From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul> Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2011 15:06:47 -0400 (EDT) Archived: Wed, 20 Jul 2011 15:50:31 -0400 Subject: Re: Devastating Critique Of Jacobsen's 'Area 51' >From: Kathy Kasten <catraja.nul> >To: <post.nul> >Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2011 17:40:43 +0000 >Subject: Re: Devastating Critique Of Jacobsen's 'Area 51' Book <snip> Kathy, List, All - >Dear List: >I would like to point out that the only comment regarding >Jacobsen's take on Roswell was made by Stanton Friedman. >Something to the effect that "it was rubbish". Before making such a comment, the least you could do is check to make sure you are correct. I submitted a comment on Saturday that was posted on Monday. Rather than give my resume and a commercial for myself, I suggested that the evidence did not lead to the Mogul conclusion. I noticed another comment added this morning. >No one else has commented except with a flip of the palm and 'oh >well what do you expect she's not one of us'. No, but her >report, to my mind, is the third one discussing "deformed >children" or similar tale regarding the pilots - i.e., the >bodies found at the "crash site." No, we dismiss her because she has a single source she refused to identify... which makes sense because he has now been identified and has suggested that her reporting was less than accurate. >The rumors now floating around are as follows: >1) Report from Jacobsen from EG&G engineer of "deformed >children" flying exotic air craft. >2) Report from Nick Redfern from "insider", as I remember it, >from Oak Ridge Lab. In this case malformed children. I though Nick talked of Japanese captured at the end of the war who were used in an experiment. I'll let Nick come forward on this. >3) Report of rumors around Roswell from John Price of "deformed >children" as pilots of exotic air craft. >I guess the old guard gets to toss away the above rumors and >even put down Jacobsen for repeating one of the rumors that has >never been pursued by the community of ufo investigators. Just how do you know this? I chased many rumors about the crash, but when I was unable to find supporting information, set those theories aside. >There is substance to these rumors. But, they were not children, >nor deformed, but Fort Stanton does figure into the rumor. This reminds me of a ABC commentator who had reported that James Brady had died in the attempted assassination of Ronald Reagan. When it was learned that Brady had not died, he said that they weren't reporting rumors and had confirmed the information from four sources. But, of course, if Brady was not dead, then they were, in fact, reporting rumors regardless of the number of sources they had. Kevin 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