From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 18:12:42 +0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 11:01:26 -0400
Subject: Re: Who Is Behind It All? - Hall


>From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 10:24:46 +0200
>Subject: Re: Who Is Behind It All?

>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 13:48:31 +0000
>>Subject: Re: Who Is Behind It All?

>>>From: Jeff Olson <jlolson.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 12:00:23 -0700
>>>Subject: Re: Who Is Behind It All?

>>>I find it hard to imagine that you would argue that position.
>>>But once one grants that the USG and other governments have
>>>suppressed information, then the question becomes: How routinely
>>>and how systematically? Since this would be speculative, on what
>>>basis would we quantify one speculation as "wild" and another as
>>>"sedate"? In extreme cases this could be done, granted, but
>>>there seems to be substantial latitude for speculating on the
>>>degree of government suppression among reasonable people.

<snip>

>>>Certainly government agencies can tell the truth, but when their
>>>statements appear logically inconsistent or obfuscatory, it
>>>seems reasonable to suspect that relevant information is being
>>>withheld.

Hall said:
>>Then we don't need dark, sinister hints about "who's behind it
>>all" do we, as if there were some evil cabal responsible? Of
>>course governments cover things up, but not necessarily for evil
>>reasons. More often it is due to stupidity, fear, doubt,
>>uncertainty, CYA, and other very human reasons.

>>You would do well to read my book "Uninvited Guests" in this
>>regard. It is available cheap in used editions, probably $5 to
>>$8.

>Dick, and List,

>A few months ago I was invited to the French national radio
>"France Inter". We discussed briefly the question of secrecy, and
>I expressed the view that it may be maintained for a very good
>reason: the risk of an enormous cultural shock.

>In that perspective, the only sensible line of conduct would be
>a policy of gradual lifting of secrecy.

>It is still my opinion.

>But that should not deter we ufologists from searching for the
>truth - on the contrary! That's our part of the task, I suppose.

>Do you agree with that?

I do agree that cultural shock fears is a definite possibility
(among others) and that we should continue to fight for the
truth.

>And thank you for your good books, that every serious ufologist
>should have.

In Uninvited Guests I lay out several different possible
scenarios as to the reasons for secrecy, from having absolute
proof and not knowing how to deal with it to self-cover-up
through inability to digect what is going on and therefore going
intop denial.

All too often we give governments too much credit for being all-
knowing and clever, and in the case of UFOs there is a lot of
evidebnce of the U.S. government being blind and stupid and
unable to cope with the reports. No doubt there also are many
excellent reports that have been kept secret. Very possibly the
truth is a mixture of cover-up and foul-up.


 - Dick