Info-ParaNet Newsletters, Number 180 Wednesday, March 21st 1990 Today's Topics: Re: Richard Murray information packet Re: Strange flash of light Re: Gulf Breeze photos US Law Enforcement INET Re: Signals Leaving Earth; Book Publisher? Re: Say What ?!??? Things-a-hopping! Re: Strange flash of light ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: paranet!f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Jim.Speiser Subject: Re: Richard Murray information packet Date: 20 Mar 90 06:09:00 GMT > spread, so that others would hush up and let that group do its > thing. > > @ Well,that's NEWS to me. First mention I've heard of this. > > I understand the need to keep certain aspects silent for a time, > until > more complete research is performed,but how's about a *status > report* > from time to time? > Don, I've already said more than I am allowed to. But let me speak hypothetically for a moment. If such a group existed, can you not see how it would behoove them to be as secretive as possible, even as to their very existence? If the existence of such a group were widely known, can you see how many fruit loops out there would DEMAND to be on it? Some of them might just go ahead and CLAIM to be members. Now, think of the situation in your typical Congressman's office. He or she probably has about 15 to 20 letters on his desk right now, DEMANDING a probe into everything from abductions to underground bases to George Bush's Trilateralist connections to the Hole to Hell. Lear and Cooper's "indictment" document is in that stack, along with Murray's letter and a few others I'm aware of. Congress simply can't investigate every wacko claim that comes along, and the bigger the stack, the more they are probably laughing at us. I fear its probably already too late, but such a group might succeed if it manifests a distinctly higher order of common sense, logic, and scientific expertise, and if it calmly informs rather than rashly demands. So, do you understand now why "progress reports" are probably not a good idea as yet? And why it would be best if we simply did not address this subject for now? As a matter of fact, I can't guarantee when, or even whether, you'll ever hear ANYTHING about this group, unless they are successful. Jim -- Jim Speiser - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Jim.Speiser@f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Will Martin Subject: Re: Strange flash of light Date: 20 Mar 90 15:09:54 GMT Unfortunately, my copy of the Paranet Digest (#177) that contained the basenote to this followup was truncated in the middle of that particular posting! :-( Talk about conspiracies... I am CC'ing to the SPACE list in case the cause of the flash was space-related. Anyway, apologies if any of what I say duplicates that original posting: I and a couple of my guests saw the same flash of light Saturday night (Mar 17, approx 9:30 PM CST). However, we saw it through windows and were not looking directly at the sky or the source, so only had a brief flicker of impression. The color appeared to me to be *blue-white*, like lightning, and not the "yellow/white" mentioned. Of course, the transmission through glass may have changed the apparent color. However, the news reports we heard later referred to it as "white". It was mentioned on all the local St. Louis TV stations during their evening newscasts at 10 PM or thereabouts, mostly in the weather segments but also as a regular news item. There were many references to NORAD and to the National Weather Service having been contacted, but those organizations had no explanations or comments at that time. The flash was reported from all over the Missouri/Illinois area, according to the news reports, but no mention was made of its visibility from other locations. Some reports said it was only a single flash, while others described a "flickering" or multiple flashes. I saw only a single flash. There was some speculation about it being a re-entering piece of space debris or a meteor, but nothing definite. No UFOs were mentioned that I heard. Then, later, I heard another, more elaborate report in which the flash was linked to a fire started in a farmer's field by something falling out of the sky. This was only heard once, and I have no idea of its accuracy. (I do not remember the location cited for that.) After seeing the flash thru the window, I went outside and looked at the sky. It was clear and cloudless, as far as I could determine, which made the "lightning" idea I at first had seem wrong. (Actually, there were more stars visible than is usual these days in the city with all the haze and light pollution... :-() I then thought it might have been a streetlight bulb blowing out, but then my guests said they had seen it through the windows on the opposite side of the house, and that argued against that. Later, then, I heard the news reports and realized it was more widespread. I heard another followup news report Sunday that stated that there still was no official explanation for the flash. I have not seen any newspaper or other written reports of this incident. I encourage anyone who has written articles on the subject to scan them in or type in a summary and send it to the group. Regards, Will Martin -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: paranet!John.Burke Subject: Re: Gulf Breeze photos Date: 20 Mar 90 02:24:36 GMT John: Shame on you for thinking so objectively after reading The Breeze Bible! You aren't supposed to do that! Shut up and eat your grilled cheese sandwich! -- John Burke - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: John.Burke@paranet.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Gene Gross Subject: US Law Enforcement Date: 20 Mar 90 22:05:14 GMT -+ From: paranet!f2.n1030.z9.FIDONET.ORG!John.Daly -+ Subject: Is Cooper all that crazy!? -+ -+ You may be reassured on this. US law enforcement officers have -+ no powers of search, arrest, or anything else over non-US citizens -+ outside US borders. That you should suggest they could do so is to -+ forget that the USA controls only 2% of the Earth's land area. The -+ other 98% is controlled by other people, andquite outside US -+ jurisdiction. Noriega thought so too. Fact is that this decision means that our law enforcement officials can do as they please, within the bounds of local juridiction when overt, and hang the rules when covert. And before you go further, notice what you of your Mates says: -+ -+ From: paranet!f0.n1030.z9.FIDONET.ORG!Mark.Jose -+ Subject: Is Cooper all that crazy!? -+ -+ And here in Victoria, Australia, we are kicking up a fuss about police -+ being able to finger print suspects and about them being able to demand your -+ name on the spot in the street regardless of whether you are engaged in an -+ illegal activity or not. Boy, I thought we were a police state!! Good luck. -+ -+ >I was floored by this. It means that if the police can get -+ >into your -+ >house under some legitimate sounding pretext they can search -+ >your house, -+ >your private property, merely because they suspect that there -+ >is a -+ Police over here (in Victoria) do not even have to have any thing typed on -+ the search warrant that they produce when about to make a -+ search-and-seizure. All it has to have on it is "COPY OF .... ". Just how much a joint US-Aussie law enforcement operation could do is beyond me. But I do tend to get rather nervous when the police are given too free a hand in things. The point, John, is that our Supreme Court has given our law enforcement people the right to enter the private residence without due legal process. That alone scares me. Then they gave the police the right to conduct a search of a private residence within the jurisdictional boundaries of the involved agency upon mere suspicion that an armed assailant might be waiting in ambush. I am concerned because such liberties taken with my freedoms, as protected by the US Constitution, could be abused without my having recourse to due process. Further, in the context that I originally posted, my concern was that such moves could easily fit into the views of Cooper and others like him who see the lid being clamped down. This would be necessary, in the government's view, to deal with the aliens (nasty little buggers that want to eat your face ;-)). Now I'm not siding with Cooper and the others, but prudence demands caution and the taking of precautions. If all of this alien stuff is true (must admit I have some doubts), then I say that any move to give the police and Coast Guard greater powers is a move in the wrong direction, especially when it does so without increasing my rights to due process and defense of my private property. My other concern was for those of you outside our national borders. If our police arranged through yours to conduct an operation...well, I'll leave it to your own imagination. There may not be anything more to the article I quoted from USA Today. But I found it alarming that law enforcement was given a real boost in power and authority at our expense. It is no different than using civil law to confiscate property from "suspected" criminals. Using the criminal law to do this same thing is much more difficult. So our law enforcement people have gone to using the civil law under which they can do a lot without the need for the same level of evidence as required under criminal law. Think about Americans. Here we are investigating UFOs and related phenomenon. On top of that we are going after government documents trying to determine what, if anything, the government knows and has been doing. Suppose they really have been. Suppose also that Cooper, et al, are not crackpots. What is keeping us safe from government cease and desist operations? The law--what law? What is to prevent them from entering your home on a sound, valid legal pretext and then using this new legal measure to search your entire home and surrounding property? The police merely have to suspect that there is someone in the house who is armed and hiding. As for taking it to court, good luck! They will probably find some way to use the RICO or other civil laws to confiscate your personal property. Fiction!? I leave it to you to decide. Gene -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: paranet!Bill.English Subject: INET Date: 20 Mar 90 16:22:00 GMT UFINET HAS A NEW BBS #505-437-7198 AND OFFICE BOX 3508, BRS ALAMOGORDO, NEW MEXICO 8310. PLEASE ADDRESS ALL INGUIREIES TO THIS ADDRESS AND NUMBER. -- Bill English - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Bill.English@paranet.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: paranet!Clark.Matthews Subject: Re: Signals Leaving Earth; Book Publisher? Date: 20 Mar 90 16:52:00 GMT Hi Jim. I'll pass on the Blieleck tape. His rap sounds like total piffle to me. I'll send out the VHS tape this week. I'm sorry, I keep forgetting. BTW, a while back you asked about the US Merchant Marines in the Pacific theatre during WWII. Anything to do with SS Andrew Furuseth? Just curious. Best, Clark -- Clark Matthews - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Clark.Matthews@paranet.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: paranet!f1.n304.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Jim.Delton Subject: Re: Say What ?!??? Date: 19 Mar 90 20:21:00 GMT As to things that would stand up in a court; I think we have any number of incidents that would stand up in court if the objective was to prove that "something" is happening up in the sky that is not being explained by the authourities in a convincing manner. I don't think there is anything though that would be courtroom convincible in terms of a verdict of Extraterrestrial. Not even the most die-hard skeptics would try to claim that UFO's don't exist in the definitional sense of the word(s) UFO. Even the skeptics will agree that most sightings are NOT hoaxes. WHat skeptics WON'T agree is that just because something is unexplainable it must be extraterrestrial (or some other pet theory). I believe a good case can be made (at least from what I've seen and read) that the UFO phenomenon is worth further study, especially in light of some of the truely frivolous research that gets funded in other fields. I DON'T think you can make a good case though, by presenting all the abduction tales and etherial planes and lost cities as part and parcel to the UFO phenomenon. Bringing all that crap in weakens the case a far as the people who might be in a position to help and who will have to put THEIR reputation on the line if they are to champion the cause. If nothing else, a case can be made that the gvt is far too obsessive in trying to cover everything up. If the only thing that came out of a UFO investigation was a more open gvt, that alone would make it worth it. As to specific incidents, check out Jim Speisers list of the "Top Ten" -- Jim Delton - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Jim.Delton@f1.n304.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: paranet!f20.n3607.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Jeff.Ballard Subject: Things-a-hopping! Date: 20 Mar 90 05:04:00 GMT Wow Ray! A period of silence, then the announcement that the experiment is over with results forthcoming, now flying 18 wheelers.... I'm obviously talking to the wrong contingent in the area...wrong in the sense of having the extraordinary tales....Will buzz you soon..BJB -- Jeff Ballard - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Jeff.Ballard@f20.n3607.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: paranet!f20.n3607.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Gregg.Pasterick Subject: Re: Strange flash of light Date: 20 Mar 90 15:36:00 GMT Okay.....this is interesting. Allow me to quote from a couple of boards from the St. Louis area.......or at least paraphrase. From another UFO board, The Darkside: "A 'spectacular' white flash in the southern sky was seen by many St. Louis area residents shortly after 9:30 PM SAturday March 17...." "It appeared first as a glowing orange ball for maybe a third of a second, due south and moving rapdily across the sky. Then there was a spectacular bright flash." From an AStro board in St Louis, M-42: "....but did anyone see that flash of light around 9:30 tonight? I was in my house, but it was bright enough to come through the windows. I heard on the news that it was seen as far awy as Iowa......." With so many observations, I hope a few folks might have been able to plot it, and maybe get an estimated altitude and so on...... By the way, a bright fireball was observed in the Buffalo area back on March 6........ Gregg -- Gregg Pasterick - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Gregg.Pasterick@f20.n3607.z1.FIDONET.ORG ********To have your comments in the next issue, send electronic mail to******** 'infopara' at the following address: UUCP {ncar,isis,boulder}!scicom!infopara DOMAIN infopara@scicom.alphacdc.com ADMIN Address infopara-request@scicom.alphacdc.com {ncar,isis,boulder}!scicom!infopara-request ******************The**End**of**Info-ParaNet**Newsletter************************