tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post4339716372951463625..comments2024-03-28T15:55:33.435-07:00Comments on The Big Study: Society for Scientific Exploration Annual Meeting 2013, post six.The Professorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07811807639219365621noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post-8304216596752580802013-07-08T07:56:12.792-07:002013-07-08T07:56:12.792-07:00Unless the lying/exaggerating violates something c...Unless the lying/exaggerating violates something concerning National Security that the Intel community thought was significant, then "no" lying isn't a crime unless it's used to defraud people of their property in some contractual arrangement. If no Security issue is involved, then the lying is a civil issue. America is a Kingdom of Liars --- just look at our businessmen, advertising companies, and politicians. The Professorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07811807639219365621noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post-70483824309858197432013-07-07T21:15:56.221-07:002013-07-07T21:15:56.221-07:00Can the military (US) do anything (ie persecute) i...Can the military (US) do anything (ie persecute) if an ex-military suddenly spoke in public lecture and mentioning things that not true (for example an Ex Master Sgt saying he was in doing x things in military but in truth he is not) ? Also against these kind of people who lies about their service (claiming they are stationed in Area-51 while in truth they are not), would the US Military release somekind of disclaimer against such claims ? or the Military/Gov think its better to stay away and stay silent ?<br /><br />I'm not familiar with US Gov Law , but is it a crime to lie / exaggerate your Military experiences (eg adding stuff that didnt happen) ? This concerns ex-military people that said they see aliens at some underground bases and stuff like that..Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post-44119528774913477562013-07-04T07:34:30.760-07:002013-07-04T07:34:30.760-07:00My understanding is that JANAP 146 or something ve...My understanding is that JANAP 146 or something very like it is still in effect as the publication covers any air-related security intel encountered "in the field". But, even in the heyday of anti-UFO USAF behavior, the more strict line items in the publication were used more to frighten than actually prosecute. When you add to that the overt statement by the Air Force that they are no longer interested in UFOs, and that the entirety of Project Blue Book microfilm [plus loads of FOIA] has been released, the chances of any military authority "coming after" an ex-military individual approaches zero. <br /><br />The exception to this would be any incident which involved not only a UFO but also something with high security classification, for which the observer already understood the on-going seriousness of whatever the classification was about. Until things like Top Secret elements of security matters are downgraded and declassified, oaths probably should be honored, even in very old cases. However, almost nothing associated with "old" UFO cases involves this. <br /><br />Also, if the incident involved was already "out of the barn" [i.e. the public had already gotten detailed wind of it] violations of talking about such cases [even to reporters] was not considered a JANAP 146 violation unless, again, it involved the revealing of secret military matters previously unknown. This doesn't mean the Pentagon was happy about talk, but it seemed to realize that silence was more damaging than admission in such cases. The Professorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07811807639219365621noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post-36568494343804246182013-07-04T00:25:35.808-07:002013-07-04T00:25:35.808-07:00i have to ask this : how binding is the US milita...i have to ask this : how binding is the US military rule (forbids speaking about UFO related matters) to ex-military personel ? i mean is the non-disclosure rule apply to ex-military or just active military ?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post-7796356950491074512013-06-19T09:07:34.381-07:002013-06-19T09:07:34.381-07:00Yes. In my earlier review articles on the Colorado...Yes. In my earlier review articles on the Colorado Project { particularly the JUFOS version and in the book }, I show that the so-called "Low Memo" shouldn't have been such a big thing, as it was just Robert Low used-car-salesman extraordinaire selling the Colorado Administration on the idea of accepting the project. Bob Low, in actuality, acted more like a scientist than anyone else on the project with maybe the exception of William Hartmann on photo analysis. While everyone else was pursuing their own selfish research interests and not behaving like a team, Low came up with a brilliant method/plan to pursue the difficult work. It was the other people who fell down on the job in a great variety of ways. Bob low was no perfect angel, but he has taken an extremely bad rap for things false and undeserved. <br /><br />The real "secret" USAF fixing of the conclusions was not related to the Low memo but to a letter exchange between Colonel Hippler of the Pentagon, essentially telling Condon in early 1967 what the Air Force wanted him to conclude. So, yes, "For Condon, Hope there is not". The Professorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07811807639219365621noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post-14372328129304314712013-06-18T22:39:37.227-07:002013-06-18T22:39:37.227-07:00given the memo et al. given the memo et al. Doc_Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16207012614208645067noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post-51647695947004135202013-06-18T22:37:10.289-07:002013-06-18T22:37:10.289-07:00IMO Condon.....to steal or modify a star wars line...IMO Condon.....to steal or modify a star wars line ala yoda "hope...left is no hope for condon"<br />TimDoc_Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16207012614208645067noreply@blogger.com