8/7/05: We have disagreed with his production and reporting on UFO's and other major news stories in the past, but the world has lost one of its leading journalists. Jerry Pippin's commentary follows.
TV is a strange medium. You get to know the people who you watch, even though you really don't know them. Radio is a little more intimate, in that radio listeners feel intimate with personalities they have grown to know over the years. Either way, and Peter Jennings was no stranger to either medium, the news of his death due to cancer this Sunday evening was still more than just a headline. We have done lots of shows about Peter Jennings over the years, many of them negative, because of his touting of the official line about the Kennedy Assassination and saying that Roswell is a myth.
However, Peter was the last of the big three and the first of the big three to go. He was still officially working when the end came. Cancer had ravaged his body but he still was making an effort to cover the stories. The other two, Tom Brokaw and Dan Rather, still do some news stints, but not the daily grind of day to day news.
Jennings was the consummate TV icon, smooth as silk, yet, no one challenged his intelligence or his tenacity. My only gripe was that he produced an establishment line, but perhaps he believed the official word. Alas, now we will never really know. It is sobering to think this man was born only one year earlier than myself, in Canada in 1938. He died at the top of his game, in New York in 2005.
I hate to close this tribute on personal note, but it must be pointed out because the thoughts haunt me constantly, growing old and dying is not something any of us are prepared to do, I don't think. However, I imagine, I will pass from this Earth working at my trade, just like Mr. Jennings. Broadcasting and news reporting, it gets in your blood and only a few have ever been able to walk away from it and then die, most like Jennings, pass still plying the trade.
The sobering thought tonight is that the world will go on, without Peter Jennings, the news will be reported and stories will be told. I guess the same will be said when it happens to me. Regardless of the critiques by me about him from time to time, he was a class act. I hope the same can be said of me when the time comes. God Rest your soul, Peter Jennings, and God help us keep men and women who want to tell us the news, correctly and straight forward. America and the world needs the truth tellers.
Jerry Pippin, 11:59 p.m., August 7, 2005
An interesting exchange between two members of the UFO community regarding the ABC position taken on the reporting of UFOs by the public:
Person One: At the end of the second hour NUFORC is shown and portrayed as a "one-man operation" and the only UFO investigation going, like they completely forgot all about CUFOS, which was shown in the first hour.
Person Two: ABC did give the impression that NUFORC is the only place in the US that a witness can call to report a UFO. What happened to MUFON? Are they dead? So, it seems. NUFORC was able to get this 1 minute commercial all across the US for free, but MUFON is not even mentioned. NIDS is gone now, but I thought they had the exclusivity with the FAA (not NUFORC). NARCAP does not want to be associated with UFOs, so I don't blame them for not pursuing a plug with ABC.
The position of the Jerry Pippin Show Executive Producer, Larry Dicken, on this issue: ABC has effectively steered hundreds of thousands of eye-witness accounts, many of which could be multi-witness accounts accompanied by video or photo evidence, to "the Black Hole of Ufology" - NUFORC. There are many other organizations with websites, including ours and MUFON that accept UFO reports and encourage the sharing of that information for follow-up, witness to witness interaction and potential scientific investigation. We should all work together to counter this irresponsible ploy by PJ Productions and/or ABC to manipulate the behavior of the public.
A dose of denial and cynical, modern, "objective journalism" from Mr. Know It All at the Chicago Sun Times:
UFOs are only in your dreams
March 7, 2005 BY NEIL STEINBERG CHICAGO SUN-TIMES COLUMNIST
Opening shot -I couldn't bring myself to watch Peter Jennings' two-hour special on ABC recently what-iffing the existence of UFOs.
Half the people in America believe in flying saucers, and there is a big enough mountain of "evidence" of extraterrestrial visitation that an army of TV journalists could happily mine it for years while going through the motions of weighing facts.
The thing is, you don't need two hours to explain why UFOs are half hallucination, half fraud. I can do it in a single paragraph.
Here goes: Two undisputed facts: The universe is very large, and time is very long. Though no one questions the possibility of flying objects at some point in some place in the galaxy, there is no convincing evidence of UFOs here and now. Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof, but instead we are offered the same just-out-of-the-corner-of-your-eyesight nonsense that is the hallmark of all hoaxes, from perpetual motion to alchemy. We never hear of sightings from the army of astronomers monitoring the skies all over the world, do we? Instead we get pie plates on a string that become more obviously fake with each passing year, shored up with periodic mass hysterias. What most undermines the UFO case is precisely the endless number of sightings and claims served up to support it.
They suggest UFOs of every possible description -- big, small, round, glowing, dark, cylindrical, square, fast, slow. Which means we are either a) constantly visited by a vast armada of celestial visitors of every known description who somehow never end up at Daley Plaza at noon. Or, b) Gee, maybe people are making all this up. I, and the half of America that can read without moving our lips, chose B.
UFO-Files Editorial Response to the Neil Steinberg's elementary school
Prove it in one paragraph? Not one word he wrote proved anything at all. The man is obviously still living intellectually and philosophically in the 19th Century. He does indeed represent the, at least, 50% in this country and perhaps the world that have no idea of what reality is not. We may never totally prove what reality is.
The issue here is not about believing or not believing. It is about being open to learning about and subsequently gradually increasing our knowledge about the true reality of life and the Universe. I personally, intuitively believe in the reality of ET UFOs and ETs, but that belief is based on an ever increasing body of scientific theory and evidence that supports the existence of ET life and space traveling civilizations, both out there and here on our planet. Frankly, when I was much younger, my beliefs were not so supported by science, even though I saw one of those same UFOs at a distance of only a few hundred feet, along with eleven other witnesses.
Neil needs to begin to educate himself thoroughly concerning what we are
beginning to understand about how our universe behaves, before he writes off ET
visitation to our little self-tarnished jewel of a planet. And no, there isn't
an army of professional astronomers out looking for UFOs. This is a significant
part of the problem of scientific study of the UFO phenomena. They are only a
division, not an army. And, they can't see and study what is in front of their
naked eyes, when they are sitting inside an office with no windows, looking at
computer generated images of stars and galaxies that existed, as we see them,
millions and billions of years ago.
We would like to have your opinion. Please call this number and leave your comments, they will be broadcast over the next few days. The number to call anytime is 918-682-2630, or you may email your comments to us at firstname.lastname@example.org.
From X-Conference Director Stephen Bassett: They started from the beginning = a fact of life in the fragmented audience world of television. Doesn't matter how many documentaries have been done so far, until it has been done on ABC, it hasn't been done. Ok. It was a good effort. The only real miss was Roswell, They blew that for reason only they know. Someone influenced them on this segment. Possibly Pflock. They will take great heat over this section. Let' see how they respond. What is important now are what are the ratings and when is the next special?
From Steven M. Greer MD, Founder and Director of the Disclosure Project: Of course, the title of the show was `Peter Jennings Reporting…' – if only that were so. This is the story of how, once again, the corrupt Big Media has defrauded the American people, from one who had a front row seat to the spectacle.
In the summer of 2004, as founder and director of The Disclosure Project ( www.DisclosureProject.org) I was approached by Jennings Productions producer Jordan Kronick. He explained how ABC News was going to make history by doing a serious expose of the UFO matter – for the first time on network news.
Initially skeptical – we have seen and heard this song and dance before - I agreed to meet with Kronick at our offices in Washington DC. Over the course of several hours, we discussed the subject and how The Disclosure Project had identified several hundred top secret military and government witnesses to UFO events and projects.
Kronick expressed great interest and repeatedly stated that this is exactly what Jennings, chief producer Mark Obenhaus and he were looking for. I offered to provide, pro bono, ALL Disclosure Project digital videotape interviews and full access to ALL Disclosure Project witnesses willing to cooperate with ABC News – including those witnesses not yet taped by us.
The reader at this point needs to know that these are not fuzzy, blacked-out deep throats anonymously telling stories of the night. These are hundreds of military, government and corporate insiders who have been identified by us over the past 14 years. They range from Generals, to Astronauts, to senior FAA officials who were privy to events, projects and cover-ups involving UFOs. Additionally, we have thousands of pages of uncontested official government smoking gun documents and physical evidence, photos, videos, landing trace events and other unambiguous proof.
The ABC News production team claimed to want exactly this type evidence – and especially the high-level government and military insider whistle-blowers who could credibly blow the lid off of decades of secrecy.
As a two-hour news special, ABC claimed that they could, at long last, give the subject the focus and rigor needed to achieve this objective.
But as discussions continued, it became more and more clear that Obenhaus and Jennings really wanted to do a human interest story – including anecdotal civilian witnesses, man-in-the-street interviews and the general silly season and carnival atmosphere surrounding most things ufological.
We agreed to cooperate with the filming of a CSETI (Center for the Study of Extraterrestrial Intelligence) research expedition to Mt. Shasta in August of 2004, at which time we were able to have discussions with Obenhaus, the senior producer in charge of the project.
We were incredulous as Obenhaus revealed to us that he was sure the matter was not really being kept secret but had just `fallen through the cracks' due to lack of follow through, laziness and so forth on the part of the government! It was clear he had not studied the data or evidence given to him, and had his mind made up to do a `light', human interest piece and not a real expose or research project.
This was later confirmed when, as summer turned to fall, the long promised serious research and interviews they claimed they wanted to do with these top-secret government witnesses were never followed up. I spoke a few more times to Kronick, who promised a sit down interview and follow- up with these high-ranking and conclusive witnesses. They never did.
Instead, the final ABC News show was weaker in evidence than most tabloid cable channel pieces on the UFO subject – with the bulk of the `documentary' being interviews with UFO personalities, debunkers and the carnival atmosphere of UFO hotspots like Roswell.
They fraudulently appeared to be ` balanced' by having both skeptics and `believers' – with the clear implication that the skeptics were `real scientists' and the `believers' were misguided flakes. Using the ruse of media `objectivity', ABC News would asymmetrically show, say, a Harvard scientist skeptic juxtaposed against an civilian who thought he had been sexually assaulted by aliens!
The few, very brief interviews with pilots and military people were overwhelmed by the spurious, carnival-like pseudo-ethnography of the UFO subculture mixed in with long segments of scientists pooh- poohing the entire matter.
While appearing objective and `balanced' to the general viewer, the project was, rather, a disinformation piece, carefully crafted to give the mere appearance of objectivity.
Otherwise, why spend so much air time interviewing UFO personalities, media figures and the like – while completely leaving out ALL high-ranking military, government and scientific witnesses and evidence given directly by us to them?
In light of the range and scope of material that we personally gave them, it is incomprehensible why ALL of it would be omitted – unless it was their intent from the beginning to do a disinformation and cover-up piece.
Why else would Peter Jennings state that the US Government has been out of the UFO matter since 1969, when Project Blue Book was closed, even though he and his team were directly given by us, official US government documents, senior government whistle-blower testimony and physical evidence – including radar tapes – to the contrary? Why would Jennings feature uninformed scientists rhetorically asking `where's the physical evidence' when abundant physical evidence is available and was offered to him?
Why indeed. We have received a CIA document from 1991 that clearly states that the CIA has contacts in the big media to change, kill or spin stories. From this document, dated 20 December 1991, and released 1 April 1992, to the Director of Central Intelligence from the Task Force on Greater CIA Openness, on page 6:
"PAO [the Public Affairs Office] now has relationships with reporters from every major wire service, newspaper, news weekly, and television network in the nation. This has helped us turn some intelligence failure stories into intelligence success stories…In many instances, we have persuaded reporters to postpone, change, hold or even scrap stories…"And from a CIA document regarding the psychological warfare implications of UFOs, we find a reference to Disney Studios, now the parent company of ABC, being used as a source for doing cartoon-like portrayals of the subject for psychological warfare purposes. Can we be surprised ABC News has, again, defrauded the American people – only pretending to do news and real investigative reporting when in reality they are purveying disinformation to an accepting public?
Obenhaus, without any research or foundation in fact, went so far as to personally assert to me that the hybrid government – corporate complex is not keeping new energy, propulsion and related technologies hidden from the public! His prejudice on the matter was profound and unwavering: forget the facts, my mind is made up.
It is hard to reconcile ABC News' claims to doing a serious expose and investigative report when the senior producer of the project, without any investigation or research, espouses such closed-minded conclusions at the outset.
Those who know me, know that I like to stay positive, present the affirmative facts and present the promise of an advanced, sustainable civilization on earth benefiting from the knowledge of these new technologies. But it is time for the American people to wake up to the fact that the big media and their corporate masters are the central problem blocking the truth from coming out. As a former board member of Time Warner told me, the big media has become scribes taking dictation from the right hand of the king – and the fourth estate is essentially dead.
A CALL TO ACTION
The American people must demand that ABC News correct its fraudulent assertions – and do a real investigative report on the serious evidence, government documents and courageous military whistle- blower testimony that The Disclosure Project and others have identified. The reader may obtain much of this evidence from www.DisclousreProject.org.
Write Peter Jennings at ABC News at: support@ABCNews.go.com and demand an honest investigative report.
Additionally, please contact the FCC and register your complaint regarding the transparent fraud perpetrated by ABC News on the American public. Remember: ABC News, as a broadcast network, is given by the FCC access to the public airwaves. In exchange, we have the right to hold ABC News, as well as the other networks, to fairness, accuracy and honesty -and certainly to avoid blatant fraud and corruption. This was not the ABC entertainment division that perpetrated this fraudulent report on the American people, but its news division. That they would sanitize such an important two hour report of nearly all credible evidence and government insider witnesses requires that we demand a hearing on the matter by the FCC immediately. Who induced Obenhaus and Peter Jennings to cover-up this important evidence? Why? ABC News cannot claim ignorance on the matter as they were directly given extensive testimony and evidence, none of which appeared in the program.
Contact the FCC at www.fcc.gov/cgb/complaints.html and demand an immediate investigation into this matter and demand that the FCC require ABC to retract its false statements and present the evidence which they possess but are hiding from the American public.
And lastly, support Disclosure in any way you can. Help us get the truth out. Tell people about http://www.DisclosureProject.org where they can find the truth about this important matter. And help us identify backers who will help us start a new – and honest- news outlet that will truthfully report on these and related projects that are illegally kept secret from the public. Is it not time for us to form a news network –The Disclosure Network- that will produce and air real investigative reports on a wide range of government and corporate corruption? Matters now left completely hidden by the complicity of big media need to be known by the people if we are to renew and protect democracy and disclose the technologies now hidden and suppressed that could replace oil and nuclear power and give us a sustainable, peaceful world.
We can no longer trust ABC news or the rest of the big media to do this. We, the people, must take on the task of getting the truth out – and salvaging what is left of our democracy and planet. Big media, who have become shills for their corporate masters, are incapable or unwilling to tell the truth. It is time we did it for them.
From Jan Aldrich, UFO Researcher, in response to Steven Greer commentary: Let's see the guy that "did not have the time" to vet witnesses and let a bunch of fools up to the microphone at the National Press Club with good witnesses, and whose tortured editing job in the beginning of his film is accusing big media of fraud. This is so rich. Can anyone say IRONY! Say it ten times and make it yours. When you read this don't think of Budd Hopkins' letter, think about Brad Spark's! Now please leave me alone. I have had quite enough of this gross ignorance! Sci Fi puts on a half baked program and everyone is in heaven. ABC exposed a mass audience to some of the best evidence for UFOs along with some negative stuff and the so-called UFO movement is crazed with the talking about fraud and the death of Ufology. Gad, with friends like this real UFO researchers don't need any enemies.
From Listener, L. D. Thomas, Sr., Bloomington, Indiana: [Referring to the Chicago Times Commentary above] Dear Jerry and Larry, Good for you. Keep up the good work. Steinberg is all wet behind the ears. You can find evidence that UFO's have been visiting this planet for thousands of years if you look, the King James Version Bible is one source, if Steinberg is arrogant enough to think that our measly little planet is the only one to have life on it out of the billions that exist. Then, I don't want to read his paper anymore. Also, under the freedom of information act, a report to the President at the time, of the crashed ET spacecraft in New Mexico has been released, and it sure didn't describe momma's airplane or a weather balloon. I saw that report, and I think it is an original copy of a factual report sent to the President at the time. People will argue about that for years but what we really need to look for is facts not Steinberg fiction.
From B. J. Booth, UFO Researcher, Webmaster, www.ufocasebook.com: [Referring to the Chicago Times Commentary above] Mr. Steinburg,
In regards to your recent remarks in the March 7th column, I would like to offer some comments of my own. You have adopted a very narrow minded, simple, solution to a very broad and complex problem. If you are referring to some of the hoaxes that have been portrayed in the UFO field the last 50 years, I will say "Yes" there have been those, but not as many as the number of lies that have pushed upon the American public by the news media. You have an answer to the UFO enigma, but we mainstream Ufologists are smart enough to know that we do not have all the answers. We have not closed the case as you have. We are still working on it. Our minds are open, and searching.
The mystery goes above your head. That is why you do not have an answer. You are part of the "it couldn't happen, therefore it didn't." Well, I am telling you that it has happened, even though it seems unlikely. As you have stated, the universe is very large. All the more reason to believe that the possibility exists of other life out there. And for the evidence that goes beyond a pie pan on a string?
I can prove it in one paragraph. It is really what you are. You are the flares of 1997 in Phoenix which fall in perfect formation, and suspend themselves for hours without moving. One flare flies out of formation a minute, and then flies right back into formation. You are the lighthouse beacon in 1980 in Rendlesham Forest that landed, formed a triangle shape and was touched by Jim Penniston. You slowly moved up and through the forest while disrupting communication. You also spit out orbs with small aliens in them. Quite a nifty trick. You are the pie pan that was filmed landing in London in 1995, released an orb, and then flew across the bridge as cars motored by. You are the pie pan that Hannah Roberts photographed in 1981. You are the pie pan that moved across a lake in Allagash and abducted four artists in 1976. Were you the dream that two counselors saw in Vermont in 1969. No, wait that was in the daytime. Sorry. Well, that's a pretty long paragraph. Should I go for two?
Do I have the answer to the mystery of UFOs? No, I do not, but I am searching with an open mind. You stopped, and it's just as well.
From an "Anonymous" Listener (Yes, we do allow anonymous posts on our site, if that is what you wish, but we do not force you to remain anonymous): What a wonderful show you [Jerry] and Larry did on the ABC UFO Special! I can't thank you enough for your comments.
I've had some real problems with Mr. Davenport and his "Seattle acolytes." I too have wondered why he continues to come on the Jeff Rense Show, spend half the show whining about how overworked he is, and how hard it is to put up with people, who don't know how to spell right!! (Can you believe THAT???) It shouldn't matter how the heck something is spelled if the person is trying hard to put across a report the best way they can.
What does he do with all this research??? I see an awful lot of nasty, gossipy, trash talking coming out of the Seattle area about other legitimate UFO investigators who work hard and don't complain, that is what I see. Davenport is quick to complain about how hard his job is. WHY DOES HE DO IT??? If it's so darn thankless and miserable? Why not just leave it up to people like Brian Vike and George Filer, two people who seem to burn with enthusiasm for what they do.
Your comments hit the ole' nail right on it's head Jerry and Larry, Thanks!!
From Listener, Jeff Boyington, Montreal, Canada: What a major disappointment it must have been for anyone watching last Thursdays’ ABC Special UFOs seeing is believing and expecting to be enlightened or informed. ABC and Peter Jennings demonstrate once again that the major media networks are incapable of reporting anything approaching the truth or balanced journalism when it comes to Ufology. Peter Jennings even refers to Roswell as a myth, although I doubt anyone of the witnesses whose very lives were threatened by the U.S. Army Air Force in those days and weeks and even years after the Roswell incident, would refer to the incident as a myth.
Why did most if not all major advertisers usually seen on primetime specials seem to disappear last Thursday night to be replaced by infomercial like commercials and cheesy advertising? This was a pathetic attempt to grab ratings and viewers, and I wonder in the end if it was worth it? If this is the beginning of a disclosure campaign it certainly got off to a very bad start.
From Abduction Investigator and Researcher, Budd Hopkins: During the past year Jenning's producers interviewed me a number of times, and because I sensed what they had in mind, I made, as a preemptive strike, a number of careful, highly specific observations about the UFO abduction phenomenon.
All of these crucial points - recorded by ABC on videotape - were designed to underline the physical reality of UFO abductions and to demonstrate the implausibility of current skeptical explanations. To its shame, ABC suppressed ALL of these observations.
I knew, of course, that the skeptics' favorite explanation du jour is impossibly simple: abduction reports, they believe, are all due to misperceived "sleep paralysis." Ranking as a distant second is another erroneous belief: abduction reports, they say, "ONLY emerge under hypnosis," and since hypnosis is "totally unreliable," all abduction reports must be discarded.
In the light of these tediously familiar errors and misstatements, I made certain in my taped interviews to explain the following:
- In the first two decades of our research, ALL of the central abduction cases involved people who were outside their houses when they were taken. NONE were lying paralyzed in their bedrooms. They were driving cars, walking, fishing, hunting and even, in one famous case, driving a tractor on a farm. "Sleep paralysis" as a blanket explanation of UFO abductions is therefore, ipso facto, a ludicrous non-starter. Nevertheless ALL of my insistent statements on this point were systematically eliminated by the producers.
- Second, I indicated that there are many abduction reports involving two, three, six or more people who were taken simultaneously and whose highly detailed recollections are virtually identical. This fact alone eliminates not only "sleep paralysis" but "fantasy-proneness" or any other idiosyncratic psychological aberrations as triggering causes. My descriptions of these many cases of multiple abductions were likewise completely suppressed by the producers
- Third, I showed the interviewers many photos of, again, virtually identical scoop marks, consistent straight-line scars and ground landing traces at abduction sites, and other physical sequelae. ALL of these vivid photographic examples of physical evidence were suppressed by the producers.
- Fourth, I was not alone in making these points. My colleague Dr. David Jacobs was asked by ABC to carry out a hypnotic regression for the camera, but since the woman he chose had been abducted in the daytime while driving a car, the case did not fit ABC's "sleep paralysis" agenda and was thus not only suppressed, but Dr. Jacobs' many hours of taped interviews were also scrapped.
- Fifth, I made it very clear that perhaps 30% of all the abduction reports collected by researchers are recalled WITHOUT THE AID OF HYPNOSIS, a fact which renders the issue of hypnosis moot. This point was also suppressed by the producers whose only goal, it appeared, was to eliminate any data that contradicted their transparently false debunking hypotheses.
Despite my having presented - and reiterated - the points above, the producers chose to trot out on camera two debunking scientists (whose experiments with a mere handful of subjects have yet to be taken seriously by the psychological community) to buttress the untenable "sleep paralysis" theory, the false "no physical evidence" claim, and the demonstrably untrue "its all hypnosis" assertion.
The smug presentations of these two would-be experts were accompanied by the producers' lurid "reenactments" of "sleep paralysis" phenomena, complete with flashing lights and spooky music. The taped testimony of a serious mental health professional like Dr. John Mack was likewise suppressed, along with my statement that over the years eight psychiatrists and numerous other mental health professionals had come to me about their own UFO abductions.
The producers' obvious goal was to conceal the fact that within the mental health community there are many professionals who look with amusement on the "sleep paralysis" theory, and who accept the physical reality of UFO abductions.
So what can one say about such a deliberately dishonest presentation as Peter Jenning's "Seeing is Believing" take on abductions? Perhaps one can only shrug and warn, yet again, that the incurious members of the press and the many blinkered, conservative scientists had better collectively pull their heads up out of the sand and join us in our work.
Whatever one's personal attitude toward the UFO abduction phenomenon, science insists that an extraordinary phenomenon demands an extraordinary investigation. What ABC served up on Thursday night was, instead, an extraordinary whitewash of the abduction phenomenon, and a brutal suppression of the evidence for what may well be the most portentous event in human history.
Peter Jennings and his staff should be ashamed.
BUDD HOPKINS, New York, Friday, February 25, 2005
From Phyllis Galde, Publisher, FATE Magazine: We were glad Fate was displayed [on the show], if only for a few seconds. Interestingly, we got a ton of hits on our website, but no requests for a free issue! Mixed feelings about the show, but at least it generated more interest in the UFO field. I guess I really don't like many of the skeptics. Their brains work differently from mine.
From Stanton Friedman, UFO Researcher and Author: By the time you read this you will have read a ton of verbiage about the Feb. 24, Peter Jennings ABC “UFOs: Seeing is Believing”. I think it is appropriate for me to comment since so many people sent me emails about it. Almost all were sympathetic about what they considered the unfair treatment that I and the Roswell incident received.
The producers in Roswell interviewed me for over an hour in July, 2004. Don Schmitt who has been active in Roswell research for many years was also interviewed. He and a film crew actually went out to the site, which was marked out for more archeological digging. I believe about 30 seconds of my interview was shown with none of Don’s nor of the scientific work site. I had been cautiously optimistic after hearing a few weeks before the showing that I had made the cut, but that 100 people had not. My optimism decreased when I heard that Seth Shostak, Frank Drake, and Jill Tartar, (SETI Specialists) and Michael Shermer, skeptic, were going to be on. Despite all their writing about SETI, it was clear that none knew anything about UFOs. Proclamation is not the same as investigation. I had jokingly told people that, after all, Peter Jennings and I were both dual citizens of the USA and Canada and, surprisingly, both had been born on July 29. How could I not trust him? I didn’t place enough emphasis on the fact that Benito Mussolini was also born on July 29.
I was favorably impressed with the first portion with interviews with aircraft crewmembers, comments about Blue Book’s focus on explaining away sightings and the interview with Major Friend whom I had met at Blue Book in the early 1960s. The second half of the show was like a horror film. The SETI people waxed poetic about their wonderful search for ET Signals. There was no indication of any knowledge of UFOs other than one of the sillier moments of the show when Jill Tartar described having a sighting of the moon partially obscured by clouds. This was worth recreating?? One can see why the SETI people don’t want to deal with eyewitness testimony. I think one could also see why I say that SETI stands for Silly Effort to Investigate and why I talk of the cult of SETI: Charismatic hand waving, very strong dogma (they must be out there, they can’t be coming here, we will make the most important discovery in Man’s history a signal from a distant civilization, and nobody could possibly come here… if they did, we would be out of a job) and strong irrational claims about the absence of evidence. Meaning “we don’t dare review it”. Dr. Tyson joined the crowd and proclaimed that eyewitness testimony may be OK in court, but not in science. Tell Jane Goodall that.
Several time PJ used the term mainstream science along with a proclamation about its non-acceptance of UFO reality. No evidence was presented. It appears that the only mainstream science he was talking about was astronomy. Think of chemists, biologists, and geologists, us physicists, etc. Much of science today was based on eyewitness testimony of something unusual. Think Roentgen and X rays. I believe that most mainstream scientists like me believe that the methodology has to suit the problem. Unpredictable, brief appearances of strange craft (not under the control of the observer or of Mother nature) behaving in strange ways require eyewitness testimony as of course do airplane crashes, crimes, etc. Shostak proclaims when he finds a signal they will tell everybody else who will then verify it and anybody can use his own antenna .. What happens if the transmission stops? How many can afford their own Hat Creek Telescope. System? Does he think the signal will be “Testing 1, 2” repeated over and over again? That we can order the saucer to stop while we do measurements?
PJ claimed that mainstream science doesn’t accept the UFO evidence. This was yet another misrepresentation. Polls have consistently shown that the greater the education the more likely to accept UFO reality. Two polls of R and D people showed that about 2/3 of them who expressed an opinion said flying saucers were real. But then they live in the real world unlike the SETI Cultists.
The program contained, as might be expected based on past experience, a major put down on star travel from people who know absolutely nothing about space travel. We were told that the Voyageur spacecraft, our fastest space craft launched 30 years ago, will take 73,000 years to reach the nearest star and that the fastest man made object goes only 11 miles per second compared to the speed of light at 186,000 miles per sec. Wow! Sounds like we sure can’t get there from here. These are both totally misleading. The Voyageur hasn’t been attached to a propulsion system since it left the vicinity of the earth!! It is coasting. This is like tossing a bottle into the ocean as a basis for estimating crossing time for the Queen Mary 2 or the SST or the space station.
We physicists have accelerated particles in the vacuum chambers of expensive accelerators to speeds of 99.99 % of the speed of light. 11mps is absurd. Space is a very large vacuum chamber. These totally misleading comments rank on a par with Dr. Simon Newcombe’s claim in October, 1903, (2 months before the Wright Brothers first flight) that the only way man would fly would be with the help of a balloon. Dr. Bickerton in the 1920s proved “scientifically” that it would be impossible to provide enough energy to put anything into orbit. Dr. Campbell in 1941 “Scientifically” calculated that the required initial launch weight of a rocket able to get a man to the moon and back would be a million million tons. He was, because of his total ignorance about space flight, off by a factor of 300,000,000. All three were, like the SETI cultists, astronomers. With this track record, why believe any of their proclamations? I was involved more than 40 years ago in work on a fusion propulsion system able to eject particles having 10 million times as much energy per particle as in a chemical rocket. This of course was not presented. After all, I was just a promoter.
A real hatchet job was done on Budd Hopkins in the show’s segment on UFO abductions. The witnesses were OK, but then we have the off the wall proclamations about sleep paralysis being the explanation coupled with hypnosis to generate false testimony from the witnesses. All the data provided by Budd about the fact that many abductions don’t take place in bed (Think Betty and Barney Hill, Travis Walton, etc), that there are many cases when more than one person is abducted (is sleep paralysis contagious?), that at least 30% of abduction investigations do not involve hypnosis, was left on the cutting room floor. Budd has worked with over 600 abductees. Had the 2 Harvard psychologists worked with more than a dozen? Why wasn’t any of Harvard psychiatrist John Mack’s interview run? The pronouncement that there is no benefit of hypnosis in memory enhancement is false. Phil Klass made the same claim to me, but stopped when I provided an article about a stonemason being able, under hypnosis, to describe tiny details on a particular stone that he had placed years earlier.
Finally we have the Roswell segment. I was introduced as a Roswell promoter. The term used twice. There was no mention of that fact that I was a nuclear physicist who had worked for the likes of GE, GM, Westinghouse etc. The totally unjustifiable term Myth was used at least twice.PJ should be ashamed. Jesse Marcel junior was filmed. There was no mention of the fact that he is a medical doctor, a Flight surgeon Colonel in the reserve, and serving in Iraq despite being 67. His father was called an intelligence officer, but without adding that the group was the most elite military group in the world, the 509th, which had dropped the A, bombs on Japan. Don’t these facts go to credibility? Of course I am a Roswell promoter. based on 27 years of research and investigation and the outlay of thousands of dollars and thousands of hours and finding loads of supporting testimony. all ignored by the noisy negativists and none presented in the program.
At the request of the producers I had provided a total of 57 videos from which they used a few clips. One video was the 105 minute “Recollections of Roswell”, which included testimony from 27witness including Retired General Thomas Jefferson DuBose. He told me of taking the call from General Clements McMullen head of SAC who was the boss of 8th Air Force Commander Roger Ramey (who was DuBose’s boss) saying to get the press off their back, send some wreckage up here today, and never talk about it again.
For reasons unknown they had historian Robert Goldberg tell the Roswell tale although he was seriously in error in his description of Roswell in his book about conspiracies and on the show. They gave Karl Pflock quite a bit of time with his Roswell debunking They blindly accepted the Mogul Balloon explanation even though there is no evidence to support it, the materials characteristics don’t match witness testimony, the dates and locations are wrong. They stressed the high security for Mogul… vastly overstated since several launches were allowed to just drop in the desert, no chase planes or ground teams. At least the Crash test dummies weren’t paraded. I have dealt with all the objections in my MUFON 2003 paper “Critiquing the Roswell Critics”.
The real promoters on the show were the SETI cultists with their myths. They have no evidence of any kind that there is anybody out there, that there are signals being sent, that they can receive and interpret such signals if there are any, using our primitive technology. An AM radio can’t pick up FM signals. They can’t admit that there is overwhelming evidence of alien visitation.
It appears that the producers were perfectly willing to present some interesting testimony though they left out things like Project Blue Book Special Report 14,or other large scale scientific studies, the statement by AF General Carroll Bolender that reports of UFOs which could effect national Security were not part of the blue Book system. But the three areas of investigation that clearly together establish both the cover-up and that the planet is being visited (Roswell and the abductions and the fact that interstellar travel is feasible with reasonable trip times) were trashed. Sounds like when push came to shove they lacked any courage at all. It was nice to give a neat segment at the end of the program to Michio Kaku saying that maybe visitors are well ahead of us and can warp space and time. Fusion propulsion systems are much closer in time. Blacked out and whited out government UFO documents force one to the conclusion that the government is not just incompetent with Blue Book, but lying through its teeth.
Perhaps I should mention that only 11.6 million people watched the show. The unsolved Mysteries program on NBC in 1989 about Roswell was seen by over 28 million people the first time around and 30 million the second time.
Particularly irritating was the frequent mention of lights in the sky, billions of stars, absence of physical evidence. There was not even the slightest mention of Ted Phillips’ 3000 + excellent physical trace countries from 90 countries. Why show Chris McKay digging in desert dirt and not the traces left by a UFO?
Frankly I was also bothered by the proclamations by nasty noisy negativist retired USAF officer James McGaha. We had a full-scale debate in Tennessee. The video is noted at my website www.stantonfriedman.com. It is easy to say we need both sides. But is that true when one does his research by investigation and the other does it by proclamation?
Stan Friedman, email@example.com
From Jim Marrs, Author and Researcher: For what it's worth, here's my contribution to the critiques of Peter Jennings' ABC special. The recent ABC Special "UFOs: Seeing is Believing" was an most interesting blend of fact, fiction, information and DISinformation.
It appeared that ABC was trying to play catch-up. Most of the good information was years out of date. The coverage of the Phoenix flyover and the police chase of a UFO in the North were quite good. But why were these "good" cases not covered as news events when they occurred? It was as though someone in charge of ABC said, "This stuff is already in the public domain and anyone interested in this knows about it so we can talk about this." Or to be more blunt, ABC was mimicking the bumper sticker that reads, "Hey wait for me! I'm your leader!"
Yet, there were some astounding moments in the program. After reviewing the 1950s Robertson panel and Project Bluebook, which purported to be the last government word on UFOs, Jennings correctly concluded that it was all hogwash. There was no scientific investigation, only a public relations effort to stop interest in the subject. In other words, hey America, your federal government lied to you in the 1950s and 1960s! But then, Jennings turns to Roswell.
He concludes that it was only a secret Mogul balloon that crashed and places all the blame for later publicity on Maj. Jesse Marcel who stirred up a number of publicity seekers. This is an atrocious assault on a gentleman and fine military officer. One need only review Marcel's military records to see that he was quite highly regarded. There was no mention of the more than 400 witnesses to the Roswell event. Not all of these people are flakes or hoaxers. To support the Mogul theory, Jennings trotted out Karl Pflock without mentioning that Karl is CIA and a former deputy assistant secretary of defense. Pflock argues in his book that Mogul was so secret that its recovery at Roswell had to be covered by a story about a flying saucer. Now just think about this one for a moment --- a "secret" Mogul balloon crashes and the authorities do not want Soviet agents snooping around New Mexico. So they announce they have recovered a flying saucer?!! Every agent in the world would flock to NM! He also points out that more than half the Mogul balloons launched were never recovered. Why not? No one bothered to go look for them, he tells us. Some Top-Secret project, eh? If the Mogul balloons were to detect Soviet nuclear testing in the atmosphere as claimed, it has never been adequately explained why they were launched from New Mexico instead of US bases in Turkey or Japan. The 1997 official Air Force explanation of crash dummies was not even mentioned by Jennings. This is probably due to the fact that the government's own documents clearly show the very first crash dummy test was not until June, 1954.
Both Jennings and their scientific "experts" all came down on the fact that not one piece of physical evidence has been made public to verify the UFO phenomena. Yet there was not a whisper concerning the massive amount of evidence, both documentary and narrative, that this maddening lack of physical evidence can be directly tied to government crash retrieval programs designed to appropriate such evidence and hide it away. If I take a quarter from you and place it in my pocket, then claim that I do not have a quarter, how can you "prove" that I do without emptying my pocket. We cannot empty the government's pocket. So the Jennings special ended up all about lights in the sky which admittedly is the weakest evidence supporting the reality of UFOs. He brushed aside the abduction phenomenon as a sleep disorder and never mentioned the peer-reviewed work of the late Harvard psychologist Dr. John Mack. And there was no mention whatsoever of crop circles, animal mutilations or the numerous cases involving physical effects on both people and property.
Jennings instead spent an inordinate amount of time of the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI) in which radio signals are beamed into space hoping for a reply. While most UFO researchers support the SETI program, they also question the use of primitive radio signals to contact a technologically-advanced alien civilization. What if I sent a Morse Code message by AM radio signal to your house? Would you even receive it on the new sophisticated digital receivers? Would you be listening for it? And could you understand it if you did receive it? I know I have long forgotten the Morse Code I learned in the Boy Scouts.
For all of this, the upshot of the Jennings special was encouraging. Yes, they debunked Roswell but they admitted that the government lied to us about UFOs in the '50s and '60s, a period many of us still remember. They pooh-poohed alien abductions yet showed sobering personal testimony from some unidentified persons. The personal narratives presented were riveting and compelling and undoubtedly stirred some interest in that portion of the public still in denial about life outside the Earth.
Most importantly, ABC, a major Establishment news outlet, actually addressed the UFO issue without the usual smug and condescending attitudes which marked earlier efforts. The door to serious discussion and study of UFOs may have cracked open a bit. This may be yet another step forward in the 50-year program to condition the American public to the reality of the UFOs.
From Rob Kritkausky, UFO Experiencer and Researcher: I apologize for the tardiness of this commentary, but I find it difficult to write about things that I am not passionate about. Because I hadn't shared in the anticipation or had any particular hopes concerning the show, I'm afraid it fits into this category. Nonetheless, it was a good thought exercise and my opinions may even be insightful, only in that I am coming from a position that allows me to be more or less objective in this matter. My decision to seriously look into this subject makes me a science refugee of sort and in turn I have come to identify with the hardships of Ufology and feel I can relate to the frustration that comes from the stigma this field has been sentenced to. At the same time, I find it difficult to embrace much of the field's methodologies and mindsets, hence my allegiances are with neither.
That being said, I realize Ufologist may be disappointed by the creative decisions of the show producers and some of these may be valid concerns. However, it is important to bear in mind the realities of the situation and remember that change is a process and not a one time event. People should realize the show was produced in a manner that maximized ratings by targeting an audience which was assumed to have little or no substantive knowledge of the subject. In addition, it was inevitable that time constraints were going to place limitations in regards to content. A complete and comprehensive piece was not possible in this case. Therefore, people who have maintained an interest in this field will naturally feel this is all rehash and not at all ground-breaking, but some of this is due to the fact that it was crafted with a less knowledgeable audience in mind. In actuality, the "UFOs 101" format used by the show may have been the best choice because it gave a large segment of the public a good knowledge base concerning the subject. In particular, I thought the segments regarding Witness Reports and UFO History were presented in a fair way (minus Roswell) and really left no doubts concerning our government's attempts to both cover-up and discredit the subject of UFOs.
The second hour was ripe with examples of these misconceptions and double-standards. They should have been weeded from the content by rigorous research and professional objectivity, the fact they were not is certainly disappointing. I need not go through every infraction, as the production was well populated with them. Many were blatant, like the Roswell depiction. example: "Roswell Promoter Stanton Friedman"......now I have a strong suspicion that if he were "con" not "pro" this would have granted him new status and title as "Nuclear Physicist Dr. Stanton Friedman". Complaints and omissions in this regard are certainly valid and indeed should be voiced, as this is the only way to reduce or eliminate such treatment. Are all these omissions and fallacies conspiratorial? In my opinion, I don't think it is clear either way. The media has efficiently butchered other subjects in the past with similar vigor and without conspiratorial causality. So its hard to say if this is suspicious or the product of work done by lazy intellectuals who are unknowingly being influenced by the social stigma placed on this field. Remember that this "Scarlet Letter" that has been so skillfully sewn into the fabric of perception concerning UFOs, can not be torn off with one huge tug, but it can be removed by methodically slicing the threads of misconception the government has so patiently embroidered into the image of UFOs over the years.
I think that potentially the most beneficial effects from the show will take place in the scientific community and it will quietly transpire with little public mention or knowledge of its occurrence. I am referring to the admirable and courageous commentary by Michio Kaku at the programs conclusion, which I feel to be a "Coming out of the closet" of sorts. While I am not officially employed as a scientist, many of my clients and friends still are. During the last few years of interaction and participation in this culture, I have noticed the emergence of a polarizing trend. A wedge has been slowly dividing this institution (Astronomy/Physic/Cosmology in particular) into two different factions....Classical vs. Progressive.
The Classical Faction seems more resistant to change but over time it has established a healthy root system that permeates all areas of science. In the past, this group has prospered from a steady flow of government grants as well as enjoying a cozy relationship with the media. The SETI folks provide us with a good example of this Classical mindset. However, as evidenced by their appearance in the program, they are no longer able to project an aire of scientific aristocracy like they once could. This should not be surprising because in the past they occupied the scientific high-ground or more simply put, their work made more sense. Because they still remain committed to a more archaic scientific model, their work now seems at odds with the latest physics and even common sense.
The group that has been gaining strength is the Progressive Faction. This new branch has remained passive and more or less silent to date. I suspect this is mostly due to the fact that an unconscious "waiting" may taking place in hopes of achieving a critical mass that can step forth together with little fear the negative consequences.(grant loss etc.) Currently, voicing such a view as a solo act has a downside which is much greater than the upside. This Progressive faction has a mindset that would be more open to the possibilities put forth by Ufology. This movement is powered by a "New Physics", which seems to make the idea of interstellar travel by a technologically advanced civilization a much more plausible idea. In addition, the high number of recently discovered systems with the potential for life makes the case for ETI not only more attractive, but consistent with logic. Subsequently, the stance taken by Mr. Kaku may indeed pave the way for the achievement of a critical mass that can finally get down to the business of formulating a serious scientific look into this matter.... One that can be done without stigma or ridicule. After all, the rewards reaped from the achievement of such a scientific understanding of an anomaly are often enormous and can even fuel paradigm shifts.
The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not 'Eureka!' I found it!, but 'Hmmm, that's funny ...' Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)
From Bill Hamilton, UFO Researcher and Author: Last night, I watched Peter Jennings present his ABC Special and have already seen statements made by some UFO researchers and would like to express my opinion. BTW, I have not seen how yet to provide feedback to ABC, but an email campaign might be in order.
1. Recent sightings - fairly good presentation with convincing witness testimony.
2. Early sightings - Not too bad. Military pilot testimony very interesting.
3. Phoenix Lights sightings - good witness testimony, but now I see who they interviewed when I was told they wanted to interview me, but went to Tucson for a real expert (gag!). James McGaha is an arch skeptic and his explanations are like leaky balloons which fall to the ground. His explanation of 5 airplanes instead of 1 large object with 5 lights came from one eyewitness, a dubious young man named Mitch Stanley who said he saw 5 airplanes in formation on the night of March 13th through his Dobsonian telescope. No one else saw these 5 airplanes. As for the flares, I will not waste your time on that.
4. Roswell - BIG FLUNK on this one. Maybe Peter Jennings did want to delve into that bag as he did not want to incur flashback from politicos. Karl Pflock got in more than his 2 cents and Stanton -- oh, we did not hear any rebuttal from Stanton. The Mogul balloon explanation that the Air Force dug out of its handy dandy files has been thoroughly discredited by any researcher worth his salt, but Pflock backs the Air Force: Roswell, Case Closed. HA! Anything but closed.
5. Majestic 12 and the cover up - well, the impression is that anyone who believes this is a conspiracy theorists. Check into how Jennings dealt with the JFK assassination. Just the straight poppycock and pabulum for the viewers -- no real insight here.
6. Abductions -- The abductees did well in telling a little of their stories, but the lasting impression given by the two psychologists with their opinion of hypnosis and sleep paralysis without rebuttal from Hopkins or another professional (John Mack not shown - too bad we lost him). Their statements made my wife angry and she said, "they should be taken". No fair and balanced reporting here.
7. Space Travel - I don't want to hear one more time "they can't get here from there", the distances are insuperable, or it is so incredibly difficult. Thank God Dr. Michio Kaku offset this with his positive and upbeat statements on wormhole travel.
8. Astrobiologists -- Chris McKay made an outstanding statement saying that his only difference from those who believe UFOs represent the existence of ET life is that he prefers looking for material evidence, but was actually quite friendly with his remarks.
9. SETI scientists - what is with these guys? We are not trying to fight a turf war with them. And what were they doing on a show with a UFO focus? Give them their own damn show. The time they took to make their case could be given to CE-5 cases as defined by Dr. Richard Haines -- cases involving signaling UFOs and receiving responses such as I did when I was a naive teenager.
Conclusion: UFO researchers should team up and produce their own television special and make it a mini-series. Anyone who can donate the dollars would be welcome as long as we are free to present our case for the UFO.
Well, I hope that it raised public awareness. That is the least it could do.
Bill Hamilton AstroScience Research Network http://www.astrosciences.info/
From Kim Shaffer, MUFON Tennessee State Director / Skywatch Tennessee State Director: We eagerly anticipated the airing of the Peter Jennings UFO Special, hoping that finally a major media outlet had decided to take a serious look into the phenomenon. Even by the end of the first hour, I felt satisfied that the program to that point, although somewhat reserved, was progressing into a historic and positive UFO event (despite McGaha). The same old tired format of presenting cases and then debunking them became present in the second hour.
Seth Shostak (SETI) became my number one man to despise with his somewhat arrogant, closed-minded remarks about UFOs. He, as well as all the so called "scientists" presented associated with SETI never fail to amaze. They have never stopped to realize that we are on the same side, both search for answers to the ultimate question. Yet, they call their efforts "science" and our investigative efforts "crap". If we examine the comparisons on a level playing field between SETI and Ufology, the differences become apparent. Seti has produced NO results in all the years of searching the skies for ET. If we are fools for looking for "ET", what does this make them? We, on the other hand have produced thousands of reports, pictures, videotape and very credible witness testimony.
Although we cannot prove the UFO-ET connection, common sense tells us that these anomalous craft are "otherworldly". Thus, we do have substantial evidence and SETI has nothing. Ego and bias are funny things! Especially enjoyable was the announcement by Dr. Tyson that witness testimony was "inadmissible" when one witnesses testimony will send a person to death row.
The Roswell segment played like it had been produced by the Air Force and co-produced by SETI. Not one word about the hundreds of credible witnesses except for Jesse Marcel Jr. and a laughable "poke" at Stanton Freedman PHD (have you ever read his credentials?), very disappointing.
The segment on abductions was a fiasco, blaming the phenomenon on sleep paralysis ALONE, negating all the multiplicity of cases where the abductee was driving a car, working or engaging in activities that require a state of at least semi-consciousness. What about cases where more than one person experienced abduction?? No mention of it. Travis Walton? The Allagash Four? Barney & Betty Hill? Thousands more cases, asleep???
The second hour seemed to not fit with the first one. Some have stated that this version was not the same tape sent to the New York Times for review days before the show aired. Can you say "conspiracy"? It did seem "different" from the first hour in that there was a dedication to debunking, avoidance of case files and facts.
Finally, the end showed our hero, Peter Davenport standing ALONE collecting case reports from the whole world. Regrettably, because of the publicity, Peter had to take his call center offline as well as his internet reporting mechanism due to prank calls and erroneous e-mail UFO reports which numbered in the thousands. There was NO mention of MUFON although hundreds of hours of tape were shot with MUFON representatives. A sad and disappointing omission by the producers.
The show, as a whole was another in the series of "present and debunk" as usually initiated by cable networks. It was also obvious that "Sci-Fi" television has done much to deter us in doing our job. The segments added (Star Trek, The Day The Earth Stood Still) into the program were done to make us look like "trekkies, couch potatoes, nerds, wannabe scientists, and just plain nuts." I enjoy "corny" Sci-Fi television as much as anyone, but realize that much of it is UNREAL, in as much as is much of the news and 99% of EVERY TV program. The association was an unfair but deliberate attempt of character profiling.
From here, this moment in time, we go forward without expectations of applause or thanks for what we do. It will take a new case with irrefutable physical evidence, a landing with entities exiting the craft and offering a hand (or tentacle) in friendship before live network cameras. The odds of a very enlightened/intelligent race wishing contact with the human race is not good. I sense that an advanced race of intellects would know that association with humans would come to a bad end due to our vices and shortcomings. So, we get only fleeting glances, occasional pictures and videotape, just enough for us to know we are not alone.
I could not end this commentary without a word about Dr Michio Kaku. His statement relative to the possibilities that a civilization a million years advanced to our own could "possibly" know the secrets of the universe and how to traverse vast distances of interstellar space in the blink of an eye was a delight to hear. With that, to even suggest or assume we are the only, or most advanced civilization in the universe is almost laughable. We simply DO NOT KNOW, and to dismiss all UFO sightings without considering this is quite closed minded and egotistic. I choose to keep an open mind. Does "ET" exist? I do not know, nor have I ever met one. If I do, I think I will choose to keep it a secret.
From Listener, Lynn Merrifield: Have you ever heard of the secret underground bases at Disney? Doesn't surprise me ABC (owned by Disney)is the first to do a prime-time show about UFOs. What DOES surprised me was their approach to NOT making fun of of this phenomena. Seems interesting...with Steve Spielberg's movie "War of the Worlds" coming out in June, http://www.waroftheworlds.com. I am sure Disney has some interest connection with that movie also. As researchers, we have to connect ALL the dots to see the BIG Picture.
From Larry W. Bryant, Director, Washington, D.C. Office of Citizens Against UFO Secrecy and Author: Doubt not that, when they first heard about the Peter Jennings Productions' UFOdrama, most seasoned UFOlogists exhaled a sigh of "so what?". Some of them, like me, chose a hope-for-the-best approach; in my case, this included my dispatching a pre-broadcast e-plea to ABC TV's "Nightline" that one or more segments of THAT program be devoted to expanding upon Peter's would-be ground-breaking assessment of today's UFOworld (see text of my letter below).
Now that the video-Peter-gram has been delivered and digested, I have only to say that my plea has morphed into a pan. Place no bets, dear TV viewer, that anyone at "Nightline" will get around to providing a customized reply to my plea. And why should they? In their ballooning, self-satisfied hold on the public's short attention span, the ABC moguls needn't look any farther than such cookie-cutter productions as Jennings's for earning their paychecks. So long as they're willing to continue pandering to the Shallow Halls of Scientism as regards UFO reality -- and so long as the public accepts that status quo -- we can do little to open the eyes of those scientists beset by their own form of (intellectual) "sleep paralysis."
If Jennings's languid UFOmercial has proved anything, it has proved, once again, that -- in Amerika's corporate-driven, codified society -- we UFOlogists can expect little solace (or enlightenment) from mainstream media, vis-a-vis the UFO problem.
TEXT OF L.W.B.'s 2/7/05 LETTER TO "NIGHTLINE":
TO: Mr. Tom Bettag, Executive Producer of "Nightline" (at ABC News)
As most of us in the UFO-research community eagerly await the airing > of Peter Jennings's new documentary on the state of public UFO awareness (Feb. 24 at 8:00 p.m. EST), some of us would like to see "Nightline's" cameras zoom in on the "politics of UFOlogy" (as exemplified by our decades-long efforts to seek a full, unequivocal accounting from pertinent government officials as to what they REALLY know (and when they knew it) about UFO reality . . . and why they've > chosen to suppress that knowledge from public view).
We're aware that at least once in the past -- several years ago -- "Nightline" did air a program devoted to this hot-potato subject, but it failed to dig far enough for that elusive gold at the end of the UFO-coverup rainbow. Now, with Mr. Jennings's attempt to defuse this sociopolitical/cultural taboo, "Nightline" can capitalize on the public edification thus gained -- by helping us ferret out and cultivate certain whistleblower-derived data, further insider contacts, deathbed confessions, and "leaked" documentation. You could start the process by querying certain congressional committee chairs about their behind-the-scenes activity on the UFO-coverup issue; you could assign a team of investigative reporters for producing follow-up programs; and you thereby could export the wealth and worth of Jennings's trench work in helping tell this, the greatest story ever never told.
Unfortunately, the field of serious, sustained UFO research -- along with the concomitant pursuit of full UFO freedom-of-official-information/accountability -- remains replete with missed opportunities. "Nightline" can help close that public-access > gap by marshalling its worldwide resources as a force multiplier for UFOtruth. Peter Jennings has placed an ABC-News foot into the UFO inner sanctum's back door; now let us have you folks at "Nightline" boldly barge into the FRONT door!
Meantime, I thank you all at ABC News for affording me this (unmissed) opportunity to urge you to let ALL the UFO evidence speak for itself.
From Listener, John Powers: I have been interested in UFOlogy and the paranormal for a long time, but only have become a serious study of it in the last few years. Last night I listened to George Noorey describing the Peter Jennings special as "elementary" and his guests were picking the show over like buzzards. I am personally pleased that a fairly well conducted show was aired on PRIME time television with someone with Peter Jennings credibility behind it.
I know that some of the details of Roswell are not as clear as they should be, but it is hard to hold Roswell up to the light after 60 years. Don't let me give the impression that I am a skeptic, I am a firm believer. I have never seen a UFO, but I am convinced of their existence by the evidence alone. Over the last couple of years, I have gone over everything I could find, and there is a LOT of information on the UFO/ET phenomenon. Sometimes I feel like I am looking in a haystack for that one needle of fact, the truth is IN there.
One thing I have found is that as far as enemies are concerned, the people who are involved in UFO researches are UFOlogy's biggest enemies. I think perhaps a lot of us have forgotten what it was like to be uninformed about UFO's and the Legends and Lore surrounding it. I think it is possible that the more notable names in the field have lost touch with what I thought we were all trying to achieve, understanding and acceptance. That brings me to the point I wish to make. I read a review of the Jennings documentary written by Whitley Strieber and I was frankly appalled. I would value your opinion sir, as an informed media expert in the field.
This is the link to Mr. Strieber’s review: http://www.unknowncountry.com/journal
Below is a copy of my letter to Mr. Strieber.
First of all, I have the up most respect for the work you have pioneered and maintained in the field of extraterrestrial research. The news of your wife's recovery is also very nice to hear. You have combined your abduction experiences and your writing talents to illuminate the Abductee viewpoint to an unaware and ignorant population. You position in history as a searcher for the truth and as a patron saint of the Taken is assured.
As an Icon of "UFOlogy", the tremendous respect and attention you garner through your written works and your interviews and your web site is quite a tangible source. I can think of very few people who even approach your level of recognition who also maintain an image of personal respectability. I believe, however, that this name power that you have used now and in the past has a price. Responsibility is the price for having the ability to speak your mind and the power and clout to have it listened to. You have a responsibility to the thralls of believers and non believers to not only speak your mind, but to also recognize the other positive forces in the field.
The UFO/Abduction phenomenon is wracked by various conflicting agendas and beliefs being perpetuated by people and organizations who wish to capitalize financially or personally by their actions. These persons or organizations may have started out with good intentions or may even still be under the impression that they are acting in good faith. Some are blatantly irresponsible while others are just people using The UFO issue as a soapbox to voice their opinions. I am impressed by your "Dreamland" site Mr. Strieber, but you know people judge you by the company you keep.
Your own web site, "Dreamland", shares the same search engine areas with questionable sites like ZetaTalk and AlienShift. Although you cater to a subscriber audience and Coast to Coast AM has a lion share of paranormal radio, the people still get shows like the IBC radio network and others looking to cash in on a fringe radio audience. MUFON, CUFOS, BUFORA, and hundreds of others add to some of the confusion on whom to believe, and de bunkers such as Phillip Klass and Dr. Donald Menzel are constantly disputing believing in the first place. I am not even going to go into the Urantians or other pseudo-Contactee groups and Cults. From 'Heaven's Gate' to Billy Meier and Nancy Lieder to Claude Rael, you all live in the same Google area.
In the world of extraterrestrial studies there is a pyramid with a very few individuals at its apex, and you are one of the ones at the top Mr. Strieber. The point I am making here is that although you and others reap the recognition (Both good and bad) of the field, you do little to promote its growth. I am not questioning the contributions made as individuals, I speak of what your article indicates angers you the most...ethical standards and those who don't live up to them. By MY ethical standards, you have the same responsibility to UFOlogy that a boy scout has to a campground he camps in, to leave it better than he found it. Do you think that attacking Peter Jennings is in UFOlogy's best interest?
I want to say again I have a great deal of respect for you, Mr. Strieber. The truth of the matter is that you and others like Stanton Freeman and Timothy Good and even Phillip Klass have a vested self interest in keeping their share of the fringe market to themselves. Imagine that the UFO/ET phenomenon is a really big Tuna, and you have been feeding on it for a long time with a pack of other sharks (with vested self interest). Big as this UFO Tuna is, you all know that there can only be a limited number of sharks feeding on this Tuna. Along comes a BIG shark (with credibility) and he takes a big old Peter Jennings bite out of the Tuna. Even though this shark has the ability to make the Tuna bigger (Credibility =bigger phenomenon market) you and the other Self Interested sharks go into an ABC/Peter Jennings feeding frenzy.
I ask you, Mr. Strieber, what is best for the entire genre as a whole? ABC and Mr. Jennings may have viewed the entire phenomenon in a way that is entirely different than you or I would if given the chance, but they tried. I feel that any exposure of the phenomenon to the prime time main stream world is a HUGE event. I would have been a little disappointed if there had been more glaring errors, but I think it went as well as could be expected. You seem to feel that the show cast Roswell as a hoax or money making scam by the town itself, and I say ‘so what’? The show kept the documentary at a serious level and involved investigators rather than clinical psychologists. I felt better about that documentary than I did about most of the documentaries the history channel has put out lately, and it was PRIME TIME NETWORK EXPOSURE.
It seems to me that UFOlogy is its own worst enemy. I liked your books and I even liked the movie (although the director has a strange idea of high strangeness), but attacking the credibility Mr. Jennings brings to the topic just by doing it in the first place seems to me like biting the hand that feeds you sir. I would really like the larger players in this game to start thinking about the whole UFO campground rather than just their own marshmallow in the campfire.
From Jerry Pippin Show Associate Nancy McKinney: Peter Jennings was doing a fine job presenting the facts about the credible sightings in the last 50 years, but he gave the narrow-minded scientists too much time, and the amateur astronomer in Tucson with the impressive equipment and amateur mind, said people are just believing in myths and fairy tales.
Also, SETI said they haven't gotten anywhere, so what are the SETI transmissions about, if they haven't gotten anywhere, and why are they building 3500 more towers if they haven't gotten anywhere? ET's use much more advanced communication technology than our little earthly radio waves. They have waves we have never even heard of, or could even imagine, and it is called telepathy.
I think the traditional scientists' views were weak. They will not acknowledge UFO's until they have proof, but people's experiences are considered worthless to them. The Harvard psychologist was in total denial of people's experiences, and she made abductees out to be imagining things. Roswell was ridiculed ad nausea. Jennings bought the Air Force weather balloons "secret mission" farce.
I liked the Japanese physicist at the end, who said that whether they are real or not, is not the issue. The issue is, it is worth the effort to investigate.
From John Berges, Author and Lecturer, WingMakers/Lyricus Society: I would give it about a 4 on a scale of 1 to 10. Not a lot of new territory covered here and the out right declaration about Roswell being a myth was astounding. The most troubling aspect of the show was they way treated the abductees. It was demeaning and bothered me a lot.
From Peter Gersten, Lawyer and UFO Political Activist: Not surprisingly most followers of the exploits of our enigmatic aerial craft found the media's latest presentation, hosted by Peter Jennings, disappointing. But why would any "true believer" expect otherwise - especially when the "status quo" is to continually deny the obvious?
The real significance of the TV special was the placement of this latest UFO "programming" in prime time - specifically up against three of the most popular shows on TV - "Apprentice," "CSI," and "Survivor." Could some group be attempting to gauge the public's interest in a "first-contact" scenario? When released the Nielson ratings for last week will reveal the present state of the public's interest in the phenomenon. If Jennings' program beats out any of the three mega-hits - I will be amazed. If it finishes within the top ten - I will be pleasantly surprised.
After almost 60 years of continuous appearances - the UFO mystery still remains "behind-the-curtain" and will continue to do so - until our non-human guests decide otherwise. Make no mistake - it is the Intelligence that controls all aspects of its contact with this reality - not us!
"UFO" related events - both direct and indirect - both real and hoaxed - happen for a reason. Simply because we do not understand that reason does not diminish their programming importance. So for all of you who are disappointed with the UFO program last week - I suggest you look beyond the obvious.
From Abductee Kurt Mayne: The abductees could have done a better job I thought, but all in all I am surprised. The show, it was "ok", not great, but much better than I expected. The one thing that got me, was the SETI chap (kind of an obnoxious sort) who said we need that one speck of evidence. In leau of my rather deep bag of paranormal/alien experiences, wouldn't it be rather neat to know what/who is on my answering machine????
From Listener and Abductee, Tony DiTata: I thought I was watching two totally different shows. The first hour was very objective and informative and then the second hour seemed like it was thrown together by someone else. The part of the show where Peter Jennings said it was a myth is unbelievable. I was expecting so much more that what I got. I have had more than one encounter and it was not like they portrayed it on the show. I was not asleep. I can tell you that. It did not happen when I was asleep, I can tell you that with certainty.
From Derrel Sims, UFO and Abduction Researcher (The Alien Hunter): IT IS ALL ABOUT RATINGS...I mean 80,000,000 people believe in Ufos...Do you think that there is an audience! Someone had better pay attention besides Hollyweird.
JENNINGS PROGRAM WAS VERY WELL DONE.. FOR THE FIRST HALF . IT WAS TRUTHFUL AND AWESOME.. it nuked the military liars with their own diatribe ...Wonderful statement from Gen Nathan Twining...I wished I could reveal sources (I have on audio recording. I recorded this interview this last week) on evidence that Roswell Happened. I have to get through one more permission and one more interview , to wrap that one up in a nice bundle. This will be a shocker, from a witness of impeccable character (WELL CONNECTED TO THE EVENT.).
Last Year I also found the pilot who was "supposed" to fly the bodies to Carswell AFB...He declined...When I asked him why, he said, Well, if, all of this is true, and they just said we had a flying saucer, then we don't...and the Bodies are being moved and all evidence is disappearing...what about the pilots...Too risky for me...But I do know who did fly the bodies."
I did find the pilots who flew the 1952 July event over DC. I have the flight logs, video of the story from the Pilot I know...and I also found the 3 roving anti aircraft units that were positioned for "a possible attack".
2ND SECTION WAS PRETTY GOOD TOO. IT REPORTED IT LIKE THINGS WERE. AT LEAST THEY DIDN'T TAKE THE LOCAL UFO NUT (INSERT ANY LIER), AND THE LOCAL CICOP JOE NICHOL NUT AND PUT THEM TOGETHER AND CALL IT BALANCE. BALANCED IDIOTS. SHEESH. THE SHOW WAS PRETTY WELL DONE. CUFOS CAME OUT SMELLING LIKE A ROSE...BECAUSE THEY DO. PETER DAVENPORT DID VERY WELL. GOOD PR FOR HIS WORK. OUTSTANDING.
From Listener, Jane Swartley: I sat down to e-mail you last night, but I wanted to first listen to your and Larry’s discussion of the Peter Jennings piece. Before I even did that, I read the listener comments. Then listened to your show and then to the first hour of Coast to Coast from the night before (on streamlink), because Michio Kaku was on and I wanted to hear what he had to say about the show. (Not a lot about that, but he’s always interesting.) After all that, I was tired of thinking, so I didn’t write to you.
I’ll be very interested in hearing your interview with Stanton Friedman. And in hearing what Art has to say tonight.
I tried to look at the Jennings show through the eyes of someone who doesn’t know much about UFOs and is curious, but dissatisfied with previous efforts at explanation. I actually fit that description, except I have a little more knowledge (not first-hand) and more curiosity than my alleged person. I thought the show was pretty good. Better than I expected. As one of your audience commented, for once the debunkers were actually made to look more idiotic than the witnesses. That’s a biggy.
And as you said, you and Larry and those who have really invested themselves in the subject, are the choir. You don’t need to be preached to. I think the Jennings show will engender a lot more serious interest than people who didn’t like it think it will.
Peter was the guest on Jon Stewart’s show on Wednesday night. I think Jon is really bright and funny, but he lost some points with me during this interview.
He and the audience displayed basic ignorance and ridicule of UFO folks and even had never heard the term ufologist. That got a big laugh. So my thinking is that despite the fact that millions of people are believers, they are still in the minority.
Maybe someone laughing with Jon watched Peter the next night and had a change of heart. I think that’s quite possible.
In reading the comments from your audience and from Whitley Strieber’s journal (he LOATHED the show), I just think that some people expected too much.
From Experiencer Posey Gilbert: I did watch the program and I thought it was really the same old shittaki mushrooms. They spent too much time trying to say the same thing that or government has been saying all along. Once again they did not mention that many abductions do occur while the "abductee" is wide awake, and not in bed. They did not mention how many of the files in project blue book were listed as unknown and unsolved.
They did not mention how far back UFOs go in the history of man. They use Budd Hopkins group as a focal point where he hypnotizes his people, and they forgot that many experiencers, myself being one has never been hypnotized to reclaim my memories.
These experiences are so bizarre and yes frightening that you never forget them. They talked about sleep paralysis which I have had many times and threw in a lot of junk that never happens when you experience this phenomena. You do not see flashes of light, or entities. You simply wake up unable to move for a while then suddenly with like a pop you can move.
When it is alien caused you literally have to work yourself back into motion. You come out of it much more slowly than you do in sleep paralysis. There you have to will your body back into motion.
They talked about Incubus and Succubus, but did not make the obvious connection that there too these beings were there to interested in human sexuality. In my family history they called these same things demons, ghost and spirits. People use name they are familiar with to describe things that they are unfamiliar with. The native Americans called the Train an Iron Horse all though it looked nothing like a horse, but still that did not non-exist trains now did it?
Skeptics and scientist that have never viewed these objects are given more credence than those that did see them. They do not differentiate between Believers and Experiencers, and they act like Experiencers are gullible fools.
Although scientist have not seen the planets about other stars they believe they are there because of the effect they believe planets have on the stars they orbit. But when ordinary people see something that the scientist have not all of a sudden belief has no credibility.
Believers are not necessarily Experiencers, and Experiencers are not Believers. The first thing that goes when you Experience these things is your belief. Your first words are always, "Oh [explicative of your choice] I don't believe this!" from that point on you KNOW what you saw, even if you don't know what it was that you saw, you know you saw it.
They say it all began with Kenneth Arnold, but forgot to mention the Foo fighters of WW2 and the airships of the 1800s, the UFOs shown in paintings of the renaissance and in cave drawings. Nor did they mention them (UFOs) being spoke about in many ancient text.
By the way the thing that made that pulsing sound reported from he radio telescope was not made by a passing plane it was later discovered to have been made by a pulsar. Pulsars were first discovered in late 1967 by graduate student Jocelyn Bell Burnell as radio sources that blink on and off at a constant frequency. To read more about Pulsars please go to: http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/science/know_l1/pulsars.html. That should tell you how much effort they put in to their research for this program.
I find it funny how a government such as ours that has been busted time and time again in lies deceit, and out right lawlessness is believed when they say, "Well, we were lying when we said it was a weather balloon, but we are not lying now when we say it was a weather balloon."
Now real Experiencer ever believed that Alien Autopsy on Fox, for we know that they did not look like an emasculated Elmer Fudge with six fingers. We all knew then that this was put together buy our tax dollars at work to be used as it is used now to discredit those that have really had these experiences. Read all the reports you want to will never find it said that these beings have six fingers, or were fat.
None of the entities that I have ever seen has ever had more than five fingers and those were only the human looking ones, the others have had only four fingers if you could call them fingers. For the most part they had four, those that I had the presence of mind to look at.
The other thing that bothers me is the fact that they constantly say these entities have to be millions of years ahead of us. Look how far we have come since our last big war, now think where we would be if we never had a war, or wasted our time and energy on suppressing, dominating, and murdering one group or another?
I am sure some Believers will have found this program very interesting and informative, however no real Experiencer will find it useful for anything more than proof that the Cover Up is alive and well, and is currently working at ABC.
Your friend and fan, Posey Gilbert - True experiences doth make Infidels of us all.
From Listener Dawn: Hi there, I thought so - a Disney owned channel doing a good UFO "story" with real journalism and investigation. Bah! Humbug! That show could have been researched and done better by a young kid. I did not hear or see anything new - by confusing the listener with going back and forth with time periods and people who are believers/non-believers it came out a muddled high school project that nearly put me to sleep, literally ...Yawn! Should have spent the time looking at Shakespeare for the quote running around in my head that still can't quite be placed. To bad, primetime and so boring.
From Linda Moulton Howe, UFO Researcher and Investigative Reporter: It dressed itself up as a "serious" 2-hour Peter Jennings investigation of UFOs. Instead, Roswell was dismissed as "mythology," Stanton Friedman was dismissed as a "book promoter," Budd Hopkins was portrayed as an old man trying to help emotionally disturbed people affected by sleep paralysis. The only segment worth viewing was the next to last one with Michio Kaiku about potential worm-hole space travel.
From Mary Sutherland, UFO and Paranormal Researcher, BUFOC: What a joke. just another extension of unsolved mysteries. Pure entertainment value.
From Jim Hickman, Director, Skywatch International: Yawn!!!
From George Ritter, Experiencer and Abductee: I thought it [the show] stunk.
From Dennis Balthaser, UFO Researcher and Investigator www.truthseekeratroswell.com:
Comments on the ABC Special “UFOs: Seeing is Believing”, hosted by Peter Jennings
The anticipation is over and all of us that seriously research the subject of Ufology now have our own views of how the ABC special played out. I noticed that for the first 12 hours after the show aired on February 24th on ABC, most comments on the various Internet lists were less than complimentary about the show.
Sweeps weeks are important to the TV networks and I believe airing a show about UFOs with someone as well known as Peter Jennings was not a coincidence. ABC was looking for big numbers in the ratings, which they didn’t get. UFO shows are popular with the general public, if for no other reason than the majority of the public believe UFOs exist. Unfortunately, the general public is unaware of all that is taking place with this subject, by many researchers on a daily basis, and when a show such as the Peter Jennings show last night is aired, the opportunity is there to inform the public objectively, and honestly and I didn’t sense that happening during the two hour show. Several times I thought the show was headed in the right direction, only to have it fall flat by comments from those that will never believe or agree to accept the facts.
The animation used was to me, done well and I had heard that all animations were confirmed with witnesses to assure they were as accurate as possible, so for that I compliment ABC. The sad thing for this two-hour show is the fact that the animations were better than the script that was used.
Living in Roswell as I do, and continuing to be a “staunch” supporter of the Roswell Incident as a researcher, I was particularly disappointed in ABCs presentation of the Roswell Incident. Stanton Friedman, nuclear physicist, and the original civilian researcher of the incident was not given adequate time. Stan was not able to mention MJ-12, the blacked out government documents he’s obtained, or any of his years of devotion to the subject, while Karl Pflock, ex-CIA employee and debunker was allotted too much time. There was no fairness in this segment. The Mogul balloon theory has been dismissed as a cause for several years, but that was conveniently omitted, and in fact given as the cause of the Roswell Incident. The crash site shown was finally shown as the real crash site on the Foster ranch, which was re-assuring to see. The carnival atmosphere for the anniversary of the Roswell Incident each year I suppose is necessary for attracting visitors to Roswell, but not necessary for a serious attempt at explaining UFOs in a TV documentary.
In the discussion about Project Blue Book nothing was mentioned about Roswell not even being included, or the fact that hundreds of cases in Blue Book are still not resolved. The Blue Book was then, and still is nothing more than a public relations “stunt” to pacify the public, which will continue, as proven by the four excuses given for Roswell in the past 50 plus years.
Prior to the show being televised I had read that an interview segment with Harvard professor and author Dr. John Mack, had been omitted from the show, however a professor (Dr. Clancy), from Harvard was allowed to cast her views against what Dr. Mack and Budd Hopkins have devoted so much time and effort to. Fair---I don’t think so.
The law enforcement officer’s, commercial pilots and certain retired military personnel were given an opportunity to share their experiences fairly openly, and their combined comments were to me some of the strongest evidence of proof that something mysterious is flying around in our skies, that no one thus far has been able to explain. Hopefully the military or government will come down on Jennings for airing those portions in the show, so he might finally know there is a lot more to this, than he reported last night.
SETI representatives were allotted way too much time during the show trying to convince themselves that a civilization hundreds, perhaps thousands of years ahead of us in technology would be using something as primitive as radio signals to contact us. Seth Shostak of SETI was presented as “the knowledgeable one” on UFOs, with hardly anyone realizing that Stanton Friedman destroyed his thinking and comments recently on a nationally broadcast radio show debate. Did anyone hear the SETI people say anything of scientific value? I didn’t.
On the abduction segment in the program, no mention of Barney and Betty Hill was given, and those experiencers that did share their ordeals were immediately put down as being victims of sleep paralysis.
The astronomer who blatantly stated that “eye witness testimony was a low form of evidence”, woke me up from the boredom I was watching. Is it any wonder that most of those that experience something choose to not come forward? Thank goodness our judicial system doesn’t work like that.
One of the few highlights of the show to me was near the end when physicist Michio Kaku, explained how time travel can be possible with worm holes and bending time, asking the scientist and astronomers not to be so quick to reject the possibility of travel in the universe. Perhaps it’s time for them to quit looking into their telescope’s and start looking at the sky from their backyard, like thousands of witnesses have.
For me and many others that take the subject of Ufology serious, the anticipation for the Jennings special fell extremely short. It was probably entertaining to the general public, but certainly won’t change many views about it. For us that devote hours of time and resources to researching this subject nothing new was presented, and in fact some of the same biased opinions were continued. Did it help us understand what our place in the universe is---No. Did it reveal the cover-up used by the military and government for 58 years ---No. Did a two-hour special cover the most important aspects of the 58 years---No? Did it give credit to the pilots, military, and law enforcement officers that shared their experiences---No? Did it give serious respected researchers such as Stanton Friedman and Budd Hopkins a fare review---No?
In closing I want to thank Mr. Jennings and ABC for giving me the opportunity to continue doing my research and in some small way through my web site, editorials, TV and radio interviews and an occasional lecture, I’ll be able to share my research with the public in a manner that allows them to reach their own conclusions. I don’t anticipate a follow-up by Jennings or ABC. They had their chance and “blew it.”
From Guy Malone, UFO Investigator and Reporter: My Thoughts on Jennings' UFO ABC Special?
Well, the word "wow" does come to mind...
Not so much "Wow that was amazing," because it was largely what many reading this already know. But "Wow - all that was on the air!" I'm guessing (but only guessing) that Project Blue Book was still active the last time any valid "news reporting" about UFOs was featured on any of "The Big 3" networks. History Channel and Sci-Fi Channel are one thing, but NO MATTER WHAT Peter Jennings and ABC reported tonight, the most significant factor is that a serious and thought-provoking special on UFOs, showcasing credible witnesses and researchers, finally hit the American airwaves - during prime-time, on a major network, AND was presented as a straight news documentary. This just cannot be understated. Jennings made no effort to prove or debunk anything, but finally presented to the public at least some of the facts and arguments (pro and con) that can be reported on the topic, and isn't that what we've all wanted, for a long, long time?
My quotable quote however, is that "This ABC special hosted by Peter Jennings simply could not have been any more pro-UFO, and still call itself journalism, if it tried. But it *was* journalism..." and that's my point. For the first time in my life I saw honest journalism relating to UFOs on network television. Wow. ABC didn't have to "try" to prove UFOs are real (or not), as the "tip of the iceberg" they did reveal was, in my opinion, more convincing than anything mainstream America has ever seen. The special undoubtedly covered "both sides" fairly I believe, but the facts always seemed to come down on the side of the fence that says, whatever they are - UFOs ARE HERE... the public believes they exist... and the government's explanation for them is historically unsatisfactory. Not to mention deceptive. Yes, the documentary included scientists covering all the best arguments against the UFO hypothesis and the eyewitnesses, the supposed impossibility of space travel, etc, etc, etc... However, ABC's investigative coverage, which revealed that The Air Force's Project Blue Book was never anything more than a concentrated debunking effort was, in a word, exemplary. Decades late perhaps, but this glaring fact of American history finally got the prime-time journalistic butt-kicking it sorely deserved.
The abductee community - if it can or should be addressed separately from the UFO community - came out way ahead tonight as well. Jennings even said that "Reporting the UFO story is incomplete without this facet," a statement long-overdue for the more (ahem) "serious" and scientific among us, whose most compelling form of evidence to-date has always been nothing more than eyewitness testimony in the first place. While sleep paralysis and hypno-suggestion were appropriately included in this documentary, the abduction experience no doubt got the "fairest shake" ever seen on prime-time as well. It's not enough to just report (as Jennings did) that "more than 80 million Americans believe the earth has been visited by extra-terrestrials" and "more than 40 million Americans say they have seen, or know someone who has seen an Unidentified Flying Object," without also including (as Jennings did) the fact that 1 of 5 Americans also believe that abductions are happening. ABC did an admirable job of bringing both the UFO and the Abduction topic to the American table, via the most credible people it could showcase, rather than the most colorful, or most outlandish. Just go to any UFO conference (as Jennings suggested, although I doubt he did) and you'll typically see more news cameras on the man or woman with the glittery outfit and silver make-up, than you'll ever see on the ones with the PhD's.
But... if UFO enthusiasts were the clear winners of this program, who were the losers? Roswell, for starters... or at least it's believers. Just as the best UFO skeptics were given their air-time on this show but came out somehow wanting, the same might be said for Roswell authors Stanton Friedman, Kevin Randall and Don Schmidt. Arguments both for and against the Roswell incident (being alien-related) were presented briefly, but I think anybody watching ABC tonight would have to say that this special ultimately sided with The History Channel's past Roswell special (which also concluded that the Project Mogul view of a top-secret, but altogether man-made event is "the truth"). Disappointing for many, no doubt. Giving Karl Pflock and Project Mogul the last word, and Jennings' use of language like "hallowed ground," "holy grail" and "article of faith" to refer to the Roswell story, even this decidedly pro-UFO documentary let down more than a few people no doubt, ending with Peter Jennings saying (of Roswell believers) that "they cling to a myth." In striking this blow, ABC wins both ways, seemingly maintaining it's journalistic integrity by promoting UFOs as unexplainable by earthly science, yet nonetheless "dissing" Roswell as "the" cornerstone of ufology.
Why? ... perhaps the most responsible efforts at journalism inevitably lead to both conclusions in fact, perhaps not. But there is however, another view of UFOs that can only be referred to as "the excluded middle" which might explain the seeming incongruence. This view also lost out on this show, but only becuase it was not represented (understandable and forgivable, given all that was covered in the time allotted). While neither popularly known about nor financially profitable, a growing number of researchers are beginning to promote the idea that that UFOs are indeed real and beyond conventional explanation, BUT that aliens are not piloting them - or even designing and crashing them for our benefit. Here, I'll simply refer readers to look into this view for themselves via www.manmadeufos.com (a booklist) and www.roswellufocrash.com (a view that takes neither the alien nor the Mogul view of Roswell). What I will say is that those studying these views see a global conspiracy that involves oil, banking, military, mainstream science and conglomerate MEDIA that far surpasses the organization necessary to cover up extra-terrestrials, if that's "all" that needed to be covered up.
If (and I'm just saying, IF) this view is the most accurate one, then one only needs to remember that in prior decades Walt Disney himself and his mickey mouse company were used by / partnered with the U.S. government to promote the idea of extra-terrestrial life to the American public (just Google it), before the plug was pulled and what we now know as "The UFO Cover-Up" ruled the day, to begin to glimmer WHY Disney-owned ABC *might* have been the first major network to suddenly put UFOs back into the credible, mainstream consciousness. Is ABC in bed with a government higher than our Federal one? is the question I'm posing. If there's anything to this, then perhaps "The American Public" might be included in the loser list as well, as the aftermath of ABC's Jennings report could have more to do with preparing us for something other than "disclosure" (as some might hope) is all that's behind this out-of-nowhere special. It's a big puzzle that for now I'll leave to the most astute researchers and UFO historians to piece together, but not one that should be ignored.
One-world conspiracies left for deeper, darker minds to ponder however, it could well be argued that "sweeps week" is the only reason ABC chose to devote 2-hours to this program. No matter why though - hey, we're all glad they did. What can those of us interested in these topics say negative about a prime-time special that accurately and plainly states that "the UFO phenomenon (is) only a shadow of mainstream science," but then a moment later gives several minutes of airtime to Art Bell? While there are no doubt many, many opinions relating to the origin and nature of UFOs, NONE of them are relevant until people believe that they are real to begin with. For some, ABC's special was merely affirmation of what they already know is true; for others it may be the first time they admit there's something worthy of investigation. But as a result of this special, people are going to talk. They're going to talk about what they've seen, and they're going to share their ideas. And as a result of this special, many of them won't be laughed at. Other people are going to ask questions, and those who have dedicated themselves to finding answers are going to be more in demand. I don't mean to simply say "this is good for business" (although it undoubtedly is), but what I mean is that it's good for the public interest. Very, very good. All views should and will begin to get more airtime, and interested parties will be exposed to more information. Those with questions can use this documentary to take to your government officials, your churches, your educational institutions and your local media outlets and say "Hey - I want answers, and your previous ones haven't been good enough. Are you going to give them to me? Are you going to give us someone who can? Or am I and my money going to have to go somewhere else?" As a result of this special, the general public - not just the UFO community - has won a minor moral victory, and ABC and Jennings deserve our thanks for finally showing some integrity by finally delivering this information to the American public, and especially, for doing it without including 10 minutes of Zelda Zoroastrian in the mix.
By the way, did you catch the "skeptic" who said that the Phoenix lights were flares that Phoenix radar didn't pick up? He then finished his arguments by saying (60 seconds later!) that it was *also* lights from 5 airplanes (that Phoenix radar apparently didn't pick up either?). Like I said, ABC and Jennings didn't even have to try, because for once the debunker on TV actually looked more idiotic than the witnesses. It's a new day.
Guy Malone http://www.alienstranger.com, http://www.breakingufonews.com
From Listener Marshall Beard: I thought Jennings' effort was rather sterile. Nothing new that I saw, just rehashes of old stuff. I've gotten far more from the Discovery Channel, TLC, and those type information sources. Nothing very "intriguing" or thought provoking. The sources that were interviewed were pretty impressive though, but I've seen most of them before. I bet the fellow in the audio is > disappointed too. I doubt the government will "now" be forced to reveal their innermost secret information. We'll just have to wait and see what the Russians have to say someday.
My personal thoughts are with all the available technology today, there should be concrete evidence. There are hundreds of thousands of amateur astronomers looking at the night sky with VERY sophisticated equipment EVERY night. Coupled with the military's technology, there should be evidence that would satisfy even and old skeptic such as me. I have a 6" refractor that shows the detail of Jupiter and I have spent thousands of hours looking at other Universe objects without so much as ONE suspicious item showing up.
I'm certain people are seeing "something". But I'm not certain what. The human eye can certainly fool you. Just think how many "beauties" we've seen in the darkness of a bar, and then what they turned out to be in the light! Guess I'll just remain dubious there's anything "out there" for now.
From UFO Experiencer and Researcher Dennis Bosack: The UFO community never fails to amaze me. The UFO community is like a mushroom, the more Bull---- you feed it, the more you keep it in the dark, the more it grows.
I guess the obvious is really not obvious. In 1991, Henry Kissenger made a speech to the Bilderburg group where he stated, "Today Americans would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order; tomorrow they will be grateful. This is especially true if they were told there was an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will plead with world leaders to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being granted to them by their world government."
I've written about this in the past. In fact, just recently, I wrote an article which can be found at http://www.ufolab.info/ufo_lab_newsletter.htm. The title of the article is, "Whether real or promulgated…"
I've explained many times before how the New World Order has a contingency plan for a take-over. It's called the "Alien Invasion." This contingency plan is to be used if all else fails. Well, it seems as if our government is about to implement that particular plan.
The Peter Jennings UFO 'Special' is becoming a major topic of discussion on the internet and in the UFO community. Many people have written articles about how badly the 'Special' was done. People have complained that Jennings did nothing to help prove the Roswell Incident was covered up.
The Peter Jennings UFO 'Special' did EXACTLY what it was supposed to do: PUT UFOs BACK IN THE FACE OF THE SHEEPLE!
So many people complain that Cheney-Bush won the election due to scare tactics. Well, I've got news for you. All the current reports of UFO sightings, special programs and so on, are just that…SCARE TACTICS. It's scare tactics and the UFO community is helping to fuel the fear.
Peter Jennings is a mainstream journalist. Do you really believe he would speak the truth? Do you really think Jennings is NOT controlled by the Cheney-Bush Administration?
Take notice of the new UFO television movies that have come out. Take notice that this summer a new alien movie will be released, The War of the Worlds, starring Tom Cruise. All of these shows paint Visitors as hostile, violent, and seeking to control Earth.
If those of you in the UFO community still do not understand that the Visitors are not here for that purpose, then we really are in trouble!
Those in the UFO community have "researched" and "studied" Visitors and UFOs. And, still, not one of you understands. You speak about the highly advanced technology possessed by the Visitors. You speak of their capabilities to do things far beyond our imagination. However, YOU STILL DON'T GET IT!
Remove your heads from where they're buried and listen to yourselves...if that's possible.
With technology such as the Visitors have: Why haven't they taken over yet? What are they waiting for? WAKE UP!
Many people blame our government for all sorts of strange things, MKULTRA, genetic engineering, weather control, HAARP, 9/11, assassinations, and so on. But the UFO community cannot bring itself to blame the government for the coming "Alien Invasion."
Those of the UFO community cannot understand that "alien abductions", "cattle mutilations" and so forth are part of this very plan, the "Alien Invasion." It's all designed to scare the sheeple.
And, I regret to say, those of the UFO community are, in fact, the largest population of sheeple I've ever seen.
It makes me sick to see intelligent people fall for our government's agenda. It makes me sick to see intelligent people with their minds so firmly shut. It makes me sick to know that the UFO community DOES NOT truly seek the truth.
The problem…those of the UFO community cannot see the forest for the trees…