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 -> 1999 -> Oct -> Re: Nick Pope - The Ministry of Defence Respond

UFO UpDates Mailing List

From: Donald Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 09:57:58 -0300
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 17:16:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Nick Pope - The Ministry of Defence Respond

 >From: James Easton <voyager@ukonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Nick Pope - The Ministry of Defence Respond
 >Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 05:47:53 +0100

 >Voyager Newsletter - Issue No. 8

 >* Nick Pope - The Ministry of Defence Respond *

 >On 7 August, 1999, I published the following:

 >'An Open Letter to Nick Pope'

 >Dear Nick,

 >In the July issue of 'NICK POPE'S WEIRD WORLD', you wrote:

 >"Over the past few months I'd been becoming more bullish in my
 >response to certain people within ufology who'd been sniping at
 >me over the years. Nobody likes criticism, and I'd been getting
 >a fair bit - little of it constructive in nature. If people were
 >criticising my views on, say, Roswell, then fine. I wasn't
 >there, and so my view probably counts no more or no less than
 >anybody else who's followed the case with a reasonable degree of
 >interest. But it rankled when outsiders who'd probably never
 >even visited MOD Main Building started casting doubts on my
 >knowledge about - and access to - government and military UFO
 >files. I've worked for the MOD for over fourteen years now, and
 >three of those were spent researching and investigating UFO
 >sightings, alien abductions, crop circles, animal mutilations
 >and any other weird and wonderful reports that came my way".

 >I trust I'm not one of the aforementioned 'critics' and perhaps
 >you can help clear up some of the confusion which surrounds a
 >number of claims.

 >To recap; your appointment with the Ministry of Defence (MoD)
 >was as an Executive Officer. To clarify for the 'uninitiated'
 >(I'm a former Civil Servant), the standard grading hierarchy is
 >clerical assistant - clerical officer - executive officer -
 >higher executive officer - and upwards.

Snipped for brevity.....


Hi James and List,

I know little about Nick Pope and his involvement with the
British Government, but to suggest that any government is not
associated with spin doctoring when in fact it is probably 75
percent spin doctoring, if not more, indicates a naive view of
how government works. So-called democratic governments usually
work on the myopic 4-5 year plan, or whatever term they have in
office and worry little about the long term.

They channel most of their energies into getting re-elected, and
controlling information is part and parcel of how they do it.

Having worked myself for a government for nearly 30 years, I have little
hesitation in endorsing that view. Public relations and spin doctoring
are not the sole property of the media.

To suggest that once assigned to a department or specific job
that other duties cannot be added to your original duties in
government is a seeming lacking of understanding of the trade,
or a misrepresentation of same.

Your defence of the British government in this regard is
touching, but in keeping with your views on the UFO subject.
Like the government I find that your suppositions are often
straw dogs supported by little evidence other than your own and
your dogged determination to repeat them over and over as the
solution. This is a ploy often used by government. I was
prepared a year or so ago to accept your explanation as to the
causes of the Rendlesham Forest sighting but since then your
proofs on other cases have left me cold and wondering. I am sure
that again you will repeat them over and over to whomever will
listen. Whether indeed there is anything to Rendlesham is yet to
be seen, however I now look upon that case as unresolved.

Also, James, you stated that you worked for the British
Government. Do you still?

Don Ledger