textfiles/ufo/UFOBBS/1000/1542.ufo

SUBJECT: MSG THREAD ON THE PHOENIX PROJECT                   FILE: UFO1542 

PART 1 
 
 
 BBS: Flite-Line
Date: 08-20-92 (13:25)             Number: 5580
From: PARANET INFORMATION SERVI    Refer#: NONE
  To: ALL                           Recvd: NO  
Subj: Our Response to Phoenix P      Conf: (46) UFO(Fido)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 * Forwarded from "ParaNet UFO Echo"
 * Originally from ParaNet Information Service
 * Originally dated 08-20-92 13:23

On 6 August 1992, ParaNet Information Service posted a preliminary
statement on our investigation into an organization known as the
Phoenix Project, which had recently released "investigative reports"
entitled "The Dulce Report", "The K-2 Report", and "The Ultimate
Secret".  In our statement we pointed out some apparent problems with
all three Phoenix Project reports, as well as some suspicious aspects
of the Project's organization itself.  In our conclusion, we issued a
warning not to take the Phoenix Project reports at face value, pending
further investigation.

On 10 August 1992, Jack Mathias of the Phoenix Project responded in a
long, rambling message posted to a number of bulletin boards and news
groups.  Unfortunately, rather than dealing with the substantive issues
raised in our previous postings regarding the project and its
publications, Mr. Mathias's statement consisted mostly of ad-hominem
attacks impugning the motives, integrity, and competence of ParaNet's
officers and investigators.  Here is some typical language excerpted
from the Phoenix Project statement:

  " ... you blew it ..."
  " ... a snap judgement without examining the evidence ..."
  " ... your spontaneous and instant negative reaction ..."
  " ... your attitude problem ..."
  " ... you abused your position of trust and responsibility ..."
  " ... inexcusable ... a new record for prejudice ..."
  " ... you've just won the Golden Fleece Award ..."
  " ... outstanding ineptness ..."
  " ... amateur sleuthing ..."
  " ... self-centered ..."
  " ... lacking any real expertise ..."
  " ... seated upon your starry throne ..."
  " ... elected yourself to be the final arbiter of the truth ..."
  " ... Judge, Jury, and Executioner ..."
  " ... Kangaroo Court Proceeding of your own fashioning ..."
  " ... arm-chair expertise ..."
  " ... laughable ..."

Following paragraph after paragraph of this kind of personal invective,
Mr. Mathias then suggests that:

PP> In our opinion, the public deserves the truth regarding the real
PP> story of UFO's, government involvement and the Alien threat.  That
PP> should be our objective. ...  Perhaps you'll agree that, that
PP> objective is more productive than entertaining the public via the
PP> BBS links with a side-show of petty squabbles and bickering
PP> between individuals and organizations.

This is a noble sentiment, and one which we at ParaNet wholeheartedly
agree with.  Hopefully in the future the Phoenix Project's
representatives will take some of their own advice and try to keep the
rhetoric down to a more civilized level.

Having said that, let's look at the actual issues raised by this latest
salvo from the Phoenix Project, and see how they stack up.

PP> Let us review the facts.  You reacted by issuing a public warning
PP> to the members of ParaNet, which was also widely distributed via
PP> other BBS's nation-wide. That warning contained language which
PP> implied the information, and the source, were highly suspect.
PP> Thus, single-handedly, you created a strong impression throughout
PP> the UFO community, that our information was false.  Many sincere
PP> people, trusting your qualifications, accepted your warning.

True.

PP> You took it upon yourself to make a snap judgement
PP> without examining the evidence.

False.  We did not arrive at our conclusion single-handedly or
instantaneously.  Our analysis and the resulting warning were the
products of considerable discussion among ParaNet's researchers and
subscribers.  They were also labeled as tentative, pending further
investigation.

PP> In your message, you mention that you wrote to the Phoenix Project,
PP> after the fact and your preliminary judgement, requesting further
PP> information.  You made the same comment in other BBS messages.  You
PP> state that we did not respond to your request.  You also imply, by
PP> insinuation, that this is a mark against us and a further
PP> indication that we are suspect.  ... To date we have
PP> not received your letter of inquiry.  Apparently, of all the mail
PP> we receive, your letter is the only one that has gone astray.  We
PP> can only conclude that is was either lost in the mail or you didn't
PP> mail it.  Did it ever occur to you to mail us a second request,
PP> when you did not receive a response to your first inquiry?

The letter was followed up with electronic mail to the Project's
spokesman, Jack Mathias.  The request for information was repeated
through that channel.  The request was refused.

PP> But, this was not the end of your attitude problem regarding the
PP> Phoenix Project.  You did the same thing, again, issuing warnings,
PP> etc., with our release of the K-2 and the Ultimate Secret Reports.
PP> And, again, you had not seen or examined the supporting documents
PP> at the time you issued those warnings to ParaNet and the public.

We have already stated our reasons for suspecting the "K-2" and
"Ultimate Secret" reports.  As with the "Dulce" report, our suspicions
went to the core of the entire concept and execution of both reports;
consequently, it seemed unlikely that the "supporting documents" would
make much difference.  Our judgement in this matter was borne out when
we received the "supporting documents" from another source.  We were
not impressed.

PP> Would we be out of line in concluding that your mind was
PP> already made-up?

Yes, that would be out of line, since our minds were not and in fact
are not yet entirely made up.  Our warnings were tentative, and in our
view totally justified.  So far we have not been provided with any
evidence to the contrary.  If such evidence is provided, we will not
only change our minds but say so publicly.

PP> Fortunately, for the UFO Movement, other
PP> investigators and researchers don't share your opinion.

That's not the feedback we've been getting.

PP> You state in your initial message that "much of the information in
PP> the Dulce Report about Dulce and the Archuleta Mesa contradicts
PP> information already provided to ParaNet by other capable
PP> investigators."  What information?  Who provided it?  How did you
PP> determine its validity?

Our information consists of the testimony of ParaNet investigators and
others who have been in Dulce and on the Mesa.  Their experiences were
very different from what you describe, and it is difficult to reconcile
your claims with the findings of our own people.

PP> We formally request access to that
PP> information.  We'd like to examine it ourselves.  Can we obtain
PP> copies of "that" information?

Our investigation continues, and the information will be made public
when it is complete  At that time we will be glad to provide you with a
complimentary copy of our report.

PP> Now, let us get to the main thrust of your message - your
PP> investigation to reveal the personnel of the Phoenix Project.
PP>
PP> [several paragraphs of meaningless abuse deleted]

         
  **********************************************
  * THE U.F.O. BBS - http://www.ufobbs.com/ufo *
  **********************************************