Tim Good says "Lazar has no credentials whatsoever"
Nick Humphries
Just found the tape I recorded the Tim Good Talk Radio UK interview he
gave last year, and here's the relevant portion:
Caller: It [Alian Liaison] contains an interesting interview with Bob
Lazar, he said he actually worked on a craft.
Tim Good: Bob lazar is an engineer, he *CLAIMS* [heavy emphasis] to
have worked on the propulsion system of one of these craft and to have
seen it being test flown. Now, the bad news, is that it now transpires
that Bob lazar has NO credentials WHATSOEVER [huge laughter in the
background], so he's not a nuclear physicist as he claims, at least
not a QUALIFIED one. He has done some work in the nuclear business,
but he's certainly an engineer.
So much for Gene Huff saying that Good beleives the Lazar story. To
his credit, Good DID go on to say that SOME of what Lazar says could
be true and has been corroborated by other people who have come
forward. His opinion is that Lazar was told the story and he related
it as his own - either that or someone took him around for a tour of
Area 51.
Anyone who wants a tape of this interview just email me your address
(any country - I'll pay postage). If you want, I could sample the
above snippet and put it on ftp.
An apology from Gene Huff for calling me a liar wouldn't go amiss.
Nick Humphries, ni...@the-den.demon.co.uk, at your service
If the Truth is Out There, what's In Here?
Gene Huff
In <8325155...@the-den.demon.co.uk> ni...@the-den.demon.co.uk (Nick
Humphries) writes:
>
>Tim Good: Bob lazar is an engineer, he *CLAIMS* [heavy emphasis] to
>have worked on the propulsion system of one of these craft and to have
>seen it being test flown. Now, the bad news, is that it now transpires
>that Bob lazar has NO credentials WHATSOEVER [huge laughter in the
>background], so he's not a nuclear physicist as he claims, at least
>not a QUALIFIED one. He has done some work in the nuclear business,
>but he's certainly an engineer.
>
>So much for Gene Huff saying that Good beleives the Lazar story. To
>his credit, Good DID go on to say that SOME of what Lazar says could
>be true and has been corroborated by other people who have come
>forward. His opinion is that Lazar was told the story and he related
>it as his own - either that or someone took him around for a tour of
>Area 51.
-I notice that you chose not to quote Tim's exact words about him
thinking that Lazar was told the story and related it as his own. Why
not? That's what I'll need to call Tim and hear a verification or
clarification. If what you're saying is true, Tim would have destroyed
his own reputation as an investigator and author. However, I didn't say
that you were a liar on that specific point. You're simply a liar,
generally speaking.-
Nick Humphries
gu...@ix.netcom.com(Gene Huff) wrote:
>In <8325155...@the-den.demon.co.uk> ni...@the-den.demon.co.uk (Nick
>Humphries) writes:
>>
>>Tim Good: Bob lazar is an engineer, he *CLAIMS* [heavy emphasis] to
>>have worked on the propulsion system of one of these craft and to have
>>seen it being test flown. Now, the bad news, is that it now transpires
>>that Bob lazar has NO credentials WHATSOEVER [huge laughter in the
>>background], so he's not a nuclear physicist as he claims, at least
>>not a QUALIFIED one. He has done some work in the nuclear business,
>>but he's certainly an engineer.
>>
>>So much for Gene Huff saying that Good beleives the Lazar story. To
>>his credit, Good DID go on to say that SOME of what Lazar says could
>>be true and has been corroborated by other people who have come
>>forward. His opinion is that Lazar was told the story and he related
>>it as his own - either that or someone took him around for a tour of
>>Area 51.
>-I notice that you chose not to quote Tim's exact words about him
>thinking that Lazar was told the story and related it as his own. Why
>not?
I didn't think I'd need to - the quote seemed to prove the main point
and I summarised the rest in one line. You seem to be clinging to the
vain hope that Tim Good beleives your story so that you have a
credible UFO researcher behind you. Here's the quote you're after...
Tim Good: [continuing from the last quote] Other people have come
forward, very convincing people, to confirm that what he's actually
saying is essentially true [like when Good said the MJ12 documents
contained information which was essentially true - NickH], so either
he's been told about it or the feeling is that he was taken there and
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
shown some of this stuff.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Happy now? If you want the tape still, just email me (same goes for
everyone else). No one needs to pay a penny, I'll even pay postage
(contrast that to the selling of the Lazar story). Email me before the
end of the week and you'll get a copy in the post - wherever you are
in the world.
> That's what I'll need to call Tim and hear a verification or
>clarification.
You got it - you want me to send you the tape to play to him too?
>If what you're saying is true, Tim would have destroyed
>his own reputation as an investigator and author.
One of the most respected authors lost a little respect with Alien
Liaison in which he wasted 50-odd pages promoting the Lazar story.
What's the betting that if and when he re-writes Alien Liaison he
drops the Lazar coverage to half a page? Tim Good has GAINED respect
by admitting he was wrong and corrected himself. Funny how before I
quoted from his interview you thought he was a respectable consultant
- how things change when you notice that people aren't on your side!
>However, I didn't say
>that you were a liar on that specific point. You're simply a liar,
>generally speaking.-
Let's see - you have just been proved a liar. You claimed to have been
in recent contact with Tim Good and told us all he was pro-Lazar, yet
the radio interview was in early 1995 (over a YEAR ago) which shows
this is plainly NOT the case. You are claiming to have the backing of
prominent and UFO researchers which just does not exist. Everything
which I've been saying has just been proved true and you have been
caught with your trousers down on this one (and, let's face it Huff,
it ain't a pretty sight).
I was wrong about one thing though - Bill Cooper may not be the number
one UFO conman around, you and Lazar have just been promoted to joint
first. Has anyone else noticed how Gene Huff's style is remarkably
similar to that of Bill Cooper when he first came on the net? All he
has to do now is accuse people of being government agents and we'll
have Bill Cooper V2.0! :)
Chris Trimble
Gene Huff wrote:
[in response to Nick's post about T. Good's comments]
> If what you're saying is true, Tim would have destroyed
> his own reputation as an investigator and author.
If there's any author I can think of who's taken an objective
standpoint in reporting evidence, it must be Timothy Good. Above Top
Secret has to be one of the most comprehensive and thoroughly examining
books on the subject. He presents evidence without slant, qualifying
all of the circumstances by which that evidence came about. His
reputation, in my view, is one of attempting to report what little
verifiable fact there is in a minefield of crackpots and frauds.
So, I don't think Tim Good saying bad things about any unsubstantiated
claim will ruin his reputation -- it will actually improve his
reputation as an honest researcher of the subject.
- C
Chris Trimble
Debbie Sutton wrote:
> By the way, Lazar NEVER lectured for money. The only 2..
[blah blah blah]
I'm sure the movie rights were just given up for free.. right Deb? How
about the proceeds from the video sales?
But, let's suppose that someone does it all for no money. Movie rights
for free; he gives up everything. Does that mean there's nothing gained
from the story? No. Does that substantiate the story? No way.
- C
Gene Huff
In <83262573...@the-den.demon.co.uk> ni...@the-den.demon.co.uk
(Nick Humphries) writes:
>
>I didn't think I'd need to - the quote seemed to prove the main point
>and I summarised the rest in one line.
-You had a thought? The quote said that Tim doubted Bob's credentials.
There's a big difference in that and him stating that Lazar was simply
told the story and passed it a long. Even you should be able to see
that.-
>You seem to be clinging to the vain hope that Tim Good beleives your
>story so that you have a credible UFO researcher behind you.
-I'm not clinging to anything and it's not my story, it's Bob Lazars.
There are many credible researchers who support Lazar's story and I
even named a few of them for you. I see you're conveniently ignoring
that. Tim Good included Bob Oechslers info in his book so whether or
not he's credible is debatable by some. I think he's an intelligent
gentleman, but let's face it, I only know him because he interviewed
Bob and I for a book, years ago. The validity of Lazar's story is not
based on any individual's assessment of it, least of all yours.-
>Tim Good: [continuing from the last quote] Other people have come
>forward, very convincing people, to confirm that what he's actually
>saying is essentially true [like when Good said the MJ12 documents
>contained information which was essentially true - NickH], so either
>he's been told about it or the feeling is that he was taken there and
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>shown some of this stuff.
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>Happy now? If you want the tape still, just email me (same goes for
>everyone else).
-You imbecile, that quote doesn't even come near to reflecting what you
stated in your paraphrase. That statement says that Lazar was THERE,
you idiot! I'll call Tim and get an official clarification.-
No one needs to pay a penny, I'll even pay postage (contrast that to
the selling of the Lazar story).
-The contrast is that Lazar's story is true and intelligently
interpreted. Do you honestly think anyone will listen to you after your
misinterpretation, or out and out lie about, what Tim Good said? You
can pat yourself on the back all you want, but you're a liar and an
idiot and you've proven it once again.-
>Let's see - you have just been proved a liar. You claimed to have been
>in recent contact with Tim Good and told us all he was pro-Lazar, yet
>the radio interview was in early 1995 (over a YEAR ago) which shows
>this is plainly NOT the case.
-Nice try geek. I stated that Tim Good is a consultant on an upcoming
project by a British company called Transmedia Productions and Tim Good
is a consultant. I haven't spoke to Tim recently but they implied that
he was pro-Lazar and he was last time I spoke with him. If there is any
variance it belongs to Tim Good, not me. Do you now see why your
limited problem solving capability causes you to pass on lies? I know
you're sincere, but I don't think that's a substitute for honesty and
intelligence.-
the backing of prominent and UFO researchers which just does not
exist.
-That is totally untrue and you're simply a liar.-
>Everything which I've been saying has just been proved true and you
have been caught with your trousers down on this one (and, let's face
it Huff, it ain't a pretty sight).
-It's funny to see a fool patting himself on the back when he's just
proven that his own argument is wrong. You're putting words in
everyone's mouth and they're all lies. If you're right about Tim Good,
then fine. I said I'd call him and ask him, so I'm being fair. However,
I already know that you misinterpreted what he said either out of
stupidity or malice and neither is admirable. Thanks for the insight
into you sexuality and psyche as I'm sure you and your buddies spend
plenty of time with your trousers down and it's not so you can discuss
UFOs. Obviously your ego is deeply involved here as I've shown you to
be a simpleton and a liar and you feel you need to turn the tables to
get revenge. Remember, YOU are the one who proved yourself to be these
things and you were the one who opened your mouth. It would have been
better to stay quiet and just have everyone suspect you were an idiot.
Now there's no doubt.-
>
Debbie Sutton
In article <83262573...@the-den.demon.co.uk>,
ni...@the-den.demon.co.uk (Nick Humphries) wrote:
>gu...@ix.netcom.com(Gene Huff) wrote:
>
>>In <8325155...@the-den.demon.co.uk> ni...@the-den.demon.co.uk (Nick
>>Humphries) writes:
>>>
>>>Tim Good: Bob lazar is an engineer, he *CLAIMS* [heavy emphasis] to
>>>have worked on the propulsion system of one of these craft and to have
>>>seen it being test flown. Now, the bad news, is that it now transpires
>>>that Bob lazar has NO credentials WHATSOEVER [huge laughter in the
>>>background], so he's not a nuclear physicist as he claims, at least
>>>not a QUALIFIED one. He has done some work in the nuclear business,
>>>but he's certainly an engineer.
You need to see some more recent comments by Tim. They are quite different.
>>>To his credit, Good DID go on to say that SOME of what Lazar says could
>>>be true and has been corroborated by other people who have come forward.
If any of what Lazar says is true, it is quite significant. It seems as if
more and more is verified by others. Ask Glenn Campbell about Bill Uhouse.
>>>His opinion is that Lazar was told the story and he related it as his own -
either that or someone took him around for a tour of Area 51.
Oh...right. Tours of Area 51. So Lazar was an "engineer" and someone said "you
wanna see some real cool secret UFO stuff Bob?". Get a clue dude!
By the way, Lazar NEVER lectured for money. The only 2 lectures he's given to
my knowledge are one at the Ali-Inn and one at a high school for the students.
This mythical "UFO Gravytrain" exists only in your mind. Lazar gets no money
from it. He continues to work in the scientific field as a consultant
physicist for several companies in addition to running his own businesses 5
days a week.
-The Deb
Nick Humphries
gu...@ix.netcom.com(Gene Huff) wrote:
>In <83262573...@the-den.demon.co.uk> ni...@the-den.demon.co.uk
>(Nick Humphries) writes:
>>
>>I didn't think I'd need to - the quote seemed to prove the main point
>>and I summarised the rest in one line.
>-You had a thought? The quote said that Tim doubted Bob's credentials.
The quote said he had NO credentials AT ALL. That's more than just a
doubt.
>There's a big difference in that and him stating that Lazar was simply
>told the story and passed it a long. Even you should be able to see
>that.-
But Good went on to say just exactly that. You even quoted the quote.
>>You seem to be clinging to the vain hope that Tim Good beleives your
>>story so that you have a credible UFO researcher behind you.
>-I'm not clinging to anything and it's not my story, it's Bob Lazars.
Yes, but you two seem to be joined at the hip these days. You're
pushing the story and you're getting a cut of all the money it's
making.
>There are many credible researchers who support Lazar's story and I
>even named a few of them for you. I see you're conveniently ignoring
>that.
Since you named Tim Good amongst them and it's become clear that he's
been anti-Lazar since early 1995 AT LEAST, I wanted corroboration of
yyour claims as you've been proved a liar.
> Tim Good included Bob Oechslers info in his book so whether or
>not he's credible is debatable by some.
People tend to look at the major part of his work, which is about
exposing UFO cover-ups.
>I think he's an intelligent
>gentleman, but let's face it, I only know him because he interviewed
>Bob and I for a book, years ago.
You claimed in a recent post to be in regular recent contact with
Good. How things change...
>The validity of Lazar's story is not
>based on any individual's assessment of it, least of all yours.-
I base my assessment on the research of other people, people who are a
lot more honest, reliable and respectable than you.
> >Tim Good: [continuing from the last quote] Other people have come
>>forward, very convincing people, to confirm that what he's actually
>>saying is essentially true [like when Good said the MJ12 documents
>>contained information which was essentially true - NickH], so either
>>he's been told about it or the feeling is that he was taken there and
>>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>shown some of this stuff.
>>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>
>>Happy now? If you want the tape still, just email me (same goes for
>>everyone else).
>-You imbecile, that quote doesn't even come near to reflecting what you
>stated in your paraphrase.
I said Good went on to say that he thought Lazar was either told the
story or taken around for a visit. That is precisely what he said.
>That statement says that Lazar was THERE,
>you idiot! I'll call Tim and get an official clarification.-
Tim's voice on tape no good for you? You want me to sample it and
email it to you? You just don't want to beleive that Tim just doesn't
beleive you.
> No one needs to pay a penny, I'll even pay postage (contrast that to
>the selling of the Lazar story).
>-The contrast is that Lazar's story is true and intelligently
>interpreted. Do you honestly think anyone will listen to you after your
>misinterpretation, or out and out lie about, what Tim Good said? You
>can pat yourself on the back all you want, but you're a liar and an
>idiot and you've proven it once again.-
Disproven.
>>Let's see - you have just been proved a liar. You claimed to have been
>>in recent contact with Tim Good and told us all he was pro-Lazar, yet
>>the radio interview was in early 1995 (over a YEAR ago) which shows
>>this is plainly NOT the case.
>-Nice try geek. I stated that Tim Good is a consultant on an upcoming
>project by a British company called Transmedia Productions and Tim Good
>is a consultant. I haven't spoke to Tim recently but they implied that
>he was pro-Lazar and he was last time I spoke with him. If there is any
>variance it belongs to Tim Good, not me. Do you now see why your
>limited problem solving capability causes you to pass on lies? I know
>you're sincere, but I don't think that's a substitute for honesty and
>intelligence.-
Looks like you were exaggerating your contact with Good before you
were exposed. You also like to read information between the lines
which simply isn't there, then you pass off this "information" as the
truth. Honesty and intelligence aren't your strong subjects are they?
> the backing of prominent and UFO researchers which just does not
>exist.
>-That is totally untrue and you're simply a liar.-
Like I said earlier, you said Tim Good was behind you - he is not. How
do I know if you're not lying about the others on your list?
>>Everything which I've been saying has just been proved true and you
>have been caught with your trousers down on this one (and, let's face
>it Huff, it ain't a pretty sight).
And here's the obligatory flame...
>-It's funny to see a fool patting himself on the back when he's just
>proven that his own argument is wrong. You're putting words in
>everyone's mouth and they're all lies. If you're right about Tim Good,
>then fine. I said I'd call him and ask him, so I'm being fair. However,
>I already know that you misinterpreted what he said either out of
>stupidity or malice and neither is admirable. Thanks for the insight
>into you sexuality and psyche as I'm sure you and your buddies spend
>plenty of time with your trousers down and it's not so you can discuss
>UFOs. Obviously your ego is deeply involved here as I've shown you to
>be a simpleton and a liar and you feel you need to turn the tables to
>get revenge. Remember, YOU are the one who proved yourself to be these
>things and you were the one who opened your mouth. It would have been
>better to stay quiet and just have everyone suspect you were an idiot.
>Now there's no doubt.-
>>
Christopher Jefferson
Gene,
Am relatively new to this ng, and I am following the Lazar debate, as this
appears to be the most important story in the UFO mystery to surface since
the MJ-12 papers.
My question to you is simply this: To what extent can Lazar be trusted? I
know that you have been round and round with Nick Humphries, et al, on
this. But if you wouldn't mind sparing me a post, kindly indicate just on
what basis you believe Lazar. That is to say, what has he shown you, or
proven to you, that compels you to believe his story.
I do not accuse Lazar of fabrication. Far from it. I am prepared to give
him the benefit of the doubt. But I would feel far more comfortable with
Lazar's recounting of this newsgroup's answer to the Quest for the Holy
Grail if I had proof of his veracity.
BTW, I read that you're heading out to Rachel again soon. Have a good
time. And one thing. Is there actually a statue on top of Tikaboo Peak
known as "Our Lady of the Black Projects". Please advise.
Be Seeing You,
Chris
Eugene Fields
Debbie Sutton wrote:
>
> In article <83262573...@the-den.demon.co.uk>,
> ni...@the-den.demon.co.uk (Nick Humphries) wrote:
> >gu...@ix.netcom.com(Gene Huff) wrote:
> >
> >>In <8325155...@the-den.demon.co.uk> ni...@the-den.demon.co.uk (Nick
> >>Humphries) writes:
> >>>
> >>>Tim Good: Bob lazar is an engineer, he *CLAIMS* [heavy emphasis] to
> >>>have worked on the propulsion system of one of these craft and to have
> >>>seen it being test flown. Now, the bad news, is that it now transpires
> >>>that Bob lazar has NO credentials WHATSOEVER [huge laughter in the
> >>>background], so he's not a nuclear physicist as he claims, at least
> >>>not a QUALIFIED one. He has done some work in the nuclear business,
> >>>but he's certainly an engineer.
>
> -The Deb
There are all sorts of 'Credentialed' people working in Black Ops that because they are
working in Black Ops have no credentials anymore..Anyone who works in the Black Projects
have, no drivers licence, birth certificates, "credentials" everything has been wiped
out...incentive to never leave #1 and they no longer 'legaly exist'..So anything happens to
them...nothing happened!! etc etc..all very disturbing but that the drill never the
less..So they go public ala Lazar and the Powers that be brand them "frauds" and they have
no ammo to legitemize themselves..Very freakin slick....They get paid a tun of money so
most just stay and eveaperate into the woodwork..thier families friends think they are dead
often..thats how they end up..With no paper trail it really gives them carte blance to do
as they will..whatever is deemed expediant to 'national security'
--
===========================================================
Eugene Fields, ASPN • MacTech Consulting
Systems Stabilized
efi...@i-2000.com | Phone: 516.728.8897
http://www.i2.i-2000.com/~efields/
===========================================================
Gene Huff
In <83270513...@the-den.demon.co.uk> ni...@the-den.demon.co.uk
(Nick Humphries) writes:
>
>Since you named Tim Good amongst them and it's become clear that he's
>been anti-Lazar since early 1995 AT LEAST, I wanted corroboration of
>yyour claims as you've been proved a liar.
-Not at all. Tim Good is on the record in his book as supporting
Lazar's story. I was not aware of the radio show you cite, if it is
indeed true. On June 1, Bruce Burgess of Transmedia in London is coming
here to interview Lazar and he and his assistant, Jackie Stableforth,
told me that Tim Good was assisting them by providing them info and
that he was pro-Lazar. Last time I talked to Tim he was pro, they say
he's pro now and you say he was anti last year. I did not lie. If Tim
flip flops then it is his burden to explain why. I said I'd call him,
how much more honest can I be? Now stop lying you idiot. Everyone can
see it so you can't deny it.-
>
>People tend to look at the major part of his work, which is about
>exposing UFO cover-ups.
-That's a typical statement from the likes of you. Exactly what poll
did you take that you now assert that you speak for "people"? That's
your whole problem.-
>
>You claimed in a recent post to be in regular recent contact with
>Good. How things change...
-Of course, care to cite that? I said I could call him at his home and
I can and will. I did not state that I do that with regularity. You
have, again, proven to be a liar and idiot.-
>
>I base my assessment on the research of other people, people who are a
>lot more honest, reliable and respectable than you.
-Really? Then you'd better state a case where I've been dishonest,
unreliable, and unrespectable Nicky boy. I know you've tried to do that
here, but you've only shown that you're a liar/idiot.-
>
>Tim's voice on tape no good for you? You want me to sample it and
>email it to you? You just don't want to beleive that Tim just doesn't
>beleive you.
-Not at all. Tim is free to think whatever he wants. If what you're
saying is true, his book is true, and the people at Transmedia tell the
truth, then Tim has been flip-flopping and it seems to be worth a call
to get his current status. You act like I don't want to believe it but
all I want to know is what he actually thinks. Besides, as you're a
liar/idiot, I can't trust that you've accurately conveyed what he
said.-
>
>Let's see - you have just been proved a liar. You claimed to have been
>in recent contact with Tim Good and told us all he was pro-Lazar, yet
the radio interview was in early 1995 (over a YEAR ago) which shows
>this is plainly NOT the case.
-I have not been proven as any such thing. I did not claim to be in
recent contact with Tim. If he now says that he supports Lazar does
that mean that you're a liar even though you've allegedly got a
recording of him on the radio? The problem is Tim's, not yours, not
mine.-
>
>Looks like you were exaggerating your contact with Good before you
>were exposed. You also like to read information between the lines
>which simply isn't there, then you pass off this "information" as the
>truth. Honesty and intelligence aren't your strong subjects are they?
-Actually they're my strong subjects as evidenced by my taking the time
to make an ass of you here. No, my contentions about any contacts were
accurate. If you've found a disparity, please cite it. Otherwise go
play with the other little idiots/liars.-
>
>Like I said earlier, you said Tim Good was behind you - he is not. How
>do I know if you're not lying about the others on your list?
-What list? If Tim has flip flopped, then we need to know his current
status. You say he's anti, others who are more honest and intelligent
than you say he's pro. Either way, I can live with it. You really don't
know much of anything so you'll just have to check the others out for
yourself.-
>
>
Gene Huff
In <4nt7cb$2...@mtinsc01-mgt.ops.worldnet.att.net> Christopher Jefferson
<ALMIGHTY> writes:
>
>My question to you is simply this: To what extent can Lazar be
trusted? I know that you have been round and round with Nick Humphries,
et al, on this. But if you wouldn't mind sparing me a post, kindly
indicate just on what basis you believe Lazar. That is to say, what has
he shown you, or proven to you, that compels you to believe his story.
-See your email.-
>
Gene Huff
In <31A10C...@panix.com> Chris Trimble <tri...@panix.com> writes:
>
>I'm sure the movie rights were just given up for free.. right Deb?
How about the proceeds from the video sales?
-What does that have to do with the discussion at hand Trimble? If you
honestly think that Lazar fabricated his story on the hunch that years
down the road he might get a movie deal...oh... wait a minute... I
forgot which lame brain I was talking to.-
>
>
Gene Huff
In <31A287...@i-2000.com> Eugene Fields <efi...@i-2000.com>
writes:
>There are all sorts of 'Credentialed' people working in Black Ops that
because they are working in Black Ops have no credentials
anymore..Anyone who works in the Black Projects have, no drivers
licence, birth certificates, "credentials" everything has been wiped
>out...incentive to never leave #1 and they no longer 'legaly
exist'..So anything happens to them...nothing happened!! etc etc..all
very disturbing but that the drill never the less..So they go public
ala Lazar and the Powers that be brand them "frauds" and they have
>no ammo to legitemize themselves..Very freakin slick....They get paid
a tun of money so most just stay and eveaperate into the
woodwork..thier families friends think they are dead
>often..thats how they end up..With no paper trail it really gives them
carte blance to do as they will..whatever is deemed expediant to
-Eugene, here's a case in point supporting your assertion.
Bob Lazar said that the scientist that indoctrinated him at S4 was a
guy called Barry Castillo. A gentleman named Bob Huff from Virginia (no
relation, just a coincidence) did a computer search and found a man by
this name working at Sandia Labs down in New Mexico. The info said that
this man worked in high energy physics, etc. and he pretty much fit the
bill for possibly being THE Barry Castillo. We had an investigator at
the district attorney's office run a check on this guy. Guess what? He
has no New Mexico driver's license and he has no vehicle registered in
the state of New Mexico. A gentleman named Bruce Burgess of Transmedia
productions in London is currently doing a thorough investigation of
things like this for an upcoming television special he's
producing/directing. He called Sandia and they told him that this man
was a truck driver. So here we have a man whose name is the same as the
man who indoctrinated Lazar at S4, he's listed as working in high
energy physics at Sandia, he has no registered car or driver's license,
and when you call, they tell you he's a truck driver. It must be tough
being a truck driver with no driver's license, don't you think?:)
Anyway, there is nothing saying that this man is THE Barry Castillo,
but it's quite suspicious and nothing will probably come of it without
Lazar being able to visually identify him. The fact is that not even
Lazar had any idea what states the others at S4 were actually from.
People are flown into A51 from Vegas all day every day. They could be
flown in there from other states also or fly to Vegas from elsewhere
and go out there with the rest of the crew on the EG&G flights. We also
don't know that they don't stay out in central Nevada for weeks or
months at at time.-
Christopher Jefferson
Gene.
Your e-mail to me did not arrive. I suspect that it is lost in cyberspace
somewhere, unless it pops up on my Eudora Light mail server later. ATT
Worldnet is okay, but not that okay.
Looking forward to further correspondence.
Be Seeing You,
Chris
Nick Humphries
gu...@ix.netcom.com(Gene Huff) wrote:
>In <83270513...@the-den.demon.co.uk> ni...@the-den.demon.co.uk
>(Nick Humphries) writes:
>>
>>Since you named Tim Good amongst them and it's become clear that he's
>>been anti-Lazar since early 1995 AT LEAST, I wanted corroboration of
>>yyour claims as you've been proved a liar.
>-Not at all. Tim Good is on the record in his book as supporting
>Lazar's story.
Alien Liaison was published in 1991. Between 1991 and 1995 he must
have been convinced that Lazar was a fraud.
>I was not aware of the radio show you cite, if it is
>indeed true.
You seem to have no interest in the tape I have of it - give me an
address and I'll send a copy. It doesn't even have to be your own
address.
>On June 1, Bruce Burgess of Transmedia in London is coming
>here to interview Lazar and he and his assistant, Jackie Stableforth,
>told me that Tim Good was assisting them by providing them info and
>that he was pro-Lazar. Last time I talked to Tim he was pro, they say
>he's pro now and you say he was anti last year. I did not lie. If Tim
>flip flops then it is his burden to explain why. I said I'd call him,
>how much more honest can I be? Now stop lying you idiot. Everyone can
>see it so you can't deny it.-
Why haven't you called him yet?
>>People tend to look at the major part of his work, which is about
>>exposing UFO cover-ups.
>-That's a typical statement from the likes of you. Exactly what poll
>did you take that you now assert that you speak for "people"? That's
>your whole problem.-
I said that because I have talked with other people in ufology and the
thing which they remember Tim for is his exposure of the Worldwide
coverup of UFOs, as detailed in Above Top Secret and updated in Beyond
Top Secret.
[summary of snipped bit: "Liar! Liar! Pants on fire!"]
Nick Humphries
gu...@ix.netcom.com(Gene Huff) wrote:
>In <31A10C...@panix.com> Chris Trimble <tri...@panix.com> writes:
>>
>>I'm sure the movie rights were just given up for free.. right Deb?
>How about the proceeds from the video sales?
>-What does that have to do with the discussion at hand Trimble?
You claim no UFO gravy train, we're saying there is. Worked for
Whitley Streiber and Travis Walton, so why not Lazar?
Nick Humphries
dsu...@ix.netcom.com (Debbie Sutton) wrote:
>In article <83262573...@the-den.demon.co.uk>,
> ni...@the-den.demon.co.uk (Nick Humphries) wrote:
>>gu...@ix.netcom.com(Gene Huff) wrote:
>>
>>>In <8325155...@the-den.demon.co.uk> ni...@the-den.demon.co.uk (Nick
>>>Humphries) writes:
>>>>
>You need to see some more recent comments by Tim. They are quite different.
OK, when and where? And explain to me why he would puush the Lazar
story for up to four years, be convinced that Lazar is a fraud, then
get REconvinced of the Lazar story sometime in the last few months?
>>>>To his credit, Good DID go on to say that SOME of what Lazar says could
>>>>be true and has been corroborated by other people who have come forward.
>If any of what Lazar says is true, it is quite significant. It seems as if
>more and more is verified by others. Ask Glenn Campbell about Bill Uhouse.
Unless he was told the story. Before the Lazar story broke he hung
around with John Lear who had a lot to say about Area 51. Lazar could
have taken the more credible allegations from him, added some of his
own and then related that as the truth.
>>>>His opinion is that Lazar was told the story and he related it as his own -
>either that or someone took him around for a tour of Area 51.
>Oh...right. Tours of Area 51. So Lazar was an "engineer" and someone said "you
>wanna see some real cool secret UFO stuff Bob?". Get a clue dude!
I don't believe that either - I beleive Lazar was told some Area 51
folklore and then saw dollar signs in front of his eyes.
>By the way, Lazar NEVER lectured for money. The only 2 lectures he's given to
>my knowledge are one at the Ali-Inn and one at a high school for the students.
>This mythical "UFO Gravytrain" exists only in your mind. Lazar gets no money
>from it. He continues to work in the scientific field as a consultant
>physicist for several companies in addition to running his own businesses 5
>days a week.
He's done more than lectures - interviews, merchandising, videos and
the forthcoming film. You saying he did all these for free?
Debbie Sutton
In article <83279031...@the-den.demon.co.uk>,
ni...@the-den.demon.co.uk (Nick Humphries) wrote:
>>>>In <8325155...@the-den.demon.co.uk> ni...@the-den.demon.co.uk (Nick
>>>>Humphries) writes:
>I don't believe that either - I beleive Lazar was told some Area 51
>folklore and then saw dollar signs in front of his eyes.
Sure, 7 years ago when UFO's were not a topic of conversation,
Lazar plans this big story and predicts a movie, etc. Right. Though these
projects have made it ino reality, Lazar was not the impetus for any of them.
The movie producers chased him for years, the Lazar tape was made to get him
out of doing interviews. It only went on sale when it was discovered that it
was being copied and sold by others. See the beginning of the tape. The poster
was made by John Farhat, who was just facinated by the whole thing and he did
it at his own expense, the money going to him, etc. All in all sure, a few
thousand dollars were made over the past 7 years by default, split between
various people. The amount of money Lazar has netted, he makes in a month
anyway. The "dollar signs in front of his eyes" idea is bullshit.
>>By the way, Lazar NEVER lectured for money. The only 2 lectures he's given
to my knowledge are one at the Ali-Inn and one at a high school for the
students.
-Deb
Gene Huff
In <83279031...@the-den.demon.co.uk> ni...@the-den.demon.co.uk
(Nick Humphries) writes:
>
>Unless he was told the story. Before the Lazar story broke he hung
>around with John Lear who had a lot to say about Area 51.
-Bullshit. I introduced Bob Lazar to John Lear. Lear was on television
prior to that making accusations about area51, but he never said a word
that was similar to the breadth of the information brought forth by
Lazar. The extent and dates of Lear's association with Lazar has been
totally distorted by Lear. Anyone who knows what they're talking about
knows that. Naturally, that group always excludes you.-
>Lazar could have taken the more credible allegations from him, added
>some of his own and then related that as the truth.
-Nicky boy did you know that Lears main claims were that area51 had a
roof over it and the planes had to land under it? That the earth was a
farm and we were being bread as food for aliens? That there were 2
billion grey aliens living in the mountains that line the highway
between Las Vegas and A51? Exactly how much of any of that sounds
credible? Your assertion is absurd.-
>
>I don't believe that either - I beleive Lazar was told some Area 51
>folklore and then saw dollar signs in front of his eyes.
-Yes, of course, even though he has a wealthy father. You are so lame
that it is pathetic.-
>He's done more than lectures - interviews, merchandising, videos and
>the forthcoming film. You saying he did all these for free?
-He's done NO lectures, get that through your empty, thick head. Of
course the tape and poster aren't free and neither are the rights to
the upcoming movie. What you're asserting is that anyone who gets paid
for anything is money motivated. From your point of view that may seem
likely, but as you grow older, get a little smarter, and get a little
more money you'll soon see that it isn't everything.-
Gene Huff
In <4nvcqm$m...@mtinsc01-mgt.ops.worldnet.att.net> Christopher Jefferson
<ALMIGHTY> writes:
>
>Gene.
>Your e-mail to me did not arrive.
-I tried again. Let me know if you get it.-
Gene Huff
In <83279032...@the-den.demon.co.uk> ni...@the-den.demon.co.uk
(Nick Humphries) writes:
>
>You seem to have no interest in the tape I have of it - give me an
>address and I'll send a copy. It doesn't even have to be your own
>address.
-No, I don't want you chasing me around begging for my autograph.
Besides I'll speak to Tim soon so I don't need it.-
>
>Why haven't you called him yet?
-For a number of reasons. For one, believe it or not, this isn't the
foremost thing on my mind. Second, you've turned this into a Tim Good
discussion and the original discussion was actually me asserting that
you don't know what you're talking about. The more I prolong this, the
more you prove that to all who are watching. Third, I've recently heard
that Tim Good had actually began to doubt for a short time and then
received additional info that caused him to again support Lazar. I need
to see if that story can be corroborated. This is in some book
allegedly written by Tim and distributed in 1995. I want to know all I
can before I call him as I don't want him to buffer his response
because I'm confronting him with it. He probably thinks I'm worried
about his opinion but I'm not and I just want to know where he really
stands. If he did flip-flop and has now flip-flopped back, I can't wait
to see what you have to say. Lastly, now that I know you want me to
call him so bad, I'll take my time. This weekend is the memorial day
holiday so I'll probably give him a buzz then. Whatever his response
is, it doesn't change the fact that your assertions about Lazar range
from naive misunderstandings to out and out lies. The bottom line is
that you simply don't know what you're talking about.-
>
>I said that because I have talked with other people in ufology and the
>thing which they remember Tim for is his exposure of the Worldwide
>coverup of UFOs, as detailed in Above Top Secret and updated in Beyond
>Top Secret.
-Yet those people do not necessarily represent a consensus of opinion
so you don't know what you're talking about.-
>
>[summary of snipped bit: "Liar! Liar! Pants on fire!"]
-Translation: Gene Huff highlighted the MO of Nicky Boy and although
his pants may or may not be on fire, Nicky is certainly a liar, liar.
Thus the deletion.-
Gene Huff
>Whitley Streiber and Travis Walton, so why not Lazar?
-I don't need to pass judgement on Strieber or Walton. The bottom line
is that that is not what happened with Lazar. There is no UFO gravy
train and you know it. You just don't know how to back pedal out when
you're in this deep. Whitley Strieber was a successful screenwriter and
author before he went public, making much more money than anyone on
your alleged gravy train. Why did he do it? Who knows, but it wasn't
money motivated. Maybe he's even telling the truth. According to you,
doctors are on the medical gravy train. You simply don't know
anything.-
Christopher Jefferson
Gene. I got it. I must admit that while I cannot accept Lazar's story with
100% certainty, as there is a lack of empirical evidence here, I find your
retelling of his story to have the ring of truth about it.
Thanks for the e-mail.
Chris Trimble
Gene Huff wrote:
> -I don't need to pass judgement on Strieber or Walton. The
> bottom line is that that is not what happened with Lazar.
> There is no UFO gravy train and you know it. You just don't
> know how to back pedal out when you're in this deep.
There's not much for him to backpedal out of, Gene... sorry. Granted,
maybe Whitley and Travis weren't the best choices to make comparisons
to, since their stories haven't been quite laid to rest yet; but, there
is no question that hoaxing for profit is more widespread than "real"
stories (i.e. the unsubstantiated ones that can't be disproven). No
matter how believable Industrial Light and Magic can make the Walton
story, the number of people who have come forward with their hoaxes
beats the number of people who deny it and have "real" stories, I'm
quite sure.
George Adamski definitely fits into the profiteering category, as do
many of the other hoaxers in that era. And what about the entire Alien
Autopsy crew? But, some just do it to spoof the media and citizenry,
like Bower and Chorley. The scariest part is, even after these guys
come out and say they've been putting up a hoax, many people refuse to
believe it's a hoax! It's been decades since George Adamski's original
film has been correctly called "a model on a string", yet people still
use it as proof (albeit the nut cases).
- C
Chris Trimble
Gene Huff wrote:
> The term "UFO gravy train" implies that there's a ton of
> money to be made by simply making up a ufo story and I
> just don't see it.
[...]
> I need someone to show me where some remuneration for
> an honest effort turns into a gravy train. The only story
> about which I've ever even heard rumors of big money was
> the alien autopsy film. Cite the rich UFO researchers for
> me. I've met a number of them and they do not even come close.-
One clarification: no one has said the UFO _researchers_ are reaping
huge profits; although I highly doubt John Mack, Budd Hopkins, Good and
Vallee aren't making a _pretty good_ living off of their "research" (the
quotes are for Mack and Hopkins).
However, there is a lot of money out there that hoaxers these days
would be going for. Hard Copy and those kinds of shows do pay for video
footage they use; and, guessing from what the guy with the Rodney King
video got from a local station ($30K), they probably pay out circa $10K
for hot Gulf Breeze or Mexico City videos. Then there's Rupert Murdoch,
of course, who probably paid $100K+ for the alien autopsy video. In the
past, however, I think the idea that one could profit off their UFO
evidence was a red herring; people still tried for it, though. I cited
Adamski because he never admitted to its being a hoax, even though it
was very much in doubt when he was alive, and kept pushing with new
stuff. I would interpret that as trying to profit, as opposed to Bower
and Chorley, who made their first crop circle after a few pints, and
just kept doing it for fun -- anonymously -- for a number of years!
- C
twi...@hub.ofthe.net
dsu...@ix.netcom.com (Debbie Sutton) wrote:
#In article <83279031...@the-den.demon.co.uk>,
# ni...@the-den.demon.co.uk (Nick Humphries) wrote:
#>>>>In <8325155...@the-den.demon.co.uk> ni...@the-den.demon.co.uk
(Nick
#>>>>Humphries) writes:
#>I don't believe that either - I beleive Lazar was told some Area 51
#>folklore and then saw dollar signs in front of his eyes.
#Sure, 7 years ago when UFO's were not a topic of conversation,
<snip>
Where have you been? UFOs have been a big topic of conversation since
the 50s and getting bigger with each decade! Remember,
"Encounters..." Spielberg made lots of $$$ with that!
Enjoy.
Too Fop
twi...@hub.ofthe.net wrote:
>Where have you been? UFOs have been a big topic of conversation since
>the 50s and getting bigger with each decade! Remember,
>"Encounters..." Spielberg made lots of $$$ with that!
And just where do you think Speilberg got his ideas?
Gene Huff
In <31A4F2...@panix.com> Chris Trimble <tri...@panix.com> writes:
>
>There's not much for him to backpedal out of, Gene... sorry...but,
>there is no question that hoaxing for profit is more widespread than
>hoaxes beats the number of people who deny it and have "real" stories,
>category, as do many of the other hoaxers in that era...
-I did not say that there were never any UFO hoaxes. The term "UFO
gravy train" implies that there's a ton of money to be made by simply
making up a ufo story and I just don't see it. You mention George
Adamski. Please cite the info you have on what Adamski's financial
predicament was prior to his claims, how much he netted because of his
claims, and how it changed his lifestyle for the better. People always
talk about this big money and my assertion is that they don't know what
they're talking about. Bryant is declaring that Lazar made up a UFO
story and was betting on making money years down the road. Lazar,
according to Bryant, did this even though he was financially stable and
has a wealthy father. I say Bryant is full of it and although your
point is well taken, you've not helped Nicky boy substantiate his
alleged gravy train. According to Bryant, doctors must be on the
medical gravy train, he himself must be on the computer programming
gravy train, etc. I need someone to show me where some remuneration for
Gene Huff
In <4o719n$4...@alterdial.UU.NET> twi...@hub.ofthe.net writes:
>
>Where have you been? UFOs have been a big topic of conversation since
>the 50s and getting bigger with each decade! Remember,
>"Encounters..." Spielberg made lots of $$$ with that!
>
should know that. Spielberg has also made money off of sharks,
dinosaurs, and the holocaust so your point here is even more irrelevant
than usual.-
Gene Huff
In <31A612...@panix.com> Chris Trimble <tri...@panix.com> writes:
>
>and, guessing from what the guy with the Rodney King
>video got from a local station ($30K), they probably pay out circa
$10K for hot Gulf Breeze or Mexico City videos.
-That's a pretty big probably. The Rodney King video was more
conclusive than the UFO videos you cite and police brutality is a more
highly volatile and sensitive subject to the mainstream than UFOs. This
is my whole point. You're citing what you surmise to be true and I just
don't see it. Let's say for a moment that you are right, people can't
perpetually come up with new UFO videos or stories and someone getting
$10,000 can hardly be misconstrued as a gravy train. Maybe I'm
fortunate, but I make enough money that $10,000 wouldn't tempt me to
perpetrate a fraud. There are a wide variety of topics covered on
magazine shows and they may pay big money in some instances but that's
not true just generally speaking. Would anyone else who had video of
police kicking the shit out of someone then be jumping on the police
brutality gravy train? If that's true, all the cops have to do to stop
it is stop kicking the shit out of people on camera!:) The original
point of contention here is that Nick Humphries says that Bob Lazar
probably made up his story on the bet that years down the road he's get
a movie deal. That's ludicrous as Lazar was financially stable and has
a wealthy father.-
Then there's Rupert Murdoch, of course, who probably paid $100K+ for
the alien autopsy video.
-I've heard that and I cited that case as a possible exception.-
Chris Trimble
Christopher Jefferson wrote:
> I still don't get it. Look, not that I buy into Lazar
> 100% (as I recall, neither do you-you're somewhere
> around 99%), as I don't see a disc, nor have I seen a
> paper by Lazar explaining backengineering and 115. I simply
> can't understand the continued ad hominem attacks on the man.
[...]
> The UFO business is a contradiction in terms. There's no
> "gravy train" to be had.
Whoa whoa whoa... you've made a contradictory statement. You've said
you _do_ believe Bob Lazar's unsubstantiated story, yet you _do not_
believe that there are people out there who believe hoaxing can be
profitable? There certainly is a lot more evidence for the latter:
Sightings, Hard Copy, Encounters, and The Paranormal Borderline are
all shows that will pay for footage like that. Plus, there's a
moderately sizable section of UFO books at the bookstore. These *are*
incentives for people to make things up and/or embarrass themselves...
witness daily the festival of Talk Soup on television.
In any case, Gene is correct: getting your video on Hard Copy isn't
going to reap you big money. I agree with that, but it leaves out the
other end of getting on those shows: book rights, movie rights,
whatever. I went into Barnes and Noble the other day to see an
first-person's account of abduction by the guy who made the Gulf
Breeze videos! This is not a coincidence, and I'm not implying he was
ever in contact with aliens.
Like I said the gravy train is mostly an illusion, with exceptions
like the Gulf Breeze guy or Santilli. That doesn't mean that people
won't come up with hoaxes to _attempt_ to get money and fame off of
it. That's my point at least.
> You know Lazar a lot better than most, and understand
> his financial situation. I would assume that people
> would take your word that his dad is
> loaded and Bob won't go hungry. I guess the opposite
> is the case.
Since no one has asked: why did Lazar declare bankruptcy if his
situation was that stable?
Plus, no one has said or implied that Lazar was _hurting_ for money.
If he is hoaxing, maybe he'd just do it to spoof a lot of people. Or
maybe he's just lying. BUT, if he is making this up, then he does
have visible potential financial gains to keep the lie in place _right
now_, even if he wasn't planning on this in 1989.
> What scares people is the possibilities that follow if
> what Lazar came out with is proven to the general public
> in substantive, authoritative form. Then all hell breaks
> loose, and our understanding of ourselves has to
> change (especially in regard to those who rule). Everything
> becomes questionable: the nation state, industrial
> capitalism, the existence of God,
Where have you been holed up? All of those issues have been
seriously questioned for a good portion of this century!
Here's what I think... if aliens revealed themselves to our planet, I
think a lot of people would breathe a sigh of relief and hope they'd
guide us out of the grave we're digging for ourselves. If they're
hostile, then it will bring us all together, which would also be
better than where we are now (screwing each other over for green paper
and land). The mass panic theory of a coverup is weak because of
this. If anything, an impossibly massive coverup is in place so we
_don't_ ask these questions and left Authority in its place.
- Chris
ps - that is, if you believe there's an impossibily massive coverup.
Hey, if Tom Cruise can break into the C.I.A. headquarters, anything
possible... ;-)
pho...@sahara.llv.com
dsu...@ix.netcom.com (Debbie Sutton) wrote:
>In article <83262573...@the-den.demon.co.uk>,
> ni...@the-den.demon.co.uk (Nick Humphries) wrote:
>>gu...@ix.netcom.com(Gene Huff) wrote:
>>
>>>In <8325155...@the-den.demon.co.uk> ni...@the-den.demon.co.uk (Nick
>>>Humphries) writes:
>>>>
>>>>Tim Good: Bob lazar is an engineer, he *CLAIMS* [heavy emphasis] to
>>>>have worked on the propulsion system of one of these craft and to have
>>>>seen it being test flown. Now, the bad news, is that it now transpires
>>>>that Bob lazar has NO credentials WHATSOEVER [huge laughter in the
>>>>background], so he's not a nuclear physicist as he claims, at least
>>>>not a QUALIFIED one. He has done some work in the nuclear business,
>>>>but he's certainly an engineer.
>You need to see some more recent comments by Tim. They are quite different.
>>>>To his credit, Good DID go on to say that SOME of what Lazar says could
>>>>be true and has been corroborated by other people who have come forward.
>If any of what Lazar says is true, it is quite significant. It seems as if
>more and more is verified by others. Ask Glenn Campbell about Bill Uhouse.
>>>>His opinion is that Lazar was told the story and he related it as his own -
>either that or someone took him around for a tour of Area 51.
>Oh...right. Tours of Area 51. So Lazar was an "engineer" and someone said "you
>wanna see some real cool secret UFO stuff Bob?". Get a clue dude!
>By the way, Lazar NEVER lectured for money. The only 2 lectures he's given to
>my knowledge are one at the Ali-Inn and one at a high school for the students.
>This mythical "UFO Gravytrain" exists only in your mind. Lazar gets no money
>from it. He continues to work in the scientific field as a consultant
>physicist for several companies in addition to running his own businesses 5
>days a week.
>-The Deb
And dont forget driveing his Jet-Lamborgini in the deserts around
town here. (In vegas) and also dying swimming pools green, but you
guys wouldnt know about that.
Gene Huff
In <4oh0g6$r...@sahara.llv.com> pho...@sahara.llv.com writes:
>
>And dont forget driveing his Jet-Lamborgini in the deserts around
>town here. (In vegas) and also dying swimming pools green, but you
>guys wouldnt know about that.
-For the record, Lazar doesn't have a jet Lambo. Years back there was a
funny car type Countach body made for Bob's jet dragster, which is too
loud and fast and illegal to be driven on the street. That fiberglas
body sat in his back yard for years and he just recently got rid of
it.-
Paul Murphy
A...@interacces.com (Too Fop) wrote:
>twi...@hub.ofthe.net wrote:
>>Where have you been? UFOs have been a big topic of conversation since
>>the 50s and getting bigger with each decade! Remember,
>>"Encounters..." Spielberg made lots of $$$ with that!
>And just where do you think Speilberg got his ideas?
Alien mind rays.
Muff
~~~~~~
As time divides, we watch, we wait...
Paul Murphy: ne...@pipex.dial.com
Debbie Sutton
>And dont forget driveing his Jet-Lamborgini in the deserts around
>town here. (In vegas) and also dying swimming pools green...
That Lamborghini body was made by the Coors beer company for a promotion 10
years ago with Lazar's ex-wife as the jet car "driver". The body was too
flimsy for the car to move with the it on and for that reason, he never drove
it.
Lazar never dyed any swimming pools green himself, but in a minor war with
John Lear (John tied pepsi cans under Lazar's car), Lazar distracted Lear
long enough for a friend of his to add a new hue to Lear's pool.
>but you guys wouldnt know about that.
As usual, we "guys" know more than you.
-The Deb
Christopher Jefferson
Gene,
I still don't get it. Look, not that I buy into Lazar 100% (as I recall,
neither do you-you're somewhere around 99%), as I don't see a disc, nor
have I seen a paper by Lazar explaining backengineering and 115. I simply
can't understand the continued ad hominem attacks on the man. It is ok for
an Andy Dingley to jump up and down. He actually wants hard scientific
information. And I hold with him on that. But Nick and some of the others
I have a problem with.
The UFO business is a contradiction in terms. There's no "gravy train" to
be had. You know Lazar a lot better than most, and understand his
financial situation. I would assume that people would take your word that
his dad is loaded and Bob won't go hungry. I guess the opposite is the
case.
The only folks making any money right now (besides the scam artists and
hucksters who sold Murdoch on the autopsy...) are Glenn Campbell and those
yoyos out at the Li'l Ale' Inn. And at least Glenn produces stunning
t-shirts and hats (I wish to hell he would do a coffee mug, BTW) and a
nice webpage!
What scares people is the possibilities that follow if what Lazar came out
with is proven to the general public in substantive, authoritative form.
Then all hell breaks loose, and our understanding of ourselves has to
change (especially in regard to those who rule). Everything becomes
questionable: the nation state, industrial capitalism, the existence of
God, and our relationships with each other would, IMHO, undergo a change
not seen since the Reformation, if not the Rennaissance.
But of course, Bob Lazar's story could be some wild tale he concocted to
get movie rights several years after he left S-4, couldn't it?
Righhht....
Be Seeing You,
Chris
aik...@cris.com
I for one thought it interesting that Stan Friedman would say on national
television "the TNT Larry King UFO special" that he had checked Bob
Lazars' story and determined that Lazar was simply a liar.
About the drastic changes in society like the reformation. This point is
exagerrated at best. The Mormon religion as a matter of doctrine accept
and acknowledge the existence of life on other planets. Quiet a few other
religions while not held as doctrine have no doctrine against and are
accepting of the possiblitity of life on other planets,yes even
intelligent life. Our society undergoes rapid changes everyday breaking
the sound barrier,nuclear reactors,vaccines for deadly diseases. Several
scientist have begun SETI programs so the idea is well established in the
scientific community. The seperation between science and religion is well
established today with neither one being able to control the
other,something that was not present in the days of the reformation.So
while the announcement of intelligent life elsewhere in the universe
would be world changing, religious beliefs would not all but be destroyed
as some people seem to suggest.
Sincerely,
Michael
Christopher Jefferson
Chris Trimble <tri...@panix.com> wrote:
>Christopher Jefferson wrote:
>
>> I still don't get it. Look, not that I buy into Lazar
>> 100% (as I recall, neither do you-you're somewhere
>> around 99%), as I don't see a disc, nor have I seen a
>> paper by Lazar explaining backengineering and 115. I simply
>> can't understand the continued ad hominem attacks on the man.
>
>> The UFO business is a contradiction in terms. There's no
>> "gravy train" to be had.
>
>you _do_ believe Bob Lazar's unsubstantiated story, yet you _do not_
>believe that there are people out there who believe hoaxing can be
>profitable? There certainly is a lot more evidence for the latter:
>Sightings, Hard Copy, Encounters, and The Paranormal Borderline are
>all shows that will pay for footage like that. Plus, there's a
>moderately sizable section of UFO books at the bookstore. These *are*
>incentives for people to make things up and/or embarrass themselves...
>witness daily the festival of Talk Soup on television.
OK, stop. From one Chris to another, I did not say that I bought his
unsubstatiated story. I cannot say that because I do not see proof. When I
see proof, then I can go ahead and buy into it fully. His story, as
related by Gene, appears to have the "ring of truth" about it, but that is
about as far as one can take it with the available evidence. Following
that up with a statement that I don't believe in the "gravy train" is not,
to my lights, a contradiction.
The point you make about various tabloid shows, however, is taken. When
they offer the bucks, it will be natural for various cads and bounders to
lie in order to get paid. BTW, I do hope that "Talk Soup" is still on the
"E" channel. Was a fun show, before I moved to this new neighborhood and
got TCI cable, aka, National Socialist Television.
>
> In any case, Gene is correct: getting your video on Hard Copy isn't
>going to reap you big money. I agree with that, but it leaves out the
>other end of getting on those shows: book rights, movie rights,
>whatever. I went into Barnes and Noble the other day to see an
>first-person's account of abduction by the guy who made the Gulf
>Breeze videos! This is not a coincidence, and I'm not implying he was
>ever in contact with aliens.
>
My contention is that it appears (and I could be mistaken here, but I
don't think I am) that Lazar was not thinking along these lines back in
the late eighties. I would think he simply wanted out of the program.
> Like I said the gravy train is mostly an illusion, with exceptions
>like the Gulf Breeze guy or Santilli. That doesn't mean that people
>won't come up with hoaxes to _attempt_ to get money and fame off of
>it. That's my point at least.
>
And your point here is unarguable.
>
>
>> You know Lazar a lot better than most, and understand
>> his financial situation. I would assume that people
>> would take your word that his dad is
>> loaded and Bob won't go hungry. I guess the opposite
>> is the case.
>
> Since no one has asked: why did Lazar declare bankruptcy if his
>situation was that stable?
>
This fact was unknown to me. I would ask that question also. I would hope
that Gene Huff would jump in here on this and fill us in on the gory
details. OTOH, he may have in his "synopsis", and I may have failed to
remember it.
> Plus, no one has said or implied that Lazar was _hurting_ for money.
>If he is hoaxing, maybe he'd just do it to spoof a lot of people. Or
>maybe he's just lying. BUT, if he is making this up, then he does
>have visible potential financial gains to keep the lie in place _right
>now_, even if he wasn't planning on this in 1989.
>
Wait. If he declares bankruptcy, it's for a reason, right? Or was he just
trying to reorganize, protect his house, etc. And sure, he has the
potential to make some gains now. But once again, this doesn't address his
actions of the late eighties as due to some sort of foresight.
>
>> What scares people is the possibilities that follow if
>> what Lazar came out with is proven to the general public
>> in substantive, authoritative form. Then all hell breaks
>> loose, and our understanding of ourselves has to
>> change (especially in regard to those who rule). Everything
>> becomes questionable: the nation state, industrial
>> capitalism, the existence of God,
>
> Where have you been holed up? All of those issues have been
>seriously questioned for a good portion of this century!
>
To be blunt, no shit. But your everyday Joe Sixpack has never had to deal
with the real possibility of meeting these short little grey fellas moving
into the neighborhood. Of course we've been fighting wars over this kind
of cal during this century. But suppose the little bastards come down and
show themselves. Then we start thinking about ourselves differently, one
would hope.
> Here's what I think... if aliens revealed themselves to our planet, I
>think a lot of people would breathe a sigh of relief and hope they'd
>guide us out of the grave we're digging for ourselves. If they're
>hostile, then it will bring us all together, which would also be
>better than where we are now (screwing each other over for green paper
>and land). The mass panic theory of a coverup is weak because of
>this. If anything, an impossibly massive coverup is in place so we
>_don't_ ask these questions and left Authority in its place.
Yeah, most might just breath a sigh of relief, until some jerk decided to
form some sort of hate group. After which we would all revert to type, I
suspect. But then again, if they are hostile, then I'd rather not deal
with the little buggers anyway. It's those eyes, baby. It's the damn eyes!
As my cousin e-mailed to me :"...hang around the United Nations in Space
types, but stay away from the ones with the big eyes. Trust me on this."
>
> - Chris
>
>ps - that is, if you believe there's an impossibily massive coverup.
>Hey, if Tom Cruise can break into the C.I.A. headquarters, anything
>possible... ;-)
In the case of Tom Cruise, he should have been abducted a LONG time ago.
;-)
Be Seeing You,
Chris
Christopher Jefferson
aik...@cris.com wrote:
>I for one thought it interesting that Stan Friedman would say on national
>television "the TNT Larry King UFO special" that he had checked Bob
>Lazars' story and determined that Lazar was simply a liar.
Respect Stanton Friedman here. That is to say, at least he's no Phil
Klaas. I only caught the last hour of the program last week (Larry with
Glenn Campbell, Stanton, and two others whose names escape me, one a prof
and one a retired USAF colonel). I would simply expect good old Gene Huff
to come forward with his usual spirited defense of Lazar. Stanton, from
what I understand, is usually pretty thorough, and one would hope that
Gene could fill us all in on where Lazar went to college, to what level
did he get his degree, and, of course, where Lazar could have come up with
those Department of the Navy stubs from his work.
>
>About the drastic changes in society like the reformation. This point is
>exagerrated at best. The Mormon religion as a matter of doctrine accept
>and acknowledge the existence of life on other planets. Quiet a few other
>religions while not held as doctrine have no doctrine against and are
>accepting of the possiblitity of life on other planets,yes even
>intelligent life.
The point is taken here as self-evident. However, humans have never had to
deal with ETI as a reality, and I suspect it would be quite a shock to the
public at large, no matter how conditioned to the possibility they might
be. Besides, as I wrote in another post, these little guys look different.
Our society undergoes rapid changes everyday breaking
>the sound barrier,nuclear reactors,vaccines for deadly diseases.
But not on this scale.
Several
>scientist have begun SETI programs so the idea is well established in the
>scientific community. The seperation between science and religion is well
>established today with neither one being able to control the
>other,something that was not present in the days of the reformation.So
>while the announcement of intelligent life elsewhere in the universe
>would be world changing, religious beliefs would not all but be destroyed
>as some people seem to suggest.
That is not something I did suggest. I simply pointed out that the
existence of God would be brought into question, not dismissed altogether.
>
>Sincerely,
>Michael
>
Looking forward to your reply,;-)-
Be Seeing You,
Chris
Gene Huff
In <4oim53$m...@tribune.concentric.net> aik...@cris.com writes:
>
>I for one thought it interesting that Stan Friedman would say on
>national television "the TNT Larry King UFO special" that he had
>checked Bob Lazars' story and determined that Lazar was simply a liar.
-Yes, that was truly a low turning point in Friedman's career. Friedman
didn't lift a finger to investigate Lazar and George Knapp and I laid
all of that info in his lap. Friedman feels the ufological parade is
passing him by and people no longer need his approval to examine any
particular aspect of the subject. In his defense, he was probably
overwhelmed by being there on a show that obviously was meant to
revolve around Bob Lazar. The Testor model was on King's desk and Stan
was seething. Lazar had decided not to be on the show and the show
ended up being pretty much of a nothing. Friedman's got a couple of
AIDS ladened children and he lives in Canada for the free health care.
His main income is from ufology and he needs to try and retain a
measure of authority to perpetuate his income. It seems like a guy who
touts their credentials like he does could get a job. Anyway, Carrie
Stephenson, the producer of that show, was outraged at Friedman's
behavior and we have a standing invitation to do that show, and without
Friedman. Stan will love it when I mention some of the above on Larry
King Live. When the movie is closer to being released, we'll probably
go ahead and do it.-
Gene Huff
In <31AB9D...@panix.com> Chris Trimble <tri...@panix.com> writes:
>
> Plus, there's a moderately sizable section of UFO books at the
>bookstore. These *are* >incentives for people to make things up
>and/or embarrass themselves...
-Then books on religion, medicine, the law, science, and everything in
general, are incentives for the same and ufology would be no exception.
However, that's overly paranoid and the fact that remuneration is paid
for an effort does not necessarily taint the effort. However, you are
right that some efforts are tainted.-
> Since no one has asked: why did Lazar declare bankruptcy if his
>situation was that stable?
-That bankruptcy was concluded years before he was at S4. By the time
he worked at S4, he was totally self sufficient and stable. There are
many reasons that people are advised by their attorneys to file
bankruptcy. It's just a legal tool and many times, the course of least
resistance.-
>
> Plus, no one has said or implied that Lazar was _hurting_ for money.
-Oh yes, Nicky boy did. He said that Lazar was bankrupt and fabricated
the story on the bet that he's get a movie deal in the future. Of
course, he hasn't taken the time to understand the chronology of events
or actuality of the situation.-
Nick Humphries
gu...@ix.netcom.com(Gene Huff) wrote:
Sigh, yet another misquote... Frauds don't plan into the future, they
just take each opportunity as they come. The movie deal came as a
result of the right people knowing the story. To say Lazar made up the
story for a movie eight or nine years on is ridiculous, which is why I
didn't say that. Must be another case of Gene reading in between the
lines when the information just isn't there. Also, you don't have to
be hurting for money in order to want more money.
Here's my idea of how a UFO hoax would happen.
1. Man sees people on TV claiming to have some bizzarre UFO
experience.
2. Man thinks "I could make up a story like that", so he does.
3. Man tells freinds.
4. Freinds tell other freinds. Repeat this step until one of the
people told is in the media.
5. Man appears on TV show.
6. Story gets viewers VERY interested, they want to hear more, so man
appears on more TV shows.
7. UFO writers report on story - story gets global coverage and guy
gets more and more exposure as a result.
8. Man makes appearances at UFO meetings.
9. Merchandise and spinoff products get sold if story is a really
"earthshattering" one.
Then man either writes one or more books on his story and in some
instances sells movie rights to his story.
Man makes money from interview fees, appearances (maybe), merchandise
& spinoff products and royalties from books or films. Man certainly
gets a LOT of fame as well as fortune.
This is the UFO gravy train.
Nick Humphries
Christopher Jefferson <ALMIGHTY> wrote:
>aik...@cris.com wrote:
>>I for one thought it interesting that Stan Friedman would say on national
>>television "the TNT Larry King UFO special" that he had checked Bob
>>Lazars' story and determined that Lazar was simply a liar.
>Respect Stanton Friedman here. That is to say, at least he's no Phil
>Klaas. I only caught the last hour of the program last week (Larry with
>Glenn Campbell, Stanton, and two others whose names escape me, one a prof
>and one a retired USAF colonel). I would simply expect good old Gene Huff
>to come forward with his usual spirited defense of Lazar.
He has done - interesting how he flames the investigator not the
investigation. I thought we'd grown out of the phase of shooting the
messenger...
Nick Humphries
gu...@ix.netcom.com(Gene Huff) wrote:
>In <4oim53$m...@tribune.concentric.net> aik...@cris.com writes:
>>
>>I for one thought it interesting that Stan Friedman would say on
>>national television "the TNT Larry King UFO special" that he had
>>checked Bob Lazars' story and determined that Lazar was simply a liar.
>-Yes, that was truly a low turning point in Friedman's career. Friedman
>didn't lift a finger to investigate Lazar and George Knapp and I laid
>all of that info in his lap.
Lesson in investigating number one - get information from more than
one source. If there IS only one source, try to verify it.
The information given by Lazar/Huff/Knapp wasn't verified (or
verifiable - depending on which side of the fence you are on this
one). STF looked elsewhere and found nothing to back up Lazar's story.
Gene Huff
In <83348285...@the-den.demon.co.uk> ni...@the-den.demon.co.uk
(Nick Humphries) writes:
>
>-Oh yes, Nicky boy did. He said that Lazar was bankrupt and fabricated
>the story on the bet that he's get a movie deal in the future. Of
>course, he hasn't taken the time to understand the chronology of
>events or actuality of the situation.-
>
>Sigh, yet another misquote... Frauds don't plan into the future, they
>just take each opportunity as they come.
-Yes that's exactly my point. You are a fraud when you contend that
you've investigated the Lazar story, or anything else for that matter,
to the extent that you're contributing a valid, informed viewpoint.
You're simply on a mission because people like me, Mark Hines, and
numerous other contributors have pointed out that you simply don't know
what you're talking about. You're not alone but most people don't
perpetually highlight their lack of knowledge and ability as much as
you do.-
>The movie deal came as a result of the right people knowing the story.
-Actually, the original movie deal came from a Hollywood technician who
worked in the movie industry seeing the Lazar Tape. Sorry to inject
some reality into your broad statement. Of course the movie deal would
be the result of the right people knowing the story as the right people
are the breadth of the general public! Great point Nicky boy!:)-
>To say Lazar made up the story for a movie eight or nine years on is
>ridiculous, which is why I didn't say that.
-You are a liar and this is the most ridiculous case of back pedaling I
have ever encountered. Did anyone else see Nicky boy say that? Please,
even if you're a lurker, please tell us if he did or didn't. He did,
period.-
>Here's my idea of how a UFO hoax would happen.
>
>1. Man sees people on TV claiming to have some bizzarre UFO
>experience.
>2. Man thinks "I could make up a story like that", so he does.
>3. Man tells freinds.
>4. Freinds tell other freinds. Repeat this step until one of the
>people told is in the media.
>5. Man appears on TV show.
>6. Story gets viewers VERY interested, they want to hear more, so man
>appears on more TV shows.
>7. UFO writers report on story - story gets global coverage and guy
>gets more and more exposure as a result.
>8. Man makes appearances at UFO meetings.
>9. Merchandise and spinoff products get sold if story is a really
>"earthshattering" one.
>
>Then man either writes one or more books on his story and in some
>instances sells movie rights to his story.
-That's all quite unimpressive and uninspired, even for the lowly likes
of a fraud like you Nicky boy. I've stated above how the original movie
deal transpired and you are simply wrong.-
>
>Man makes money from interview fees, appearances (maybe), merchandise
>& spinoff products and royalties from books or films. Man certainly
>gets a LOT of fame as well as fortune. This is the UFO gravy train.
-Yes, the one that doesn't exist and you've done nothing to further
substantiate your paranoid assertion here. If that's how it works,
let's see you do it. You can then tell first hand about your successes
and failures. Until then, you're simply an uninformed idiot with a chip
on his shoulder.-
Gene Huff
In <83348286...@the-den.demon.co.uk> ni...@the-den.demon.co.uk
(Nick Humphries) writes:
>
>>I would simply expect good old Gene Huff
>>to come forward with his usual spirited defense of Lazar.
>
>He has done - interesting how he flames the investigator not the
>investigation. I thought we'd grown out of the phase of shooting the
>messenger...
>
truthfully stated, George Knapp and I laid that info in Friedman's lap.
As usual, you're wrong. I always make it clear that I appreciate some
of Friedman's past efforts, but he has changed and in former exchanges,
you saw that other people agree. Friedman isn't getting any younger and
he's under a lot of stress from health and financial problems. The
health problems aren't his but that of his AIDS ladened children. The
financial problems are his as he's afraid that he might have to get a
job!:) The bottom line is that Bob Lazar's story makes some blacked out
FOIA documents infinitely less interesting. Friedman used to be THE
story, now he's simply a contributory character. His ego is wrestling
with that and he's taking himself down in that wrestling match.-
Gene Huff
>verifiable - depending on which side of the fence you are on this
>one). STF looked elsewhere and found nothing to back up Lazar's story.
>
who reads your nonsense, you don't know what you're talking about. What
a surprise, huh? All the way back when Friedman was going around the
world saying Lazar didn't work down at Los Alamos, we provided a letter
from Kirk-Meyer stating when Lazar recieved his Z number (a number
required to get paid when you work there), what the Z number was, etc.
Of course this was in addition to the Los Alamos Lab phone book with
Lazar's name in it, the front page newspaper story on him in the Los
Alamos Monitor newspaper which identified Lazar as a physicist at the
Lab, etc. Friedman's counterpoint was that he called some female public
contact at the lab and she said she had no record of Lazar working
there. Friedman back pedaled so hard that his legs almost fell off. He
was caught red handed as stating he had done an investigation and he
had done nothing of the sort. Do you expect him to tout that? That was
empirical evidence and you're wrong. That's just one instance. We
substantiated numerous other things for Friedman but they're too
complex to go into here for the likes of you. The more we proved, the
more irrelevant and unsubstantiated Friedman's opinion became, and the
more frustrated and bitter he became. He finally became so mad that he
dropped out and we cut him out of any further information. That's when
the sour grapes began and they continue. I know all of those involved,
I've spoken to them in person regarding this, and you've done nothing.
I'll let the readers decide who know what they're talking about, me, or
you!:) Nicky boy, you simply never know what you're talking about and
thanks for proving it again and as usual!:)-
Debbie Sutton
In article <4oms61$2...@dfw-ixnews10.ix.netcom.com>,
>>To say Lazar made up the story for a movie eight or nine years on is
>>ridiculous, which is why I didn't say that.
>
>-You are a liar and this is the most ridiculous case of back pedaling I
>have ever encountered. Did anyone else see Nicky boy say that? Please,
>even if you're a lurker, please tell us if he did or didn't. He did,
>period.-
>
HEY NICK! Either you're a complete psycho, or you need to put that crack pipe
down for a couple of days. >You stated yourself< that Lazar made up his story
for a movie deal. You are totally full of shit.
-Deb
Larry Jackman
In article <4oms61$2...@dfw-ixnews10.ix.netcom.com>,
>(Nick Humphries) writes:
>>To say Lazar made up the story for a movie eight or nine years on is
>>ridiculous, which is why I didn't say that.
>
>-You are a liar and this is the most ridiculous case of back pedaling I
>have ever encountered. Did anyone else see Nicky boy say that? Please,
>even if you're a lurker, please tell us if he did or didn't. He did,
>period.-
>
Ditto. Nick, you're just making yourself look like a moron. Check your old
posts.
LJ
H. Brown
In article <4on20o$e...@dfw-ixnews9.ix.netcom.com>,
jac...@ix.netcom.com (Larry Jackman) wrote:
>In article <4oms61$2...@dfw-ixnews10.ix.netcom.com>,
>
>>(Nick Humphries) writes:
>
>>>To say Lazar made up the story for a movie eight or nine years on is
>>>ridiculous, which is why I didn't say that.
>>
What? Hello? is anyone there? Yes, you accused Lazar of that along with other
unsubstantiated statements.
klaatu
Nick Humphries wrote:
>
> gu...@ix.netcom.com(Gene Huff) wrote:
>
<snip>
> Here's my idea of how a UFO hoax would happen.
>
> 1. Man sees people on TV claiming to have some bizzarre UFO
> experience.
> 2. Man thinks "I could make up a story like that", so he does.
Excellent idea!
> 3. Man tells freinds.
D00ds, I was out in the woods by the highschool field and me and Bobby was
smokin' this _really killer_ hash, man, and like my wristwatch got hot and like
glowed with this really spacey like blue fire like static or somethin' and next
thing ya know, Bobby and me's hair's, like - stood on end. Whoa! And so I look
up like at the sky and there's this like _bitchin_ light up there, sorta like a
giant Frisbee ('xcept'n it's like real or somethin') and it ike goes WHOOOSH
and comes down almost to the ground. It was like, a mongo vacuum cleaner an' it
sorta zapped everyonce in a while and it was sorta like hovering and it kept
zapping ya know sorta like them things that zap bugs when yer barbequeuing? and
it's gettin' like closer to th' ground and me an' Bobby was like too stoned to
move and we got like really freaked out and it was like zappin' more often and
gettin' closer an' I thought maybe it was gonna suck us up an' zap us too but
it allufa sudden stopped zappin' and like the glow got more steady an' then it
started whooshin' more and sorta took off straight up for a ways and thn it
just sorta slid off behind a cloud. Weird huh?
(believe it or not, this is really true. From about 1973 or so.)
> 4. Freinds tell other freinds.
'Damn d00d, that must have been some asswhuppin' tokes!' 'Yeah man, but you
ever been so stoned you seen someone else's hallucination?' 'Um, now that you
mention it...' 'No man, herb, not locoweed!' 'Um...'
Repeat this step until one of the
> people told is in the media.
"Oh. Yeah, I remember you. You're with the school paper?"
> 5. Man appears on TV show.
Well, listed in the school yearbook as certain to grow up to be the
flying-saucer nut...
> 6. Story gets viewers VERY interested, they want to hear more, so man
> appears on more TV shows.
Actually, people scoffed, except for those who wanted to know where to get some
of that really killer hash that makes you see flying saucers...
> 7. UFO writers report on story - story gets global coverage and guy
> gets more and more exposure as a result.
I was laughed out of highschool. Considering my highschool, that took some
doing... well, everyone laughed except for this guy, um, Nutter was the last
name... I think that was just being polite 'cause lots of people laughed at him
at the time. I think he's a rocket scientist now...
> 8. Man makes appearances at UFO meetings.
Laughed out of highschool, I failed in college as well. Embittered by
rejection, and clinging to his 'truth' he logs onto alt.alien.visitors and
pretend to be a skeptic.
> 9. Merchandise and spinoff products get sold if story is a really
> "earthshattering" one.
>
> Then man either writes one or more books on his story and in some
> instances sells movie rights to his story.
What story? I was really stoned and saw a UFO. Like, really believeable.
>
> Man makes money from interview fees, appearances (maybe), merchandise
> & spinoff products and royalties from books or films. Man certainly
> gets a LOT of fame as well as fortune.
Hmmm, not so much fame as infamy...
>
> This is the UFO gravy train.
>
Hey, I didn't even get any kibbles and bits. Why are these guys getting gravy
train?
> Nick Humphries, ni...@the-den.demon.co.uk, at your service
> If the Truth is Out There, what's In Here?
--
Be kind to your neighbors, | "When the going gets wierd the weird turn pro."
even though they be | http://www.clark.net/pub/klaatu/home.html
transgenic chimerae. | Now. Chock full of uninteresting links.
--------------------------- "How's the weather?" "Kinda, um... spooky."
---- In the Fall: http://www.clark.net/pub/klaatu/infall.html ------
"Sarah Connor?" All UseNet and BitNet postings are copyrighted.
Christopher Jefferson
ni...@the-den.demon.co.uk (Nick Humphries) wrote:
To say Lazar made up the
>story for a movie eight or nine years on is ridiculous, which is why I
>lines when the information just isn't there.
Jesus Christ on the Cross, Nick. I'm relatively new to Area 51 and even I
read those posts. Which is why I made my original post to Gene, as I
disagreed with your contention that Lazar was preplanning this whole
thing. Face it, this whole "gravy train" which you contend exists rests on
this assumption of yours stated in earlier posts, which you now deny!
The sound you hear is your whole argument about the "UFO Gravy Train"
beginning to crumble. Backtrack if you will, but you've just handed Gene a
strategic triumph.
And the funny thing is, all you had to do was stick to your guns.
Be Seeing You,
Chris
Debbie Sutton
In article <4onnvu$6...@mtinsc01-mgt.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
Christopher Jefferson <ALMIGHTY> wrote:
>ni...@the-den.demon.co.uk (Nick Humphries) wrote:
> To say Lazar made up the
>>story for a movie eight or nine years on is ridiculous, which is why I
>>didn't say that. Must be another case of Gene reading in between the
>>lines when the information just isn't there.
>
>
>Jesus Christ on the Cross, Nick. I'm relatively new to Area 51 and even I
Hey, maybe Nick just has alzheimers disease. Orrrr.... maybe he's got that
other disease called "Convenient Amnesia". Here in the U.S., it's also known
as a Lie.
-The Deb
Gilgamesh
gu...@ix.netcom.com(Gene Huff) wrote:
>The bottom line is that Bob Lazar's story makes some blacked out
>FOIA documents infinitely less interesting. Friedman used to be THE
>story, now he's simply a contributory character. His ego is wrestling
>with that and he's taking himself down in that wrestling match.-
There is a repeating pattern that seems to emerge made by the many
Stan Friedman encountees. If he didn't get involved at the start of
something, then the story is worthless, the investigation pointless.
It was quite clear on TNT that the plugs would come out that first
hour, 'My re-finding of the Roswell case', 'The movie I appear in
after the special'. These cases that he has worked on have not
brought down the wall. Attempts have been made though. I used to
like him myself, now is game is obvious. And that was what, 2 year
old show? What other UFO orginizations does S.F. remind you of?
--
OVNI CHAPTERHOUSE-Last updated May 25, 1996.
All video, all the time.
http://www.netzone.com/~gilgash/ufoovni.htm
Phoebos Krieg
oh no, not nick, how could anyone belive such a thing.
--
'There is no Knowledge
That is not Power'
Phoebos, Somewhere in Time.........
Noone
gu...@ix.netcom.com(Gene Huff) wrote:
> In his defense, he was probably
>overwhelmed by being there on a show that obviously was meant to
>revolve around Bob Lazar. The Testor model was on King's desk and Stan
>was seething. Lazar had decided not to be on the show and the show
>ended up being pretty much of a nothing.
The show was a decent show.
> Friedman's got a couple of
>AIDS ladened children and he lives in Canada for the free health care.
>His main income is from ufology and he needs to try and retain a
>measure of authority to perpetuate his income.
It is you who have sunk to a new low with this missive.
> It seems like a guy who
>touts their credentials like he does could get a job. Anyway, Carrie
>Stephenson, the producer of that show, was outraged at Friedman's
>behavior and we have a standing invitation to do that show, and without
>Friedman.
The producer was outraged that Friedman gave his opinion? Really?
Who is the "we" Gene? The producer wants Lazar and.......you? Why?
> Stan will love it when I mention some of the above on Larry
>King Live. When the movie is closer to being released, we'll probably
>go ahead and do it.-
I seem to remember you posting messages here saying Lazar hasn't made
any real money off this dog and pony show, now there is a movie deal.
Wonders never cease and it seems you don't have to wait long in
Ufology to see things turn 180 degrees.
Thank You for requesting a quote from SDG!
http://www.usbusiness.com/insurance_quote.html
Gene Huff
In <4p0m55$s...@nntp.interaccess.com> tu...@pobox.com (Noone) writes:
>
>> Friedman's got a couple of AIDS ladened children and he lives in
>>Canada for the free health care. His main income is from ufology and
>>he needs to try and retain a measure of authority to perpetuate his
>>income.
>
>It is you who have sunk to a new low with this missive.
-Well, if it's a low, it's not a new one as this has been discussed
before. Friedman told me that himself. People want to know why he's
changed and I've told them why.-
>
>The producer was outraged that Friedman gave his opinion? Really?
-His unsubstantiated opinion fueled by bitterness and jealousy? Yes,
she apologized over the phone.-
>
>Who is the "we" Gene? The producer wants Lazar and.......you? Why?
-Lazar, George Knapp, and me. As to the why, because Lazar is THE ufo
story and George and I are contributory characters, I guess.-
>I seem to remember you posting messages here saying Lazar hasn't made
>any real money off this dog and pony show, now there is a movie deal.
>Wonders never cease and it seems you don't have to wait long in
>Ufology to see things turn 180 degrees.
-The only thing that has changed is your information. The movie deal
has been in the works for 5 years. You have inadvertantly become a part
of the dog and pony show by not knowing that!:) The movie deal was
offered a couple of years after the story broke.-
yungqua...@gmail.com
ghostgr...@gmail.com
Bob Powell
> Can’t believe this was written in 96 lol so cool
Considering the long lag period between 1997 and now, is there an update on Lazar, etc?
And re Col Corso, I've read the Day After and other interviews. As a 35 year retiree of the USAF, I found a lot of his claims
improbable, mostly due to his military grade at the time and the position claimed. It's also interesting that with his assignment record
and working directly for General Officers that he was never promoted to full Colonel.
I just got Farrell's book Roswell and the Third Reich and while thumbing through it found a passage that quotes Corso's son as saying " the book was 97% rubbish". What's the truth there? Or with any of these UFOlogists?
Cheers.