From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 16:10:47 -0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 12:15:29 -0400
Subject: Re: Misperceptions On 'The French DMI Report' -


 >From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 12:32:45 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Misperceptions On 'The French DMI Report'
 >To: ufoupdates@home.com

 >>Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2001 20:53:18 +0100
 >>From: Jean-Philippe Dain <aska@noos.fr>
 >>To: ufoupdates@home.com
 >>Subject: Misperceptions On 'The French DMI Report'

 >>>From: Richard Nolane <raynaud@total.net>
 >>>Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 15:52:33 -0500
 >>>Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 16:31:23 +0000
 >>>Subject: Re: SOS OVNI & French DMI - Nolane

 >That report was not an official study but, because it was signed
 >by senior military officers and military engineers, it did have
 >a kind of 'official' look, and as a consequence its publication
 >reactivated many old critics against those official studies at
 >GEPAN and SEPRA, now headed by Jean-Jacques Velasco at CNES,
 >often accused of hiding things and despising private ufologists.
 >
 >One of the polemists was Perry Petrakis, first on the internet
 >and then in his review 'Phenomena'. In the issue No 42 published
 >in September, he wrote a vehement article titled 'The War Of The
 >Worlds, COMETA Version', trying hard to ridicule the report
 >because they gave some credence to false claims ("canulars")
 >such as, said Petrakis, UFO crashes, abductions, and the ETH,
 >dubbed here an "exotic" hypothesis.

 >And of course the United States are suspected to do that. To
 >document the idea, Dain cites the infiltration of ufo
 >organizations like NICAP in the 50's!

Gildas,

I accidentally erased your other posting in regard to Sheehan's
story, but this one will do to make the same point. This
constantly repeated statement that NICAP was "infiltrated" in
the 1950s is 99% myth and 1% unimportant fact. I know because I
was there, and I am tired of hearing this myth constantly
repeated.

Something very similar applies to Sheehan's story (and that's
all it is so far). Grant Cameron keeps circulating it, and when
people raise serious questions about its validity, he says "ask
Sheehan." Cameron is the one circulating the story and insisting
that we take it seriously, so it is up to him to check on its
obvious credibility problems. It is not up to us to try to prove
a negative. Furthermore, that shifts the burden of proof to us,
and we don't have the time or interest to chase down every
unsubstantiated claim. He is the advocate.

The bottom line is this. Sheehan's story, if true, would easily
blow the lid off any U.S. cover-up, if he is a credible witness.
And if he really did the things he claims to have done, he
should have ample documentation of it that he could easily
produce: Contracts, letters, pay records, tax forms.
Documentation of briefings to JPL and the like should be easy to
locate.

Why does he, instead of going to the major news media (N.Y.
Times, 60 Minutes...) or Congress, go around telling his story
to UFO believer groups? Why are we hearing that instead of
simply documenting his claims, he instead is planning some kind
of mock trial about UFOs? That sounds suspiciously like "show
biz" to me, not the modus operandi of a serious-minded person
who holds the key to exposing a cover-up.

His association with Steven Greer, another "show biz"
specialist, only deepens my suspicions as their joint efforts
unecessarily bog the issues down in partsan political
controversy. I don't like game playing. If Sheehan is telling
the truth, he owes it to everyone to ask for Congressional
hearings based on his own alleged experiences, and/or to give
in-depth interviews to major news media and let investigative
reporters dig out the facts.


Dick