Pay No Attention to the Man Behind the Curtain! Alleged Super-Skeptic Tells All!

Originally posted by IsaacKoi
But where's the evidence of military disinformation in relation to UFOs (other than in relation to one or two very limited instances, such as Project Beta) instead of, say, certain people having a laugh at the expense of the gullible and/or seeking to make a bit of money?

Of course you know I have some fairly strong opinions on that issue, but it does bring to mind another question about Ernie "Hawk"Kellerstrauss. I'm having a little trouble determining if he was retired or active military when he was first associated with the info that later seemed to turn up in relation to MJ-12 & Serpo?

Not that that would mean he was working it in an official manner, but I am continually struck by the fact that many of the folk associated with the shenanigans never seemed to take any real heat or official consequences and, further, those that might be deemed major players continued--and continue--to be utilized on official projects. Some even retain top secret clearances.

"More credible" than some of the others involved in this drama isn't exactly high praise.

HaHa, that's a fact.

Originally posted by The GUT
I am continually struck by the fact that many of the folk associated with the shenanigans never seemed to take any real heat or official consequences

Well, I have seen a reference to a FBI file on Doty being held by some researchers - and other material relating to investigations of him. I'd like a copy of that documentation...

www.sciforums.com...

Paul Warren

I've just finished conducting an investigation into the former special agent, osi, Richard Doty. I received the FBI investigation on Doty. Although heavily censored, it concluded Doty did not pass the MJ12 documents, was involved in the Ellsworth AFB hoax document sent to the National Enquire. However, Doty did admit performing USAF/OSI sponsored disinformation operations against UFO investigators, particularly Linda Howe. I interviewed Doty in Jan 98. He denied any involvement in current UFO investigations.

Anyone know "Paul Warren" to ask him for a copy of that material and/or further information on his investigation??

By the way, I did try to contact Robert Michael Collins via Facebook a few months ago about related issues but didn't get any reply at that time. However, I did have an exchange with him on another topic on Facebook a few days ago when someone suggested that he and I debate our conflicting views.

(Oh dear, I'm getting dragged into these fascinating issues again... I really should be finishing my work on a long thread on Steven Greer...)

Originally posted by IsaacKoi
(Oh dear, I'm getting dragged into these fascinating issues again... I really should be finishing my work on a long thread on Steven Greer...)

edit on 11-7-2013 by IsaacKoi because: (no reason given)

That is guaranteed to cause some excitement and emotion. LOL
I will be interested to read it when it is finished.

reply to post by IsaacKoi
That is interesting if true. I was just about to ask if you knew who Paul Warren was when you added the question.

Seems like that document would've turned up by now?

Man, I am so looking forward to an IsaacKoi thread on Greer! At the same time, you know I wanna keep you focused on this topic as long as possible! I'm torn.

reply to post by IsaacKoi


Or if you look at the third post in that thread there is a lady named Janet Caldwell who claims Paul is incorrect on some stuff having investigated him herself for Time Magazine.

Sounds like just some dude to me.

ETA: the same Janet Caldwell can be verified with a simple Google search. I got nothing on Paul Warren.
Hmm

Originally posted by JayinAR
Or if you look at the third post in that thread there is a lady named Janet Caldwell who claims Paul is incorrect on some stuff having investigated him herself for Time Magazine.

All the more reason to try to obtain any documentation he actually had, rather than rely on an online posting.

Similarly, I'd be interested in reading the article Janet Caldwell mentions. She says "I investigated Doty for a Time Magazine article in 1998" so I'm not sure it was actually published. That article would be worth obtaining (though not as good as any FBI file...). It may not be hard to find current contact details for Janet Caldwell (I haven't tried yet) and ask her for a reference/copy and any further information she obtained.

reply to post by IsaacKoi


I sent her an email.
We shall see, I suppose.

ETA: when and if she responds I will ask her for info about this Paul Warren fellow and see if she knows what he is on about.

reply to post by JayinAR
Work it Jay!
Use your masculine wiles on her!

reply to post by IsaacKoi


I find that estimation of sightings caused by the U2 to be utter guff of the highest order. The U2 was an incredibly expensive short lived white elephant that has passed into myth and has many "fake" successes attributed to it. The Russian Missiles on Cuba, were first spotted by a U2. Utter tosh, they were first spotted and photographed by a bog standard Naval Jet, from memory a Corsair, although I could be wrong on the specific mark.

I suspect the reason for the mythologising of the U2 is a simple one. The money wasted on it, had it been spent on rocket research wouldn't have seen the Russian Block first into space, Ergo with typical bellicose retrospective grandeur, the U2 is talked up as some wonder machine when in fact, it was nothing of the sort. This is the same CIA that time and time again was either, wholly incompetent at assessing Russian military strength or, flat out lying as many of its' oppos were taking kick backs from the military suppliers.

The CIA wasted billions of tax dollars on what were, in the end, nothing more than fiscal dick waving projects that, were not only aimed at sneering at foreign powers rather, their own legitimate armed services and Space programme.

We then had a "Stealth Fighter, which was actually a sub sonic bomber that had an operationally useful life of less than 6 years before it was rendered wholly obsolete by the simple expediency of using mobile phone networks to track it and shoot one down. . Billions of dollars effectively, pissed up the wall and undone by a single lowly ranking Serbian Radar operator.

As ever, the CiA are long on wind short on actual evidence when it comes to the U2 and UFOs. Frankly, I find it hard to believe a word they say about much of anything unless it's been checked, cross referenced and checked again by someone or some party, that least has a grasp on telling the truth. The CIA and Britain's MOD are habitual liars, probably because, it's just easier to do that as for decades ,most people were happy to simply swallow the "party line". The problem is, with regards to UFOs, both parties have successfully managed to pee off numerous good hearted model professionals, who have spent their whole careers "on message" and been quite happy to make them look like idiots in front of their peers and the public.

Tell you a little story about a classic military myth. That they have computers that are decades ahead of what we in the cheap seats have. Well, a few months ago, this being a time of austerity and all that, there was an auction on EBAY. Most wouldn't have noticed it, only a true geek friend of mine spotted it, bid and won it. He ended up with something like 20 PCs recently decommissioned from military use. They ran on XP and the only thing that marked them out as "unusual", was inbuilt sharing app, that allowed them to communicate with each other over a quite sophisticated network.

In short, the military, in terms of true blue sky technology are nowhere near as sophisticated as their press office would have you believe and neither the spooks or the politicos really know much more about UFOs than they did 70 years ago. What they want is this, for people to either believe their line of "it's all bunk" or, they want the "believers" to think that, they are in cahoots with these UFOs and have all kinds of secret stuff lying about. What they will never admit is simply that. "Well truth be told, we don't know and yes, these critters are still giving us the figurative finger".

However, the spooks/military world wide are aware of this. That if someone were to stumble on some genuine data on UFOs and what they really are or, were to actually find something that amounted to genuine non human technology then they want it so, the infiltrate and subvert the various organisations just to make sure they are at the "front of the queue" should the time come. Oh they believe, they believe and then some and they want it for their own ends. What's more, they are bricking themselves that, should the non humans choose to make themselves truly apparent, then they, the spooks, will be the last people included in the loop.

reply to post by littled16


Yeah, I attached a sexy pose and offered to pay for the info with good looks.

Originally posted by JayinAR
reply to post by IsaacKoi

 

I sent her an email.
We shall see, I suppose.

ETA: when and if she responds I will ask her for info about this Paul Warren fellow and see if she knows what he is on about.

Jay you are turning into quite the detective! Great initiative, brother.

reply to post by The GUT


You just like the angle of offering sexiness as payment, don't ya??

Thanks, man.

The strange thing about that Paul Warren guy is that THAT post is the only post he ever made on that site.
Talk about random.

"Uh hey guys, here is some false (potentially) info on Richard Doty.
Deuces."

reply to post by JayinAR
Doty: The Teflon Con.

Btw, I hope Jim comes back for some Q&A...

Originally posted by JayinAR
The strange thing about that Paul Warren guy is that THAT post is the only post he ever made on that site.
Talk about random.

I know, but his reference to FBI documents on an investigation into Richard Doty was consistent with other (frustratingly brief) references.

Here's another one:

www.martiansgohome.com...

Doty, who is now with the New Mexico State Police, told us that he was investigated by the FBI in 1987, which would be very shortly after Moore first made the "Presidential Briefing Document" public.

A naive question (I am still younger than many of you, ):

I notice that there seems to be a desire to slot folks as either a conspiracy theorists, skeptics, and now, cynics. I like cynic fine, because I am a sort of conspiracy-theorist/cynic; I'm not very skeptical (on antiquities, I can be, but that's a good thing).

Why should we bother to make such distinctions for other than the purposes of target acquisition? We are all swimming in the same soup.

We are all expecting to find the same answer in the end, aren't we? The truth, or at least a closer approximation?

Which makes me wonder another thing: do we all know each other well enough yet, and trust each other well enough yet, to come up with a list of anything that we agree on?

If we did, we could push this train farther down the tracks. Granted, if we break something and the train comes off the tracks, the disaster will be larger; but there would be more fodder for analysis in the end, then we could ever muster by ourselves.

Someone asked, for instance, if we can throw Kecksburg and Maury in the military-production-number pile (Dog and Pony Show pile); seems those two should be obvious after the last few days of this depressing stuff. So I would throw those in the that pile for sure. And so we could build a list. A tentative list.

Asking too much?

Originally posted by The GUT
[
And that was my hope with this thread. I do have a question as related to reports in conjunction with your Open Letter to CSETI:

Did you actually receive some official flak and attempted intimidation for writing and disseminating it?

I've gotten so much flack from TPTB at NASA and elsewhere I have a hard time filtering out what specifics sparked what reactions. In the 1996-7 era I was the proverbial 't^rd in the punchbowl\'; over my whistleblowing on NASA safety culture decay -- after I testified to Congress I endured unprecedented IRS harassment for a few years, even got the honor of being the only journalist EVER to be called 'whacko' in an official NASA press release... but I doubt any UFO opinions were really noticed.

reply to post by Bybyots
Personally I prefer the title "Inquisitive Nutbag", but only when used in an endearing fashion! But hey- that's just me. To each his own!

reply to post by Bybyots


I tossed out Kecksburg and Maury Island hoping to entice Jim into giving us a hint.

Those two would seem like logical guesses to me given the specific wording of his letter.

Originally posted by JimOberg
I've gotten so much flack from TPTB at NASA and elsewhere I have a hard time filtering out what specifics sparked what reactions. In the 1996-7 era I was the proverbial 't^rd in the punchbowl'; over my whistleblowing on NASA safety culture decay -- after I testified to Congress I endured unprecedented IRS harassment for a few years, even got the honor of being the only journalist EVER to be called 'whacko' in an official NASA press release... but I doubt any UFO opinions were really noticed.

Thanks for the reply to that question. I'd say being called such names by NASA is a compliment. Congrats on calling them out as regards safety culture and thank you for doing so.

I'm sure you knew it would cost you...just not how much. Boy, the IRS certainly seem to be first-line 'enforcer" thugs for the TPTB, especially in light of the recent revelations.