Admiral wilson documents are bogus claims the admiral himself

apologies if this has been posted. But here goes

The admiral at the center of controversial notes describing his inability to access a classified UFO research program says the documents are bogus. Furthermore, he says the alleged author of those notes, physicist Dr. Eric Davis, never interviewed him. “It’s all fiction,” says former Defense Intelligence Agency Director Thomas Wilson, from his home in Virginia. “I wouldn’t know Eric Davis if he walked in right now.”

Source


I guess richard will move on to skinny bob now.Richard Dolan good one matey

So this either means that the documents are genuine or that the documents are fake. Nothing new...

i can't remember specifics right now but wasn't there like a chain of authenticity associated with the docs?
wasn't the whole deal with it that nothing the docs were alluding to could be proven or take us anywhere we didn't already know about but the fact that they existed was beyond reproach?

The documents are real, the content? Thats up for debate. Nothing more to do or see till someone asks Eric Davis to provide some proof to back his claims. Till then the so called wilson leak of the century is another of dolans "great" successes.

Hopefully someone will soon ask davis to comment and more importantly back up his claims.

a reply to: IMSAM
I agree with John Greenwald, the documents read like a script for an episode of the X files that neve aired. The scene is described and set...then dialogue.

When taking notes, who does include someone interrupting a conversation?

Also the 10:10 time on a watch face is quite a funny wink... Let alongside fact Wilson was retired anyway.

But a denial is always and only an admission in ufology... Nowhere else...

What about Grant Cameron, who was originally in possession of the documents way before Richard Dolan leaked them? Cameron argues that "of course" Admiral Wilson would deny all knowledge . . .
he doesn't want to be "that UFO guy", among other reasons. He presents a very compelling argument; too long (& too fast!) for me to recount all the details. But there seems to be a provable provenance, from Edgar Mitchell's files onwards. I'd be interested to hear opinions, especially from the member who is a British Barrister.


www.youtube.com...

a reply to: kiro8lak

The issue with "provenance" of these documents is that they are not official documents. The ownership or connections as to who had them and who else's hands they passed through can be proven; but that doesn't mean the content is also legit by default of those circumstances.

It's a story...until evidence supporting it that does have provenance and evidence backing it up.

The word on the grapevine is that something regarding these "Wilson documents" is cooking in either the NYT, Politico or something from bloggers posing themselves as self styled journalists.

Yeah, sadly I agree. . . & they do read like a bad script. But I still wonder whether these are the "brushed up" version of the original notes taken? I shall be very disappointed if Richard Dolan doesn't see the poor scripting. . .

originally posted by: pigsy2400
a reply to: IMSAM
But a denial is always and only an admission in ufology... Nowhere else...

I thought this is worth quoting - because it’s true!

Too many people - credible people at that - have seen “things” in the sky, on the ground, in space, etc. that seem to defy our known technology and capability to just easily buy the “UFOs don’t exist and we’re alone” line as easily as we once did. Now we can say “yeah... but what about ?” that seems to refute the official narrative. That means sometimes the stronger the denial, the more over the target you are.

As for the Wilson docs... I don’t know. I’d like to think it’s authentic but I’d like a little more evidence of their authenticity before I buy it. I’d say right now these papers, like many other events or revelations on this subject, fall into the “plausible” but unconfirmed bucket for me.

I am not in the mood to pursue things now that the 404 comet is approaching but heres something for those that archive stuff and threads and whatnot.


The following comment is word by word from a correspondence Philip Mantle had with Hal Puthoff.

I had this comment dated 15 June from Hal Puthoff (via email):

Hi Phillip, I have no reason to comment on the authenticity of a document that purports to describe classified USG programs to which I'm not privy.

Best regards, Hal

Eric Davis added on the same day:

Hal speaks for me. Regards, Eric


Make of these comments what you will. All i asked was if the Wilson 'core secrets' were authentic or not. I asked no questions about their contents.

Ps I am also fairly sure Mantle reads these forums, if not a member so , Philip associating your name with paul stonehill will bite you in the rears. I am 101% sure he dosent have a single evidence to back up any of his claims in his books.