From: skunk-works-digest-owner@mail.orst.edu To: skunk-works-digest@mail.orst.edu Subject: Skunk Works Digest V5 #261 Reply-To: skunk-works-digest@mail.orst.edu Errors-To: skunk-works-digest-owner@mail.orst.edu Precedence: bulk Skunk Works Digest Saturday, 6 May 1995 Volume 05 : Number 261 In this issue: Black Helos/Russian Flight crew... Responses to aircraft@Groom Lake Re: Responses to aircraft@Groom Lake See the end of the digest for information on subscribing to the skunk-works or skunk-works-digest mailing lists and on how to retrieve back issues. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Corey Lawson Date: Fri, 5 May 1995 12:00:26 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Black Helos/Russian Flight crew... One possibility is (assuming one lives near Ft. Irwin, CA) is that they were the OpFor from Ft. Irwin. Sorry I don't remember the specific details about them, but they are often credited with being the best Soviet-style force in the world (yes, even better than the Soviets!). Maybe they're using Blakhocski helicopters now as well... Or they could have been SOC guys, the Avn unit (that's separate from the 101st) from Ft. Campbell that does all the spooky SOC helo stuff and were playing their roles to the hilt. Or, most likely, they were the secret UN force that's being implemented to help observe and stop human rights abuses in the US. I have proof! (the last one is very tongue-in-cheek) - -Corey Lawson "Sorry...I'm just...it's starting to csl@booster.u.washington.edu hit me like a umm...t-ton of...heavy thing." - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Why can the press keep secrets from the public yet demand that others' secrets be made public? ------------------------------ From: chosa@chosa.win.net (BYRON WEBER) Date: Fri, 05 May 1995 19:14:23 Subject: Responses to aircraft@Groom Lake Responses to aircraft@Groom Lake.area 51 posted 5/2/95 were especially interesting. It seems the criterions used to evaluate observations at Groom Lake, by those "in the know," are impassively established by questions of place, time and date of observations. The remarkable consistancy with which these guidelines were used in first responses suggest someone, probably a self proclaimed expert on Groom Lake activities, is a confidant of those "in the know" offering analysis and demurrer. (an example is "handling the press.") An elitism has risen from the desert dust in Rachel. Those "in the know" are distinguished by their rational examination of facts and single minded interest in aircraft as opposed to the fools who proffer knowlege of UFO's. There is clear territorial demarcation of knowledge and the elitist maintain a secrecy and fraternity equal only to that of the government. Crazy as this sounds, the consensous of opinion by those "in the know" is that no secret aircraft testing is done if someone knows you are watching, ie, since they always know when someone is watching, no one will ever see a secret aircraft.(unless of course you are privy to secret places from which to watch known only by those "in the know," ie, only they have seen secret aircraft?) Even with photographic evidence those not "in the know" are dismissed as "one of the others." The source book, Viewer's Guide, goes so far as to state the worst time for viewing is at dusk, photograpy is useless, they never fly in bad weather (from Lazar), seeing something first time out is like winning a jackpot, "I have lived here for over two years, spent countless days and nights in the desert and never seen anything even remotely alien," if you come, do it for the recreation, if you see something it was probably an optical aberation, a flare, a mistaken object, etc., etc. The elitists have been duped. The ufologists denounce any factual knowledge by crazy beliefs. Freedom Ridge is gone. The secrets live on. I never really liked Campbell's soup, but they sure know how to sell it. ------------------------------ From: kuryakin@arn.net (Illya Kuryakin) Date: Fri, 5 May 1995 22:37:51 -0500 Subject: Re: Responses to aircraft@Groom Lake +Responses to aircraft@Groom Lake.area 51 posted 5/2/95 were +especially interesting. It seems the criterions used to evaluate +observations at Groom Lake, by those "in the know," are +impassively established by questions of place, time and date of +observations. The remarkable consistancy with which these +guidelines were used in first responses suggest someone, probably a +self proclaimed expert on Groom Lake activities, is a confidant of +those "in the know" offering analysis and demurrer. I prefer to call it scientific methodology. Or experimental analysis. I also prefer to view it as evidence of the validity of such methodology since everyone seems to agree on it. I'm not saying you didn't see anything. I do note that you're more interested in lambasting your critics than your are in validating your claims... at least in public. What _evidence_ can you offer? Anything besides anecdotal? I'd love to believe you... but your descriptions are unique from those already alledged. All you've sent so far is some electrons. You got some kind of photography? Illya Illya Kuryakin "HA!!" U.N.C.L.E. Network Services Ruby kuryakin@halcyon.com Galactic Gumshoe They told me to put a disclaimer here. And _I_ run the place. :} ------------------------------ End of Skunk Works Digest V5 #261 ********************************* To subscribe to skunk-works-digest, send the command: subscribe skunk-works-digest in the body of a message to "majordomo@mail.orst.edu". If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-skunk-works": subscribe skunk-works-digest local-skunk-works@your.domain.net To unsubscribe, send mail to the same address, with the command: unsubscribe skunk-works-digest in the body. Administrative requests, problems, and other non-list mail can be sent to either "skunk-works-digest-owner@mail.orst.edu" or, if you don't like to type a lot, "prm@mail.orst.edu A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "skunk-works-digest" in the commands above with "skunk-works". Back issues are available for anonymous FTP from mail.orst.edu, in /pub/skunk-works/digest/vNN.nMMM (where "NN" is the volume number, and "MMM" is the issue number).