tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10903320.post113270365945484249..comments2023-08-15T01:24:39.187-03:00Comments on The Other Side of Truth: How to Be a Real WhistleblowerPaul Kimballhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08804735930733797952noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10903320.post-1132814503991720682005-11-24T02:41:00.000-04:002005-11-24T02:41:00.000-04:00DM:Oh, some people use cold, hard logic, just not ...DM:<BR/><BR/>Oh, some people use cold, hard logic, just not very many in ufology, or so it seems sometimes. It's always those nasty little inconvenient facts, as Karl says, that seem to get in the way of most people. The shame is that when they get sucked into the side-alleys, they tend to lose sight of the big picture.<BR/><BR/>As always, agree or disagree, thanks for stopping by, and good luck with your new blog.<BR/><BR/>Paul KimballPaul Kimballhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08804735930733797952noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10903320.post-1132764415801593832005-11-23T12:46:00.000-04:002005-11-23T12:46:00.000-04:00It looks strange that we have a growned human civi...It looks strange that we have a growned human civilisation filled with such a great amount of people who, when dedicated to deep research into something, do not use the cold and hard logic.Don Maorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09501920515893210306noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10903320.post-1132721686676560362005-11-23T00:54:00.000-04:002005-11-23T00:54:00.000-04:00DM:Sorry, but what you see in my post is cold, har...DM:<BR/><BR/>Sorry, but what you see in my post is cold, hard logic (well, that might not be what YOU see, but there's not much I can do about that) - the kind that a lot of folks (although fortunately not all) within ufology seem to have trouble with.<BR/><BR/>Paul KimballPaul Kimballhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08804735930733797952noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10903320.post-1132720271373139282005-11-23T00:31:00.000-04:002005-11-23T00:31:00.000-04:00all i see in your post is "woulds" and "shoulds".e...all i see in your post is "woulds" and "shoulds".<BR/><BR/><BR/>everybody can stand up and invent a "would be" story, of their own taste and choice.<BR/><BR/>for example, as you say: an agent trying to destroy another agent or agency "would" leak the data to some credible recipient. <BR/>but the leaking agent would probably feel fear of being punished by the law. You know there are very hard penalties to those who deliver classified information. In this case , the agent should go public, give detalied informartion to the receiver, etc. too much trouble.<BR/><BR/>So what the agent could do without giving explanations and without giving his identity? Easy. Send it to the ufologists, they shouldn`t ask because they should have the background to understand the documents and to validate them.<BR/>so the agent leaked the data and he is safe in his house, with no cops jumping over him! (just his wife, i hope)<BR/><BR/>i can invent more "woulds" and "shoulds" if you like, but i prefer dealing with facts...<BR/><BR/>things happen in the way they happen, not in the way they should.<BR/><BR/>i am defending some of the MJ-12 leaks, and of course I considerar that Lazar's-claims-modus-operandi has nothing to do with the modus operandi of the MJ-12 documents leaks.<BR/><BR/>Don MaorDon Maorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09501920515893210306noreply@blogger.com