Aliens On Earth.com Resources for those who are stranded here Our Bookstore is OPEN Over 5000 new & used titles, competitively priced! Topics: UFOs - Paranormal - Area 51 - Ghosts - Forteana - Conspiracy - History - Biography - Psychology - Religion - Crime - Health - Geography - Maps - Science - Money - Language - Recreation - Technology - Fiction - Other - New Search... for keyword(s)   in Page Titles in Book Title/Author in Contents of Pages ---other searches--- Metacrawler Yahoo FAST Search Google Altavista Dogpile Inference Find Northern Light IWon.com MSN Search Las Vegas Sun Location: Mothership -> UFO -> Updates -> 1997 -> Aug -> Re: PROJECT-1947 - Corso's Qualification Record

UFO UpDates Mailing List

From: Scott Hale <shale@megalinx.net>
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 00:35:49 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 11:02:27 -0400
Subject: Re: PROJECT-1947 - Corso's Qualification Record


> Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 21:50:26 -0400
> From: Gary Alevy <galevy@pipeline.com>
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: PROJECT-1947 - Corso's Qualification
> Record

> Jan,

> I think I was being a bit unfair to you alone and I would
> like to ask you and everyone on the list to come clean with
> their various intelligence backgrounds.

> As a true private citizen I feel a bit overmatched by all
> the "spooky" background histories of the individuals running
> around in "ufology".

Maybe you see "spooky" backgrounds where none exist?

> The general readers, posters and lurkers of this list and
> may well wonder as I do why individuals with past or present
> intelligence affiliations have such an active participation
> in "ufology", a field which is thought of by the public as
> fringey or worse.

UFO sightings have long been and will continue to bea question to be
studied/noted by intelligence groups.
Perhaps one notices what a confusing subject UFOs
are when in intelligence? After all, I think we all probably
agree that someone with a background in intelligence
would be more likely to get interested in UFOs then
an average person.(Ignoring the recent UFO press
frenzy.) I would also like to point out that the public
at large doesn't think UFO research to be "fringe",
at least according to the recent polls

>  For example how did your background or
> that of Karl Pflock lead you into this area?


How did any of our backgrounds lead us toward the
subject? Let me give you a
example as to how somebody becomes
interested in UFOs. In my case I was
in Copper Mountian, Colorado skiing.
While in a book shop I noticed a copy
of Kevin Randle's The Truth about the
UFO Crash at Roswell sitting in a sale
rack.(Sorry Mr. Randle, it's the truth
you know!) I read that book and it
went from there!
I'm not saying that
there aren't people with creepy
ulterior motives involved in UFO
research. I just think that people
are starting to assume that it's
commonplace. If someone
does some research into
a researcher's background
and finds some interesting
information that could be vital
to their motives, that is fine.

The problem comes in when
we have people like Ed Komarek
(I hate to use real life examples, but
it's the only thing I can relate it to.)
who scream debunker or disinformation
agent if that person doesn't think the
same way as them. Take Karl Pflock
for instance. Do I agree with all of his
conclusions regarding Roswell?(For
those who care I remain undecided.)No.
Do I think he's some sinister disinformation
agent of some kind? Of course not! I might
not agree with all his conclusions, but I think
he's a good researcher.

This undying untrust of every person we associate
with in regards to UFO research holds us back!
Look at Jan Aldrich. Here is a researcher
who has undertaken a study, which, will probably
become one of the most important UFO studies
ever made.

Instead of being praised for such excellent and
level-headed research we questions about
Jan's military past! This is something wrong
with this picture...

My Two Bits,
Scott K. Hale