National Press Club Press Conference, November 12, 2007
By Dick Hall
11-15-07
Note-Veteran Ufologist & editor/founder of The Journal of UFO History, "Dick" Hall is on a very short list of some the most respected researchers in the field; his continuing contributions and accumulative efforts are in a league of their own. He is la crème de la crème! -FW
By Dick Hall
11-15-07
Note-Veteran Ufologist & editor/founder of The Journal of UFO History, "Dick" Hall is on a very short list of some the most respected researchers in the field; his continuing contributions and accumulative efforts are in a league of their own. He is la crème de la crème! -FW
In my 50 years of more or less active involvement with the UFO subject I have been present or a participant in numerous press conferences, private and public meetings with high-level people present...you name it.
This press conference was one of the most impressive experiences I have ever had just sitting in the audience, though I did get a chance to chat with various of the witnesses eventually. The affair was beautifully planned and well-conducted. To me, it struck just exactly the right note...which I will get to in a minute.
First I must say that some people who outspokenly demand alien bodies on a gurney or a crashed saucer with the hull still warm be displayed at a press conference like this have their heads up their posteriors. Only the Government could possibly produce the corpus delecti, and this was decidedly NOT a Government press conference. It was implicitly very critical of governments for failing to openly and honestly address cases like those reported by the panel members.
The press coverage was quite accurate insofar as it went and was widely disseminated (via Reuters, Agence France Presse, ANI, and other news services), but extremely shallow. A mile wide and a foot deep. The presenters-especially the former military pilots of several countries-reported mind-blowing experiences, most of which were well-documented, contained radar verification, etc. They provided smoking guns all over the place and lots of fodder for reporters (old-fashioned reporters, anyway).
The news coverage focused almost exclusively on the carefully orchestrated and well-justified message that some very strange encounters have been experienced by highly credible observers like these, and the need to re-open a serious investigation on a basis of international information sharing, since UFOs are a global phenomenon as illustrated by the reports made. This is exactly the central point that needs to be hammered home.
I don't recall yet seeing any one of the outstanding cases summarized in a news account as an example of what they were talking about. Not one. Something may come of their testimony later, I hope, but in that respect the reporting was superficial.
What questions did the newsmen present ask? "Why would the [U.S.] Government want to cover it up?" This silly question has been asked over and over in the past 40 years, as if suggesting that the witnesses must be mistaken because the Government would have no need or desire to cover up the information. Several of the case reports they had just listened to included specific examples of the information being swept under the rug! Why?
My retort would be, "Ask the Government!" Any veteran UFO researcher could (and has many times) suggested four or five possible reasons for a cover-up, but at bottom that is only speculation and we cannot provide a definitive answer. What we can provide is outstanding and highly credible witnesses whose testimony establishes a serious mystery badly in need of international scientific investigation with a free flow of information. Don't ask for speculations, Mr. or Ms. Reporter, ask for credible witnesses to and documentation of cases like these people described...and there is plenty of that available Ask the Government how they can possibly continue to ignore such cases.
No comments :
Post a Comment
Dear Contributor,
Your comments are greatly appreciated, and coveted; however, blatant mis-use of this site's bandwidth will not be tolerated (e.g., SPAM etc).
Additionally, healthy debate is invited; however, ad hominem and or vitriolic attacks will not be published, nor will "anonymous" criticisms. Please keep your arguments "to the issues" and present them with civility and proper decorum. -FW