From: Gildas Bourdais <bourdais.gildas.nul> Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2011 10:45:18 +0200 Archived: Sat, 09 Apr 2011 12:55:04 -0400 Subject: Re: Priests Of High Strangeness - II >From: Carol Rainey <csrainey2.nul> >To: post.nul >Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 12:54:44 -0400 >Subject: Re: Priests Of High Strangeness - II >>From: Gildas Bourdais <bourdais.gildas.nul> >>To: <post.nul> >>Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 10:53:22 +0200 >>Subject: Re: Priests Of High Strangeness - II >>This is not what I wrote. The case is not wrapped up and proven, >>either way, it seems to me. >>You say it is proven to be false and my opinion is you are >>wrong. >>>From: Carol Rainey <csrainey2.nul> >>>To: post.nul >>>Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 11:23:51 -0400 >>>Subject: Re: Priests Of High Strangeness - II ><snip> >>>This is your implied summary of what it takes to do UFO >>>abduction research: it's gotta _feel_ good. >>>Let me paraphrase how you assess the validity of the Brooklyn >>>Bridge Case (1989): >>>"I like Mr.X and I have warm fuzzies for Ms. Y. Therefore my >>>gut feelings about these perfectly nice people makes me 100% >>>convinced that their reports of an extravagant abduction story >>>that goes on for 12 years, involves casts of hundreds, both in >>>the skies and on the ground, secret service agents, bugged >>>telephones, chases through Lower Manhattan, top international >>>diplomats, extraterrestrials with intentions of making their >>>presence known to the world, the oversight of George Bush I, the >>>Pope, and the CIA and FBI, the principal character's ongoing >>>romance with a shadowy, never-seen government agent named >>>Richard-which romance began in childhood and continued through >>>production of a child (possibly)-all this and more I am willing >>>to accept as a given. >Gildas, >Perhaps the mis-communication is due to your use of a non-native >language. I was _paraphrasing_ (interpreting) your argument to >Kathy: you felt the Cortile case seemed valid because you liked >the people involved in it. Carol, Kathy and the List, I understand you very well. You are the one who is caricaturing me. >And, please, point out exactly where I said that the case is >_proven_ to be false? I have never said that. My investigation >of and film about the case are not completed yet. When they are, >I'll let you know. It's going to be a big surprise, no doubt. BTW, Linda Cortile has written a letter to you, published on Kay Wilson's site: http://www.alienjigsaw.com/Whats_New/Open_Letter_From_Linda_Cortile.html If you want to carry on with your campaign, it's your choice, but I see for myself how unfair you can be, so I stop the discussion here. Gildas Bourdais Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast At: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/ These contents above are copyright of the author and UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced without the express permission of both parties and are intended for educational use only.
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp