Bill Moore on Paul Bennewitz

[Kieran]

So you accept what he said about Hynek without any evidence? Even though he claimed to have evidence but has never produced it? Interesting.

Obviously your right, Moore has shown know evidence for this. But one could speculate as Hynek we do know worked with the Air Force to debunk UFO sightings across America. Even though much later on he switched sides from non-believer to non believer, but could anyone truly say, he cut all ties with the Airforce after changing his mind about the subject? Remember the Airforce was paying Hynek for two decades as a consultant, and he obviously build up some very close relationships with people in the intelligence community, so in my opinion of course only speculation, there is a more than average chance, he still was doing some covert work long after after blue-book closed. I wouldn't bet money on it, but one can't say is not possible could we?

Moore said he had a contract which would show Hynek's involvement in UFO Disinformation. Were is it?

Vallée, as far as I am aware has never worked with the United States Air Force to debunk UFO sightings. With Hynek, one can see were he could have been employed again by the people he once worked for.

Vallee, I would need to see some documentation, evidence of Vallée having had met with intelligence people, in the past, before ever coming around to the idea of what Moore was claiming during the show. Vallée and Hynek knew each other back in the sixties, but one can not confirm, Vallée was spreading UFO-disinformation, until examples of him doing this can be shown, so far know evidence like this has not been forthcoming, so I think it likely was bullshit.

I think some of Moore opinions are credible some are not without prove. I personally think what he said about Hopkins and Jacobs in 1994 is correct and has proven to be true 16 years later.

 

[trainedobserver]

If you are asking me in a more general sense about what I think about UFO's then I have to say that I feel that the evidence of anything non-prosaic is weak. But UFO's are important as a sociological phenomena and as a pop culture force. In those senses, I think they are fascinating.

That's part of it. I can't say that I can strongly disagree with what you've said there although I do think there is evidence for the presence of truly Unidentified Flying Objects. I think the cases included in the documentary Best Evidence: The top 10 UFO sightings are good examples.

I think there is evidence that various groups and individuals have used the sociological phenomena surrounding UFOs to their own ends. Vallee's Messengers of Deception being one source for examples of cases of that.

I strongly agree with you about how fascinating UFOs are as a social and cultural phenomenon. Given that most of us will never actually experience the phenomena ourselves those are the only real aspects of the thing we can study.

 

[Double Nought Spy]

Thanks, Kieran. I understand your thoughts, and my questions were mainly rhetorical.

But just what is Hynek being accused of, exactly? Did he supposedly "spread disinformation" after he was no longer associated with Blue Book? What disinformation, and when? For that matter, does his activity on behalf of the Air Force in the Blue Book days qualify as disinformation? I don't think so. Some of it was bullshit, but the term disinformation has a specific meaning. Was Hynek supposedly giving some arm of the government information that wasn't published in his writings elsewhere, after his tenure with Blue Book? Moore said he had a contract, which certainly implies payment for... what? Dirty little secrets about other people in the field? That does not sound like the sort of thing he would be involved in, and why would the government pay him for that crap?

So. Is there anything to the accusations about Hynek beyond some vague suspicions and a slanderous allegation (from a questionable source) that he was some kind of spy? As with so many other claims in the field, the more you look, the less you see.

To be fair to Moore, we can't hang the MJ-12 mess on him, for some of the same reasons. Sure there are suspicious circumstances and odd details, but those do not prove he did it. The date format is interesting, but even without the facts brought to the table by people like Stan Friedman, it still proves nothing. It is the sort of thing that should cause someone actively investigating the affair to dig deeper. That's sometimes known as a "lead." It's not proof. Such leads were followed by lots of people, and we still don't have proof Moore is the author. If it turns out he was the author, it would not surprise me all that much. I have no doubt, really, that he was the conduit for much of the information needed to make MJ-12 the kind of bombshell it was. As a piece of disinformation, it was a bomb-down-the-chimney bullseye.

 

[Kieran]

Thanks, Kieran. I understand your thoughts, and my questions were mainly rhetorical.

But just what is Hynek being accused of, exactly? Did he supposedly "spread disinformation" after he was no longer associated with Blue Book? What disinformation, and when? For that matter, does his activity on behalf of the Air Force in the Blue Book days qualify as disinformation? I don't think so. Some of it was bullshit, but the term disinformation has a specific meaning. Was Hynek supposedly giving some arm of the government information that wasn't published in his writings elsewhere, after his tenure with Blue Book? Moore said he had a contract, which certainly implies payment for... what? Dirty little secrets about other people in the field? That does not sound like the sort of thing he would be involved in, and why would the government pay him for that crap?

So. Is there anything to the accusations about Hynek beyond some vague suspicions and a slanderous allegation (from a questionable source) that he was some kind of spy? As with so many other claims in the field, the more you look, the less you see.

To be fair to Moore, we can't hang the MJ-12 mess on him, for some of the same reasons. Sure there are suspicious circumstances and odd details, but those do not prove he did it. The date format is interesting, but even without the facts brought to the table by people like Stan Friedman, it still proves nothing. It is the sort of thing that should cause someone actively investigating the affair to dig deeper. That's sometimes known as a "lead." It's not proof. Such leads were followed by lots of people, and we still don't have proof Moore is the author. If it turns out he was the author, it would not surprise me all that much. I have no doubt, really, that he was the conduit for much of the information needed to make MJ-12 the kind of bombshell it was. As a piece of disinformation, it was a bomb-down-the-chimney bullseye.

Here is an article from the internet, i haven't looked into what we are discussing here all that much, so forgive me if what is said in this write up about Hynek is crap.
Was J Allen Hynek a Mole for the CIA

 

[Sentry]

Is there any evidence to substantiate Moore's claims about Hynek? The closest I've found is this:

BRIAN PARKS in Saucer Smear Volume 48, No. 2 February 20th, 2001:
"As for the comments by the elusive William L. Moore, I can confirm that Hynek did in fact work as a consultant for Wright-Patterson after the close of Blue Book in 1969."
http://www.martiansgohome.com/smear/v48/ss010220.htm
No documentation is offered.

So maybe Bill Moore is a nice guy, but there's a credibility issue. He's associated with a dubious collection of projects:
The Philadelphia Experiment
The Roswell Incident
Bennewittz case
MJ-12 documents
UFO Cover-Up?: Live!

If you choose to pay attention to anything Moore says, I think it should backed up with supporting evidence. Conversation, while entertaining, is not proof.

 

[trainedobserver]

Does anyone have copies of The Focus Newsletter they could scan and share?

 

[boomerang]

Reading Vallee's autobiographical commentary about his years of friendship with Hynek, he seems often puzzled by Hynek's waffling and fence straddling where he should be pushing good evidence. I can't think of an example offhand. I came away from reading Vallee with the impression of great affection for Hynek, but also a feeling that Hynek was either internally conflicted, or externally pressured. This is just my impression.

The fact that most of us know none of these people personally leaves us connecting dots in the dark.

 

[ALPHA ROMEO UNIFORM]

Don,
Enjoyed the show and Mr Bill Moore needs a to be interviewed again on Darkmatters show which your Co-Host Richard.
I have to agree Don its a minefield of mind boggling deceptions what ever it is ?and it all can't be good.

Great Show DON,
BF

 

[Decker]

Don,
Enjoyed the show and Mr Bill Moore needs a to be interviewed again on Darkmatters show which your Co-Host Richard.
I have to agree Don its a minefield of mind boggling deceptions what ever it is ?and it all can't be good.

Great Show DON,
BF

Blowfish, would love to interview Moore again but I have no way to contact him at this point. I also do not know even if I did contact him if he would want to. He left the field many many moons ago. But, like the man said ... who knows?

Decker