| Subject: Re: Ruppert: Advice for Whistleblowers |
| From: Wally Anglesea� <wanglese@spammersbigpondareparasites.net.au> |
| Date: 14/12/2003, 06:56 |
| Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.alien.research,alt.paranet.ufo,alt.paranet.abduct,alt.usenet.kooks |
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 06:32:39 GMT, Otis Reed <oreed@dontbother.net>
wrote:
On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 06:16:06 GMT, Wally Anglesea™
<wanglese@spammersbigpondareparasites.net.au> wrote:
On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 05:18:07 GMT, Otis Reed <oreed@dontbother.net>
wrote:
On 10 Dec 2003 09:34:31 EST, House Widdershins
<sinistre@concentric.net> wrote:
X-No-Archive: Yes.
On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 05:40:50 GMT, no name <oobie@doobie.com> wrote:
On Tue, 9 Dec 2003 19:27:47 -0800, "Ugly Bob" <ugly_bob42@hotmail.com>
wrote:
"no name" <oobie@doobie.com> wrote in message
news:n1qbtv4360nt1p7t8179ek72t3jf741gif@4ax.com...
On 09 Dec 2003 10:06:07 EST, House Widdershins <sinistre@concentric.net>
wrote:
X-No-Archive: Yes.
On Tue, 09 Dec 2003 14:59:33 GMT, no name <oobie@doobie.com> wrote:
On Tue, 09 Dec 2003 06:05:14 GMT, Thé Whøléflåffér ÇøñtiñÜÜm
<nospam@newsranger.com> wrote:
CIA involvement in drugs in Panama
When will George Bush and the CIA realize that all governments on earth
now
know about what they're doing. The world money cartel can not buy alien
technology with their drug money.
There has to be aliens before there can be "alien technology."
HTH
Indeed. And there are. And there's an alien saucer at Groom. And that's
known by wolrd governments too. You see Bush and Co. would like everyone
to
believe there isn't, but there is. Bush wanted to sequester the fact and
the
technology and keep it for his bosses. That was a bit short sighted of
him.
HTH <grin>
No, it doesn't. If, however, you were to come up with something
a little more tangible...
That's your job.
Nope. You made the claim, you get to back it up with hard, physical
unambiguous evidence. Don't have any? That's what I thought.
What a ludicrous demand.
This is an electronic medium, usenet.
It is friggin' impossible to provide 'hard physical evidence' over an
electronic medium.
Well, a FOI document may be electronically presented, but it's
verifiable.
So, it still is not 'hard physical evidence', it is just a report.
You may or may not accept the source as credible, apparently
you do, but they are still just reports.
However, so far Otis, it's more credible than the nothing which has so
far been presented.
HTH
<SNIP>