. As
the record shows, the local newspaper published the photographs
first. Were they _paid off_ by Walters or Maccabee? I doubt it.

Also, as I recall, after that newspaper published the
photographs, they were _conveniently_ purchased by a large news
company... Night Ridder, if I recall correctly?

And what benefits and rewards has Dr. Maccabee received? So, he
may have been paid for his contribution to the book - If you
knew _anything_ about publishing, _ and I mean _anything_ then
you would know that the sum of $18,000 (if that is really the
amount of money he was paid) is a drop in the bucket for
publishing companies to pay someone for an expert opinion about
the subject matter they are publishing.

Before you and Jerry respond again, why don't you present some
proof for a change instead of empty allegations and innuendos?

And, one last thing, if Mr. Black really knew Vicki Lyons, he
would know better than to put words in her mouth or to speak for
her.

And, he would know how to spell her name!


Katharina Wilson