Aliens On Earth.com Resources for those who are stranded here UFOs | Paranormal | Area 51 People | Places | Random Top 100 | What's New Catalog | New Books 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 Our Bookstore is OPEN Mothership -> UFO -> Updates -> 1999 -> Jan -> Here

From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 16:27:54 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 21:07:49 -0500
Subject: Re: Keeping Secrets


>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
>Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 00:58:26 EST
>Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 11:22:16 -0500
>Subject: Re: Keeping Secrets

>>From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
>>Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 13:14:46 +0000
>>Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 16:09:36 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Keeping Secrets

>>>>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
>>>>Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 12:14:52 EST
>>>>Fwd Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1999 08:51:03 -0500
>>>>Subject: Keeping Secrets

Previously I had written:

>>Is it really your contention that the US Government never does
>>anything illegal, never breaks laws, has never had anyone
>>silenced simply because "known policy" says otherwise? Do you
>>really believe that the government even bothers to make all of
>>its policies known to the public? Or that they would publicly
>>acknowledge hurting anyone one, if not forced to? Do you really
>>believe everything the Government tells you?

><snip>

>Where do you think the term "clandestine operations" comes from?

Bob replied:

>He obviously wasn't talking about some off
>the books Iran Contra sort of operation, but a major defense
>project. And we aren't talking about 1950s nuclear tests or what
>possibly has or might happen somewhere, someplace, sometime.

>We're talking about Jim Mortallero's claim about standard
>security measures in use where he worked as a civilian.  I asked
>him for one, single documented case where such measures have
>been used.  Somewhere, someplace there must be an example.

This logic escapes me, Bob. Why must there be an example?

On the one hand, you try to differentiate this from an "off the
books" project. On the other, you continue to maintain that, if
there's no documentation, then it doesn't happen.

Now, I'm not trying to be a smart ass here, but follow me:

If a project is "off the books" would there not be a general
lack of documentation available? Using your logic, this lack of
documentation would mean that the project doesn't exist, right?
I mean, there's no proof. Yet you admit that "off the book"
projects exist or else you could not differentiate this project
from that group. You seem to selectively choose when lack of
documentation is a problem and when is isn't in your argument.

Could you possibly prove the existence of even ONE of the "off
the books" projects you know to be real? Not without
documentation. Yet, you know they exist; as we all know they do.

But we have no proof. Nothing.

Jim has admitted that his claims of punishment by death were a
joke, so in a sense you were right, but not for the reasons you
state. You were asking for something that you knew would not be
available, whether it exists or not. Then you used that lack of
availability as some kind of "proof" that you were correct that
the policy doesn't exist.

Things are not that black and white. Did it ever occur to you
that even though a project might be "on the books" its security
measures might be "off the books"? As Scott Carr pointed out,
the government does condone the use of "deadly force" to protect
its secrets as clearly illustrated by the sign outside of Area
51.

Do we have any proof that this force has not been used? And
where would we find records of that usage? Perhaps in the same
filing cabinet as the info on the Roswell crash or the plans for
reverse engineering of alien craft, etc, etc. My point is that
if such a record exists, the LAST thing they are going to do is
make it easy for you or me or Jim to get a hold of it. So lack
of documentation means nothing.

None the less, I'm was not arguing that Jim was correct about
threats of punishment by death regarding his work for the
government. I was taking issue with your logic that just because
you don't know about something, or just because there's no
documentation, or just because it's not a known policy, then,
therefore, it doesn't exist.

Nothing could be further from the truth in this day and age.

Later,

Roger Evans