UFO UpDates Mailing List
From: jvif@spacelab.net (John Velez)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 1997 12:02:03 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Mar 1997 16:06:17 -0500
Subject: Re: Earth Lights or Spacecraft?
>Date: Tue, 18 Mar 1997 23:26:26 -0600 (CST)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Earth Lights or Spacecraft?
>John Velez wrote:
>>I've been trying to tell them that for awhile, but apparently
>>no one who can do something about it is listening or cares!
>>Maybe when the pucks start hovering over their own hometowns
>>they'll pay some attention. Oh yeah, they'll want to talk then,
>>for sure. <G>
>[Bill Hamilton said]
>>>We have taken video of night lights. We consider these to
>>>be unknowns.
>[Velez replied]
>>And properly so.
>>John Velez
============================================================
Dennis writes,
>Dear John:
>Not to rain on anyone's parade, (snip)
Oops, too late! <G>
>Properly so, indeed! Who says so, and on what basis?
It's proper to consider them "unknown" until what they are has
been determined! Simple, nothing complicated going on. Why do
I get the feeling that I'm in court Dennis? Did anyone ever
tell you that you phrase questions with all the finesse of a
NY lawyer?
>No, I haven't seen the latest video you mention by them,
Until you have seen it, there's no basis for discussion is
there? That, is the topic of the thread, not the Linda case.
Which (once again) brings us to,...
>Since you live in NYC, why not do me (and you) this: go
>down to the Post loading docks between 3 and 4 some morning
>(when Linda was supposedly abducted), and report back to
>the list on what you see.
The 'fifty dollar' response:
1. Greg Sandow (who is a journalist and a researcher, I am not)
has written a review of the "Linda case" which is in the printing
stages as we speak. I'm sure he'll see this e-mail and respond to
you directly on that very point.
Greg went and did precisely what you suggested that I do. He went
to the loading docks in the middle of the night. I'll let him tell
you what he found/thinks.
2. Why are you involving me in the investigation of the Linda case?
Other than to defend her reputation several months ago when she was
being verbally ripped apart publicly, I've never said anything one
way or another (anywhere) about my thoughts, feelings or interests
in the case.
You're the one who is so upset by it Dennis, not me. Why don't YOU
go to the post loading docks at three AM! I have a wife and children
and a grandson (I'd like to live long enough to dance at his wedding)
who need me.
Put _yourself_ in jeopardy if you care so much about that case.
Stop trying to drag me into the middle of any arguements or
personal/philosophical differences that you may have with Mr Hopkins.
This is the third time in a year that you've tried. Enough already.
3. I'm not a "researcher" and have never claimed to be. I've already
come forward publicly and 'reported' what I had to report. I don't
have to investigate anything for anybody, much less report back to
the list. I've lived up to the dictates of my conscience. I've
reported to my fellow creatures honestly and without embellishment.
And not just with words either, I've put my reputation and future
career options (and quite possibly my family's) on the line. Guys
like you think that you have the right to 'grill me' in any way that
you deem fit, and about any topic because I have come forward
publicly as an abductee, well you need to find out what time it is
Sasquatch.
I don't owe you any explanations but because I like your accent
I'll say something here. I am here (a member of this list) at the
invitation of a very dear friend who felt that as an "abductee"
and a member of Hopkins' Intruders Foundation that I might be a
good addition to the cast of characters on the list. That, and be
able to contribute something of value once in a while. Which I try
to do. That's the extent of my obligations. So go get your own
answers about the bleeding Post loading dock!
4. If you want Budds head so very badly why not harass (him)
instead of me? The fact that you dragged the 'Linda case' into a
thread that had absolutely nothing to do with it tells me that
something has this Texan 'chomping at the bit'! <G> Your anxieties
are showing Dennis!
ONCE, AND FOR ALL,...
Ask *Budd* about Linda and her case. I have _nothing_ to do with
it. At all,... ever! Unnerstan Sasquatch?
To All,
Anyone wishing to discuss/critique the Elders, and Tom Kings'
videotapes is most welcome to do so. (It's why I started the
thread.) However, I _will not_ respond to any further comments or
questions concerning the "Linda case".
I'm not an expert on it, I don't care to discuss it publicly, and
the simple truth is that _I_ know nothing more than anyone else
who has read the book.
John Velez
=======================================
jvif@spacelab.net
"INTRUDERS FOUNDATION ONLINE"
www.spacelab.net/~jvif/bhhp.html
=======================================
UFO UpDates - Toronto -
updates@globalserve.net
Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp - ++ 416-696-0304
A Hand-Operated E-Mail Subscription Service for the Study of UFO Related
Phenomena.
To subscribe please send your first and last name to
updates@globalserve.net
Message submissions should be sent to the same address.
|
Link it to the appropriate Ufologist or UFO Topic page. |
Archived as a public service by Area 51 Research Center which is not
responsible for content.
Financial support for this web server is provided by the
Research Center Catalog.
Software by Glenn Campbell.
Technical contact:
webmaster@ufomind.com