526 lines
29 KiB
Plaintext
526 lines
29 KiB
Plaintext
SUBJECT: REVIEW OF THE "PHOENIX PROJECT" BY PARANET FILE: UFO2497
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PART 3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Filename: Par-Adv3.Reb
|
|
Type : Rebuttal/Reply
|
|
Author : Paranet Information Service - Michael Corbin
|
|
Date : 08/20/92
|
|
Desc. : Response/Rebuttal to Phoenix Project
|
|
|
|
Note : See also; PAR-ADVx.ZIP
|
|
|
|
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 between
|
|
PP> 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 to
|
|
PP> the members of ParaNet, which was also widely distributed via other
|
|
PP> BBS's nation-wide. That warning contained language which implied
|
|
PP> the information, and the source, were highly suspect. Thus, single-
|
|
PP> handedly, you created a strong impression throughout the UFO
|
|
PP> community, that our information was false. Many sincere people,
|
|
PP> trusting your qualifications, accepted your warning.
|
|
|
|
True.
|
|
|
|
PP> You took it upon yourself to make a snap judgement without
|
|
PP> 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 not received
|
|
PP> your letter of inquiry. Apparently, of all the mail we receive,
|
|
PP> your letter is the only one that has gone astray. We can only
|
|
PP> conclude that is was either lost in the mail or you didn't mail it.
|
|
PP> Did it ever occur to you to mail us a second request, when you did
|
|
PP> 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 already
|
|
PP> 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 investigators and
|
|
PP> 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 information. We'd like to
|
|
PP> examine it ourselves. Can we obtain 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] > What, if
|
|
PP> anything, is the Phoenix Project guilty of? Is it the fact that we
|
|
PP> dared to question and investigate two of the sacred cows of UFO-dom
|
|
PP> namely the ones you mentioned, i.e., "underground alien bases, and
|
|
PP> the cluster of government projects referred to collectively as
|
|
PP> Operation Majestic Twelve?"
|
|
|
|
No. ParaNet has long questioned both of those sacred cows. To this
|
|
point we have seen no acceptable proof for the existence of any
|
|
underground alien base near Dulce, nor have we seen adequate proof for
|
|
the existence of "Operation Majestic Twelve". We have publicly stated
|
|
as much on many occasions.
|
|
|
|
PP> According to our sources within the intelligence community, the
|
|
PP> Dulce Scam, perpetrated by the disinformation specialists of MAJI,
|
|
PP> better known to you as Majestic Twelve with help from the CIA and
|
|
PP> NSA, is considered one of their most brilliant success stories.
|
|
|
|
But, of course, these "sources" cannot be named, and all we have to go
|
|
on is your word that they even exist. And, unfortunately, you are
|
|
making a concerted effort to keep anyone from knowing who *you* are,
|
|
either. Anonymous stories relayed by anonymous story tellers. Sorry,
|
|
but that's not "evidence".
|
|
|
|
PP> We sent in experienced investigators, not amateurs, to check out
|
|
PP> the alleged Dulce Base. Those people knew what to look for, how to
|
|
PP> look for it, how to get answers, and are not easily mislead.
|
|
|
|
We have no evidence for this except your say-so.
|
|
|
|
PP> If you do not agree with our findings, get off your posterior, go
|
|
PP> to Dulce, and check it out for yourself.
|
|
|
|
We have.
|
|
|
|
In fact, we invite anybody to do the same thing. We're sure you'll
|
|
find exactly what we did ...
|
|
|
|
We didn't.
|
|
|
|
You imply that you're good at asking questions -- how are you at
|
|
answering them? We have a few questions ... Would you mind sharing
|
|
with all of us, everyone on the BBS's and the public, what hard
|
|
evidence you have that, without question, supports the presence and
|
|
validity of the Dulce Base.
|
|
|
|
Would you mind sharing what hard evidence you have that we ever said
|
|
anything of the kind? We have never said anything in support of the
|
|
presence of a secret alien base at Dulce. In point of fact, we consider
|
|
it extremely unlikely that any such base exists--at Dulce or anywhere
|
|
else. That's one of the reasons we have so much trouble with your "K-2"
|
|
report, which purports to document the existence of just such a base in
|
|
California.
|
|
|
|
Unless you have irrefutable evidence to present, made available for
|
|
public scrutiny and evaluation, which invalidates the findings of
|
|
the Phoenix Project regarding Dulce, K-2, or the Ultimate Secret,
|
|
or our future reports, back off. Either put-up or shut-up. In other
|
|
words, get off our back.
|
|
|
|
All right, challenge accepted. Let's start with this statement from
|
|
your "Ultimate Secret" report:
|
|
|
|
According to eye-witness testimony, the CIA agent in charge of this
|
|
covert operation, wearing the uniform of an AF Colonel, was William
|
|
C. Cooper. ... This witness testifies that this is the same William
|
|
C. Cooper, who has been prominent since 1988 in the civilian UFO
|
|
movement.
|
|
|
|
Is this "William C. Cooper" supposed to be the famous Bill Cooper we
|
|
have all come to know so well? Apparently so. Unfortunately, in his own
|
|
published documents Bill Cooper gives his full name as "Milton William
|
|
Cooper", not "William C. Cooper". Either Cooper doesn't know his own
|
|
name, or the Phoenix Project's "eye witness" doesn't know what he's
|
|
talking about.
|
|
|
|
And while we're on the subject of Bill Cooper, it is instructive to
|
|
compare some of the text of the Phoenix Project's "Ultimate Secret"
|
|
document with some of Bill Cooper's material on the same subject.
|
|
Cooper writes in his "Operation Majority--Final Release":
|
|
|
|
BC> [Project Grudge] was financed by CIA confidential
|
|
BC> funds (nonappropriated)
|
|
BC> and money from the illicit drug trade ...
|
|
BC> The purpose of Project Grudge
|
|
BC> was to collect all scientific, technological, medical and
|
|
BC> intelligence information from UFO/IAC sightings and
|
|
BC> contacts with alien life forms. This orderly file of
|
|
BC> collected information has been used to advance the United
|
|
BC> States Space Program.
|
|
|
|
Now look at the corresponding paragraph of the Phoenix Project's
|
|
"Ultimate Secret" report:
|
|
|
|
PP> Project Aquarius was funded by CIA confidential
|
|
PP> funds (non-appropriated) ...
|
|
PP> The purpose of Project Aquarius
|
|
PP> was to collect all scientific, technological, medical and
|
|
PP> intelligence information from UFO/IAC sightings and
|
|
PP> contacts with alien lifeforms. This orderly file of
|
|
PP> collected information has been used to advance the United
|
|
PP> States' Space Program and provided the data needed to
|
|
PP> develop present stealth technology.
|
|
|
|
You don't have to be an intelligence agent to see that these two
|
|
passages are virtually identical in both content and phrasing. Since
|
|
Cooper's statement is dated 10 January 1989, more than half a year
|
|
before the "Ultimate Secret" report's "origination" date of 4 August
|
|
1989, we seem to be left with three possibilities: (1) Cooper was
|
|
somehow privy to the Phoenix Project's investigative results even
|
|
before they were first put to paper; or, (2) the Phoenix Project
|
|
plagiarized Cooper's writings; or (3) the Phoenix Project's own
|
|
investigations drew on the same tainted and discredited sources as
|
|
Cooper apparently did in compiling his own materials. Whichever one you
|
|
pick, it's not a pretty picture.
|
|
|
|
But it gets worse:
|
|
|
|
PP> The basic information revealing the existence of Operation
|
|
PP> Majestic-12, the crashed UFOs, alien beings, and their secret bases
|
|
PP> within the United States, was obtained through the Freedom of
|
|
PP> Information Act from the files of the CIA, NSA, FBI, State
|
|
PP> Department, the U.S. Air Force.
|
|
|
|
This is utter nonsense, as any perusal of published FOIA documents on
|
|
UFOs would quickly reveal. FOIA requests have forced the government to
|
|
disgorge many hundreds of pages of UFO documents over the years, but
|
|
they provide little if any support for the existence of Operation
|
|
Majestic Twelve, crashed saucers, alien beings, or secret bases. If the
|
|
Phoenix Project is relying on already published documents as their
|
|
source for this claim (e.g., "The UFO Cover-UP" by Lawrence Fawcett and
|
|
Barry Greenwood, or "Above Top Secret" by Timothy Good), then clearly
|
|
they have not examined them very carefully. On the other hand, if the
|
|
project really does have such explosive FOIA documents in its
|
|
possession, let's see them; their publication would do more to
|
|
establish the project's credibility than anything else it could
|
|
possibly do short of producing a live alien.
|
|
|
|
PP> PROJECT GRUDGE: This project was originally established in 1953, by
|
|
PP> order of President Eisenhower and is under the control of the CIA,
|
|
PP> NSA, and MAJI. Project Grudge went underground and another project,
|
|
PP> Project Sign, was established as a cover operation. In 1960, the
|
|
PP> Project's name was changed from Project SIGN to Project Bluebook.
|
|
|
|
This is demonstrably and totally wrong. Project Sign was established
|
|
first, in 1947, and it was under the control of the Air Force, not the
|
|
CIA. The name was changed to Project Grudge in 1949, and to Blue Book
|
|
in 1952-- not 1960. (For details, see "The Report on Unidentified
|
|
Flying Objects" by Edward J. Ruppelt, who headed the project from 1951
|
|
to 1953.) The exact dates slide around a little bit depending on
|
|
whether you're talking about when the decision was made, when the order
|
|
was signed, or when the order became effective; but the differences are
|
|
on the order of months, not decades! How could the Phoenix Project's
|
|
experienced intelligence agents make so many ludicrous errors in a
|
|
single paragraph?
|
|
|
|
In fact, this whole business was such an embarrassing mess that the
|
|
Phoenix Project issued a "correction" document to try to straighten it
|
|
out. But, ironically, the correction is also wrong--just less obviously
|
|
so.
|
|
|
|
We could go on, but I think you get the point. The "Ultimate Secret"
|
|
report is, at best, a rehash of other people's garbage. At worst, it is
|
|
a deliberate effort to confuse and disinform.
|
|
|
|
PP> We actively encourage other serious investigators to use the
|
|
PP> information we have provided as a basis for conducting their own
|
|
PP> inquiry and to carry-on our effort. Can you, Mr. Corbin, or
|
|
PP> ParaNet, or Mufon, make the same claim. Or, is it true that the
|
|
PP> results of critical investigations are held sacred by the elite
|
|
PP> leadership of these organizations, and are not shared with the
|
|
PP> member's of their organizations or the public?
|
|
|
|
We can't speak for other organizations, but in the case of ParaNet we
|
|
have always made our results public as soon as our investigations are
|
|
complete.
|
|
|
|
PP> In your message, you insinuate that because of our past military
|
|
PP> and intelligence backgrounds, our area of expertise so-to-speak,
|
|
PP> that the motives of the Phoenix Project are suspect. You further
|
|
PP> insinuate that we are possibly government operatives attempting to
|
|
PP> send serious researchers off on a variety of wild goose chases.
|
|
|
|
Given the prior history of government disinformation in ufology, most
|
|
of it purveyed by active or former intelligence agents and their
|
|
victims, anyone who (1) purports to have a military intelligence
|
|
background, (2) refuses to divulge their identity, and (3) propagates
|
|
known disinformation as reliable intelligence (whether deliberately or
|
|
not) should expect his motives to be considered suspect until proven
|
|
otherwise. It is extremely naive of you to think it would happen any
|
|
other way.
|
|
|
|
PP> If anyone needed assurance that the truth regarding UFO's will
|
|
PP> remain a deep, dark, secret -- they can rest secure in the
|
|
PP> knowledge that you, are on the job. There are any number of
|
|
PP> government agencies who would welcome you with open arms. Expect
|
|
PP> some offers.
|
|
|
|
Sorry, none so far. We'll let you know if we get any.
|
|
|
|
PP> We are sure that the honest and sincere members of ParaNet and
|
|
PP> other UFO investigative organizations (and there are many) must be
|
|
PP> seriously considering whether your qualifications, fitness and
|
|
PP> investigative ability warrant your continuance in a position of
|
|
PP> leadership within what used to be a respected research
|
|
PP> organization.
|
|
|
|
Exactly the opposite, actually. Most of our people are grateful for the
|
|
warning, and are coming to the same conclusions as we did.
|
|
|
|
PP> Instead of making an honest attempt to validate or disprove our
|
|
PP> findings regarding the subjects mentioned -- missing the point
|
|
PP> completely, you chose to become obsessed with determining the
|
|
PP> identity of Phoenix Project personnel. For what reason? Do you
|
|
PP> intend to judge the validity of the information based on the
|
|
PP> credentials of those providing it? Some people would interpret that
|
|
PP> as putting the cart before the horse.
|
|
|
|
And some people would interpret it as a determination not to fall prey
|
|
to the same fate as far too many others in this field, who trusted
|
|
strangers too easily and ended up wasting years chasing wild geese--or
|
|
worse.
|
|
|
|
PP> Explain to us how or why the credentials of our investigators, or
|
|
PP> their identity, have any bearing on the validity of the
|
|
PP> information. Either the information is true or it isn't. It's as
|
|
PP> simple as that, or does that simple fact escape you.
|
|
|
|
The credentials of your investigators have a strong bearing on whether
|
|
or not it is even worth the trouble to examine your "information".
|
|
Anybody can sit down for a few hours at a word processor and cook up
|
|
reams of tittilating "information" about almost any subject under the
|
|
sun. But unless there is good reason to think there might be something
|
|
to it, it's a fool's errand to try to chase it all down.
|
|
|
|
It's like this: If ordinary claims come from an anonymous source, they
|
|
may be assigned some measure of trust simply because they accord with
|
|
everyday experience. If extraordinary claims come from a reputable
|
|
source, they may be assigned some measure of trust simply because of
|
|
the proven track record of the person making the claims. But when
|
|
extraordinary claims originate from an anonymous source, they generally
|
|
are given no credence at all, because there is simply no reason to
|
|
believe they are true. Life is too short to chase every wild goose that
|
|
comes cackling along. There must be *some* reason--either in the
|
|
plausibility of the claim or the authority of the claimant--to think
|
|
it's worth the trouble. You have provided neither one.
|
|
|
|
PP> How can we, or others, be assured of your motives. One does not
|
|
PP> need a brilliant mind to envision a scenario where the information
|
|
PP> the Phoenix Project has released is discredited because of an act
|
|
PP> of character assignation.
|
|
|
|
Please explain what "character assignation" is, and then maybe we can
|
|
envision the scenario you have in mind.
|
|
|
|
PP> Suppose we asked these questions -- would you be prepared to
|
|
PP> respond to them? Who are you? What are your credentials? Who are
|
|
PP> those holding positions of leadership in ParaNet? What are their
|
|
PP> qualifications and credentials? How do we know that you or ParaNet
|
|
PP> are not controlled by government operatives? What qualifications
|
|
PP> are required to hold a position of leadership within ParaNet?
|
|
|
|
There has never been any secret about what ParaNet is or who it
|
|
consists of. Lists of ParaNet nodes and their sysops have been posted
|
|
to the net on several occasions. Anyone who wants to follow the ParaNet
|
|
BBS echoes can log in to a local ParaNet node, receive the echo digests
|
|
over the net, or download them from our FTP archives. All postings are
|
|
signed with the user name and node ID of the originator. All articles
|
|
in Continuum, ParaNet's quarterly magazine, are signed by the authors.
|
|
I'm sorry to disappoint you, but neither our personnel nor our purposes
|
|
are in any way secret or mysterious.
|
|
|
|
PP> We were unaware that anyone had ever attempted to create a
|
|
PP> corporation in Nevada calling itself the Phoenix Project. Due to
|
|
PP> the nature of our work, and to protect the identity of our
|
|
PP> personnel it would be a foolish endeavor. We never made an attempt
|
|
PP> to incorporate our organization in any State.
|
|
|
|
The incorporation issue originally came up because we were trying to
|
|
track down your trademark registration. We have been unable to find any
|
|
such registration, yet at the beginning of each of your reports you
|
|
explicitly state that "all publications of the "Phoenix Project" bear
|
|
the Project's Logo (a registered trade-mark)." Is that a lie? It
|
|
certainly seems that a trademark registration of the project logo would
|
|
be almost as much of a threat to "the identity of your personnel" as
|
|
incorporation would be.
|
|
|
|
PP> You suggest a possible link between our organization and America
|
|
PP> West. Sorry about that, but you're dead wrong. It has come to us
|
|
PP> from several sources that we're not on their list of favorite
|
|
PP> people. We will take this opportunity to categorically deny that we
|
|
PP> have any affiliation with America West, their publication the
|
|
PP> "Phoenix Liberator," or any other publication they provide.
|
|
PP>
|
|
PP> Do not expect us to respond to the other coincidences,
|
|
PP> suppositions, insinuations or innuendoes contained in your message.
|
|
|
|
Why? Perhaps because there are other "insinuations" that cannot be
|
|
truthfully denied? As a matter of fact, we now have solid confirmation
|
|
of another one of our "insinuations"--i.e., the fact that the Richard
|
|
Miller who owns Advent Publishing is indeed the same Richard Miller who
|
|
used to channel "Hatonn". That confirmation came from none other than
|
|
Mr. Miller himself. So I guess we're not doing too badly.
|
|
|
|
In consideration of your explicit denials of any ties to America West,
|
|
and in view of the additional information provided privately by Mr.
|
|
Miller, we withdraw our previous suggestion of possible connections
|
|
between the Phoenix Project and the America West/Phoenix Liberator
|
|
operation. As we stated before, those suggestions were tentative
|
|
pending further investigation, and further investigation has not
|
|
uncovered any additional evidence to support them. Unfortunately, this
|
|
is the kind of burden that the Phoenix Project inevitably took on when
|
|
it chose to publicly portray itself as a clandestine organization.
|
|
|
|
PP> Since you brought up America West and The "Phoenix Liberator," why
|
|
PP> not turn your investigative abilities loose on their organization.
|
|
PP> Just suppose that Milton Cooper is, quietly, linked to their
|
|
PP> organization. That should intrigue you.
|
|
|
|
It does, if true. We also find it intriguing that you are, apparently,
|
|
using Cooper's material without attributing it to him--thereby lending
|
|
it credibility when there is every indication that it is completely
|
|
bogus.
|
|
|
|
PP> Equally intriguing, is where their funding comes from - not the
|
|
PP> obvious subscription income - the covert funding. Or, how about the
|
|
PP> busy and numerous, off premise, writers that prepare the volumes of
|
|
PP> "Hatonn" material, and their use of high-speed modems to provide
|
|
PP> the copy for each weekly issue of the "Phoenix Liberator" and the
|
|
PP> dozens of books they produce. In our supposition, we're talking
|
|
PP> about a big-time operation. You might also check out their printing
|
|
PP> facilities, distribution centers, and world-wide circulation.
|
|
PP> Equally fascinating is their sudden rise, in a few short years, to
|
|
PP> the top of the New Age Movement. You might even think to ask
|
|
PP> yourself, why the New Age Movement? What possible connection is
|
|
PP> there with covert government UFO activities, or a New World Order,
|
|
PP> with the New Age Movement? The answer to that might be revealed, if
|
|
PP> you dig deep enough, and discover high-speed modem links between
|
|
PP> their headquarters and certain organizations located at Langley and
|
|
PP> Ft. Meade. Yes, if you really dig, you might uncover all kinds of
|
|
PP> interesting things about America West.
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the tip.
|
|
|
|
PP> As to your effort in trying to identify staff personnel of the
|
|
PP> Phoenix Project -- good luck. However, we do have to admit that you
|
|
PP> may get lucky and hit on a couple of them. However, since there are
|
|
PP> many, it is doubtful you will ever get beyond that point.
|
|
|
|
Our only interest in the personnel of the Phoenix Project is to
|
|
determine whether the Project has a hidden agenda, and whether it is
|
|
covertly linked to other organizations whose agendas are known. That
|
|
interest was made necessary by the Project's clandestine nature and
|
|
consequent lack of public accountability. You brought it on yourselves,
|
|
and your continuing hostility and evasiveness suggest that we were not
|
|
entirely mistaken in our suspicions.
|
|
|
|
Our investigation continues. We'll let you know what we find out.
|
|
|
|
Michael Corbin
|
|
Director
|
|
ParaNet Information Service
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
**********************************************
|
|
* THE U.F.O. BBS - http://www.ufobbs.com/ufo *
|
|
********************************************** |