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 -> Sep -> Re: The Question of UFO Witness Anonymity

UFO UpDates Mailing List

From: rprokic@ibm.net [Roger Prokic]
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 11:58 -0600
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Sep 1997 22:34:59 -0400
Subject: Re: The Question of UFO Witness Anonymity

>From: HONEYBE100@aol.com
>Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 18:08:17 -0400 (EDT)
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: The Question of UFO Witness Anonymity


>>Date: Tue. 2 Sep 1997 02:23:55 GMT
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDates: Re: The question of UFO witness anonymity
>>From: "Roger R. Prokic" <rprokic@ibm.net>
>>To: updates@globalserve.net

>Hi everyone!

>Roger wrote:

>>I agree 100%.  I've been meaning to chime in on Rebecca's
>>accidental naming Linda's last name here.  I think Linda is
>>trying to have her cake and eat it too.  If she wants to hide
>>behind Cortile, she should stay out of the public (such as
>>this list).  I also agree with Glenn Campbell's rationale of
>>listing Linda's real last name.  We can't be pitying people
>>who are selling their UFO stories, especially when they
>>themselves don't stay private.

>Roger:

>So, what are you saying?  Are you saying in not so many words,
>that any person who wishes to remain anonymous within the
>UFO community, shouldn't, if their case was brought public?

>Are you saying that those of us and our families shouldn't only
>suffer the indignities of ridicule, but we should also stand in the
>background (as I have for 8 years) and watch everyone else, but us,
>(debunkers, researchers, skeptics, believers and journalists)
>make money on the misery of my family and I?   Are you dealing
>with a full deck, Roger?

>Trying to have my cake and eat it too?  I wouldn't be so angry
>if there were some cake left to eat!!  The sharks got it all during
>the feeding frenzy.  If I want to hide behind the Cortile name, I
>should stay out of the public (such as this list)?  If I had your
>values, I would not have come forward, as it was my public duty to
>do so.  Then I suppose, I wouldn't have had to hide behind the
>Cortile name.  But then again, think of all those people who
>would not have made money regarding my case.  Perhaps they
>would've bilked someone else's experience.

>If I should ever write a book of my own and I don't think I will,
>I WILL have my cake and I'll eat it too.  There's a lot of raw and
>personal material (evidence) regarding my case.  But I have kept
>it to my family and to myself after experiencing the deranged
>enthusiasm of those who have used what has already been made
>public.

>If I knew, what I know now, I'm not so sure I would've let Budd
>Hopkins bring my case to the people, as a whole.  There's one
>thing I am sure of, and that is, "I would never recommend another
>person to go public with their case."

>Roger, aren't you tired of swimming around in these waters?  There's
>nothing left to eat.  Perhaps, YOU should stay private for a while.

Look Linda, I wasn't trying to offend you.  It's just the
way I feel about being anonymous.  I didn't know how else
to tell my position without it upsetting you.  I don't
mean to hurt you in any way.  It is only my opinion.  And
if I had gone through what you did, I wouldn't have gone
public with the story.  I definitely would have kept quiet.
But that's me.  That's whats nice about each of us being
different.  We all can react different to situations like
this, and we all have our own opinions.

Sorry again.

Roger