How MEAMSTREAM MEDIA gets its slimy name

Okay first of all as suggested I am making a NEW thread since we are going to be discussing Mr. Oberg's ACTIONS as a "NBC News Space Consultant" in "hot-journalistic" pursuit of his "mission" ( his words not mine ) from the thread on Ken Johnston being fired..BECAUSE of Mr. Oberg's email...imho.

First these first few posts are definately going to stretch the 4000 character max so I will hopefully be able to post them quickly enough that they make coherent sense and we can go from there as to whether or not Mr. James Oberg who now states he WAS acting on the behest of "someone" at NBC news....but will not state who..in "some" department of NBC news....but again will not state what department at NBC News.

He does admit in the thread that he had a "budget"...hence he was PAID REAL $$$$$ fot this "journalistic mission".

But the question remains...

WHAT WAS THE MISSION ???

From MY perspective reading and disecting the first email sent by Mr. Oberg to Ms. Kay Ferrari of the JPL NASA Volunteer program it is obvious this mission was a SMEAR campaign with the sole purpose and attempt was to get Mr. Ken Johnston FIRED from NASA so as to sever the ties that Mr. Johnston still had with NASA when the book Dark Mission came out recently.

imho...the whole thing was DESIGNED to get Mr. Johnston FIREd and SMEARED along with smearing Mr. Richard Hoagland by inuendo using a Swedish UFO site as a "source" by Mr. Oberg. Since I know Mr. Oberg does not believe in Flying Saucers one has to wonder how namy "Swedish sites" Mr. Oberg had to look at to find the one he wanted?

In furhter resposnes, here and at the Dark Mission blog he has attacked Mr. Mike Bara co-author with Mr. Hoagland of the Dark Mission book and Mr. Keith Laney who has done some image procesing for the book.

Let's being with the email Mr. Oberg sent to Ms. Ferrari in this next section.

Bob...
commonsensecentral.net...

r. Oberg started his "mission" with this email:

From: "Jim Oberg" To: Cc: , ,"james oberg" Subject: question re ambassador Ken JohnstonDate: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 06:45:04 -0500X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138X-Source-IP: sccrmhc12.comcast.net [63.240.77.82]X-Source-Sender: [email protected]: 0.00%To: Kay Ferrari:

Hi! I'm checking out some stories attributed to New Mexico Solar System Ambassador Ken Johnston, described atttp://www2.jpl.nasa.gov/ambassador/profiles/Ken_Johnston.htm>www2.jpl.nasa.gov... that NASA photos from Apollo show alien structures on the Moon which NASA is covering up, and that Richard Hoagland is correct about NASA and its astronauts lying to the public.See ttp://www.enterprisemission.com/tran1.html>www.enterprisemission.com... andttp://darkmission.blogspot.com/2007/09/kenjohnstoncalls.html>darkmission.blogspot.com...

and ttp://www.lunaranomalies.com/corbtroy.htm>www.lunaranomalies.com/corbtroy.htm etc etc

Some criticism here: ttp://www.ufo.se/ufofiles/english/issue_2/ukhoag22.html>www.ufo.se... Noory, ;Coast to Coast' (all night show, formerly 'Art Bell' show)ttp://www.coasttocoastam.com/shows/2003/02/12.html>www.coasttocoastam.com...
"Ken Johnston, who worked for NASA for 23 years, appeared in Hour 2, and described screening Apollo footage and seeing a cluster of lights in a moon crater accompanied by a plume of steam. But then two days later when he showed the footage to some officials, the crater material had been seamlessly removed. Perhaps even more surprising was Johnston and Hoagland's supposition that astronauts who went to the moon may have had their memories altered or blanked in order to suppress their knowledge of what they saw there."

Is he still an 'ambassador' in good standing, and did you ever make any effort to verify any of his professional/educational claims as published on your website?If he was 61 in 2007, as the data indicates, he was born in 1946, so "in the 1960's" he would have been about 20. To learn to fly jets in the Marines, and then serve out his service commitment (3 to 4 years), and then become a Grumman LM pilot instructor by 1969, he'd have had to begin flight training at about the age of 17, I figure -- which doesn't seem credible, since he's have had to have been a commissioned officer before that step. What am I overlooking here?He also says he examined original Apollo imagery in the Lunar Receiving Lab at JSC. Please correct me on this as needed, but I thought that film was transferred from the quarantine facility (and LRL) to the regular Bldg 8 photoprocessing lab for development and printing -- NOT handled by a temporary facility within the LRL area? Have I got that wrong?

Thanks!

Jim Obergttp://www.jamesoberg.com/%3Ewww.jamesoberg.com
NBC News space consultant

in response to tezzajw

Mr. Oberg States:

(snip)

Secondly, my comments have been about the accuracy of claims attributed to Johnston, as a calibration of other claims less susceptible to independent verification. The criticism of me has not been based on factual claims of mine, but on views of my intentions, ethics, and character. I suggest such criticisms are much more subjective and personal.

I am not trying to assess any motives for Johnston's stories, or speculate on his inner thinking, just uncovering independent accounts that match up (or don't) with his own accounts.

I think one approach is good investigative journalism. and the other approach is 'character assassination' exemplified. It's not a matter simply of 'whose ox is gored' -- it's the very nature of the horns and their targets.

Jim O


tezzajw then states and quotes Mr. Oberg promise to check with Br. Boyle at MSNBC:

If you wish, then maybe it would be more appropriate to start a new thread, here on ATS, about Bob and his attacks on you over at Bara's blog. That way, we won't have to clutter this thread with off-topic posts while you and Bob can argue it out with each other?



Mr. Oberg was quoted here:
"He did quote the email correctly, assuming the email is unaltered. I've asked Boyle why he felt knowledgeable enough to issue such a blanket statement and will post the results."


No worries. Assuming that you don't alter your email, we'll also be happy to see the reply that you receive!

rhw:
To date Mr. Oberg has NOT given us the reply Mr. Boyle sent to him...if any.

Bob...

re-repeat of my anaylsis of his email to Ms. Ferrari:

First of all zorgon, thank you for the invite.

As you may have noticed I've been a member for awhile since I got back on my feet. I don't want to get too off-topic here but when you invited the folks from Mr. Bara's blog here you mentioned your real name and I used to work with another fine gentleman with same name at a local college, I am Robert H. Williams. If so, I would be very much interested in exchanging voice conversations, I'm in the book in Mooers NY. However, unless I (or my wife in wheelchair) know the number and the caller ID comes up with a name I know...I (and my wife) let the answering machine answer it...after all...that's why I bought the infernal thing Please leave a message with number and I'll call you if yuo're still here locally. LOL

tezzajw you are right that Mr. Oberg's posts here have been CONCENTRATED on Mr. Johnton's "credentials"...and copies of those have been supplied and posted at the blog site:

darkmission.blogspot.com...

His comments WITHIN the email to Ms Ferrari, as you can see since I posted it are of the same vein, imho. The email does not sound...imho...like a "PURELY journalsitic" neutral inquiry into Mr. Johnston's credentials. I mean, using a Swedish Ufo site as a 'source', and not even the FIRST page of the article...but the ONE page where we get a "Swedish twist" in by Mr. Oberg without Mr. Oberg actually having to say it himself...to wit:

www.ufo.se...


"In the Art Bell interview Mitchells coments of Hoagland finally drops down to such a level they had to be censured. Or what do you say about this:
- Hoagland must have been masturbating too much and whakened his brain cells out of his little pecker."


Which...in BRUTAL TRUTH reality is from a page filled with comments about Mr. Hoagland...supposedly from an ancient Art Bell Inerview with Edgar Mitchell who firmly believes in a Flying Saucer presence (something Mr. Oberg does NOT..btw...so WHY choose THIS site...THIS part of the Article?...only because Mr. Johnston's name is at the top? but really no "comments" about Mr. Jhonston ! ) and actually says in that interview...presuming THIS Swedish Article is an ACCURATE translation (something I, nor do I think Mr. Oberg has verified before he used it).

To whit Mitchell states:

"And in a interview with the UFOlogist Linda Howe (mutilation-researcher) Mitchell once again says that Hoaglands claims are just not there. But at the same time he reveals that he has been in contact with people who claims that the Belgium, (ex.) Soviet and American governments have had direct contact and exchange with aliens. As a source for this remarkable claims Mitchell says he has friends within the US agencys a.o.
On the question if he has been confronted by any government people for this knowledge he says:

- No, but I'm expecting it. (chuckles).
If you're expecting it, what's your response gonna be?
- Go to Hell...
And you feel this strongly now, because why?
- The evidence is mounting..."


Again...all this is PRESUMING the article is an accurate translation of that ancient interview that Mr. Oberg used as a "source"...supposedlly "reputable" in his email to Ms. Ferrari at JPL.

Not a very professional neutral journalstic inquiry imho....but let's get BACK ON TOPIC with something more from that 2nd part ONLY from a Swedish UFO Site Mr. Oberg used as a "source" ( again suppopsedly reputable since NOW he IS claiming 'someone' at NBC did indeed authorize and is likely paying him for this 'inquiry')...from that same part 2 of the article:


"Wheathering away


The person behind the public letter to Hoagland adds that the only true originals is located at Johnson Space Flight Center in Houston, USA. The magnetic-tapes with the raw-data is wheathering away, and NASA knows this, but says their budget don't allowe them to restore the tapes (!!!) NASA has been accused by Hoagland to have misplaced a number of frames, one of them are 4822. Hoagland also accuses NASA to have delayed his orders of frames in order to prevent him to make an comparison to Johnstons copies before the press-meeting. And the frame-numbers on Johnstons private "firsthand"-negatives has different framenumbers than those that are available for the public use, according to Hoagland. "


Can anyone tell me where NASA has put over 690 of the more than 700 boxes of RAW TELEVISION FOOTAGE from ALL the APOLLO missions? Gee...NASA wouldn't be so 'careless' or "paranoid" to INTENTIONALLY loose those tapes would they about such a prime and HISTORICAL RECORD paid for by...you guessed it...YOU the American Taxpayers.

Yet...that is EXACTLY what NASA has done...Contact the National Space Science Data Center and ask them where THAT data is:

nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov...

Next...let's review some ancient history about NASA 'numbering of images'...we have to switch from the Moon to Mars to discover this MISFILLING and MISSING context data. The beginning of this Odyssey starts with Tobias Owen and gets corrupted from there. A short essay can be found here if you wish to pursue the REAL story of the VIKING "HEAD" image:

commonsensecentral.net...

You need not go if you've heard the story and we can get BACK TO THE MOON stuff.

For YEARS AND YEARS a small group of us led by Mr. keith Laney have been on an email and mail and BBS endeavor to have NASA scan and archive ALL of the Apollo Moon images....both manned and unmanned...see:

www.keithlaney.net...

It is only within the last 6 months that NASA and AU began doing this process...why now???!!!

Is it because they KNEW Dark Mission was comming out soon on bookshelves and libraries across the USA and the world? Now that it is out...I believe "some interests" are doing everything and anything to discredit the book...and the ONLY target they are targeting is Mr. Ken Johnston.

Now one wonders...why is that? Why attack ONLY Mr. Ken Johnston's creditionals?

Maybe because the ORDER to DESTROY these pricless HISTORICAL RECORDS was in fact BRUTAL TRUTH.

Same way the CIA TAPES of the interogations of CIA detainees were also REAL BRUTAL TRUTH DESTROYED...and now there may be some LEGAL LIABILITIES should Congress or the FBI get enough cajhones or ovaries to actually DO ANYTHING about that and CHARGE someone with a coverup and press criminal charges.

Ahhhh...but what good would it do if we found out who destroyed the tapes, either the CIA tapes or those precious and MORE interesting and IMPORTANT 690 some-odd Apollo RAW TELEVISION TAPES...or...4 Sets of Apollo first generation copies of the original negatives...when in all probabilty...like Scooter Libby...anyone who coverd-up this stuff will be pardoned completely by THIS administration with uncarring impunity.

But as of this moment the 690 plus Apollo Raw Television Tapes remain...GONE...Where is Mr. Oberg in the HUNT FOR THE BRUTAL TRUTH ABOUT THIS TOPIC...like the tapes themselves...mia.

Think about it. REALLY think about it all....it IS all connected if you have an open mind and search out the BRUTAL TRUTH FACTS and use COMMON SENSE reasoning...imho anyhooo

So...what and who are we left with concerning the Dark Mission book and the current 'web-war' STARTED by Mr. Oberg with his "neutral journalistic inguiry" at the behest of "someone" at NBC News?

PLease re-read his FIRST email to Ms. Ferrari on page 46 of this thread and decide for yourself.

Is it really "Mainstream Media" when it turns into a personalized "MEANSTREAM MEDIA" ???

I'd like an answer to that one.

Bob...

zorgon, sorry about the confusion...but the gentleman worked at the same institution I was "fired" from in the same manner Ken Johnston was "fired"...though Mr. Oberg claims "being pressured to resign" is NOT the same as being "fired"...it was at THIS point I stepped into the fray as it where.


I'll say as little as possible, but covering the points, on this subject since again...I do not want to derail the thread...however, Mr. Oberg's assertion that he WAS hired by 'someone' at NBC news certainly helps justify my filing with the FCC for his style of "reputable NEUTRAL investagive" techiques authorized by NBC and MSBC News...sorta like asking King Georgie JR down to the new AG if "Waterboarding" is tortue or not. Because the point I had with Mr. Oberg started when he stated this:

"There is the version that is consistent with Johnston's subsequent email asking to rescind his voluntary resignation (the way I thought I heard her tell it), and your version of a demanded resignation, that seems to me to be hard to reconcile with Johnston asking the next day to withdraw it."

from here:
www.blogger.com...

Rather than tie up this post with a copy and paste of Mr. Ken Johnston's statements about his being either 'asked to resign or he was being fired' I'll post link where you can read the C2C interview yourself and see Mr. Johnston's email back to Ms. Ferrari and read his own words here:

darkmission.blogspot.com...

From there the back-n-forth went around the definition of what the word being "fired" meant...in a wierd and unpleansant sort of way because it brought back a lot of memories where I was put in Mr. Johnston's shoes back in Autumn 2000 to May 2001. I was FIRED for filling a FOIA against NASA and I had the College President's WRITTEN authorization and 'protection' to do so. 2 weeks after the FOIA hit Washington DC...well...all hell broke loose and I was forced to either back down or be fired...exactly like Mr. Johnston was being asked to do. To learn more about MY event go here:

commonsensecentral.net...

And THAT experience lead me to the knowledge that many College 'Administrators' are NOT as all powerfull nor as knowledgable about events at their own institution as they may think. A view I still hold since that same collge has gone through numerous adminstrative replacements...because the power...lies always with the Board of Directors.

Now enough about that, I have only 631 MGS MOCs IMQs to get through and I want to get back to that project and also for gathering information for the FCC inquiry about Mr. Oberg's claim here that NBC did INDEED hire him to 'investigate something'.

Who and what remains to be seen. But I ask ANY of the ATS crew to re-read Mr. Oberg's email I posted on botom of page 46 of this thread, my previous post that breaks down that 'source' he used and ask if that is an honest and neutral and unbiased inquiry into Mr. Ken Johnston's credentials?

Mine would have been pretty short and to the point:

Dear Ms Ferrai,

I am inquiring as to the qualifications of a Mr. Ken Johnston who is affiliated with a new book out called Dark Mission and can be reviewed here at Amazon.com:

www.amazon.com..link to Book and reviews

Does JPL still stand behind Mr. Ken JOhston's qualifications and credentials to be part of the NASa Ambasador program?

Sincerely,

yada yada yada...


Now THAT is a simple, dispassionate, neutral and unbiased way to approach JPL and inquire into JPL's confidence about Mr. Johnston's credentials.

The above is a far cry from what Mr. Oberg wrote as I pointed out already.

NOW>>> NEW NEWS AND REVELATIONS

Since Mr. Oberg is going to refuse to tell us who in NBS News authroized him to investigate Mr. Johnston with such a one sided and slanderous emial to MS. Ferrari, we'll just HAVE to presume that the NBS person in question is very happy with the work done with that email and the Swedish UFO site used as a 'source' and the comments made at that site against Mr. Hoagloand mostly and not Mr. Johnston.

Just re-inforces my view that MEANSTREAM MEDIA is being fed from the bottom up.

As for access to Apollo images Mr. Oberg again attacks another person who has high credentials that NASA itself has found ectremely useful in the past:

keithlaney.net...


In fact Mr. Laney's image processsing skills surpased even those of the PI of the MGS using the MOC for the site selection for the two rovers running around Mars now:

MERC landing sites Keith Laney work

marsoweb.nas.nasa.gov...

marsoweb.nas.nasa.gov...

And again let's not forget that we are are only NOW gettting the FULL APOLLO DIGITAL IMAGE ARCHIVE going through the work of Mr. Laney and others out here like him, who have been lobying for this for years and years.

Perhaps Mr. Oberg's easy access to the images FOR HIM...meant that ONLY those people who could make the trip to Texas should be allowed to view these images? Why wasn't this done a long long long time ago???

Why is this project only beginning now about six months ago?

keithlaney.net...

And again...if NASA has nothing to HIDE about the Moon...where are the missing 690 plus boxes of PRISTINE television tapes for which NO COPIES were made?

Why isn't "someone" at NBC News interested in finding them by keeping constant presure and at least monthly updates on the supposedly "search" for these missing tapes?

I again ask anyone to view Mr. Oberg's ORGINAL email to Ms. Ferrari and decide if that was an unbiased and neutral inquiry...or was it written with the slanderous intent it gives when reading it?

Nuff said...and Mr. Oberg said earlier:

"I would like Bob to address his comments about Dr. Gonzalez and whether he now agrees they were unjustified. "

I do hereby apologize to Dr. Gonzalez that the "vehemence" of my statements were unjustified, however, my view that not ALL 'adminstrators' may know what is going on in their institutions remains accurate from my perspective and experience.

Mr. Oberg has used the same argument saying Mr. Boyle would have no knowledge of someone else in NBC presumably hiring him to attack Mr. Johnston, rather than the BOOK itself. Since Mr. Oberg refuses to divulge this information...we have only his side of this supposed job offer.

Now maybe Mr. Oberg would like to apologize to Mr. Keith Laney at least since it seems NASA deems HIS WORK of such high quality and his integrity of such high caliber that they would OPENLY use him, despite his anomalous views of the Moon and Mars, for NASA websites and relying on the QUALITY of his work in deciding where to place a BILLION BUCKS of hardware on the surface of Mars?

Or to admitting what his "mission" truly was along with who and from where in NBC News he was hired and paid?

Bob...

Was Mr. Oberg's email to Ms. Ferrair the type of journalism you would want your local TV station to investigate in your neighborhood?

Was it fair and unbiased?

Or was it DESIGNED with some other intent?

Bob...
commonsensecentral.net...

JimO
The history of Bob's posted messages about me is extensive, but it's over at Bara's blog.

He did quote the email correctly, assuming the email is unaltered. I've asked Boyle why he felt knowledgeable enough to issue such a blanket statement and will post the results.

But Bob did handle that message accurately, otherwise, and my comment was inappropriate based on that example.

JimO, I ask in good faith, in case I have genuinely missed your update, in which case I apologise for wasting your time:

Have you posted the results of Boyle's response to you, regarding your above quote? If not, will we be able to expect a reply in the near future?

Thanks for your time.

Robert is so upset with a concept he calls the 'MEANSTREAM" media that.. gosh, he can't even spell a word he himself invented. Look at his thread title:

"How MEAMSTREAM MEDIA gets its slimy name"

I'm not the object of any rational investigation -- my decades of quality space-related investigations stand on their own. Aside from the amusement value, in my view Robert's views are worthless except for what could be a darker purpose -- distract, and discredit results that conflict with claims made in Dark_Mission.

I don't disclose internal communications with my clients, any clients, ever.

And for laughs, note: 'budget' refers to time. Unlike (apparently) Robert, I don't have an infinite amount, even in the case where maybe his own family could use more of his attention.

Originally posted by JimO
I don't disclose internal communications with my clients, any clients, ever.

Thanks for your reply, JimO.

Your above quote suggests that even if you have communicated with Boyle, that you will not disclose any details. This contradicts your earlier quote, where you stated that you 'will post the results'.

Please clarify this contradiction.

Thanks for your time, I realise that it is not in infinite supply.

So I had fat and fast fingers trying to put the whole thing together before someone could insert a reply into the stream before I was finished.

Do you REALLY think anyone missed the POINT ???

MEANSTREAM MEDIA...and HOW it got to be that way.

You're not alone, never fear...FOX news could have hired you

or even JPL itself...wouldn't surprise me:

commonsensecentral.net...

Bob...
commonsensecentral.net...

Originally posted by rhw007
You're not alone, never fear...FOX news could have hired you

Y'know, it's interesting that you'd say that. I've noticed more and more that conspiracy theorists tend to lean left.

In fact, the more outragous their conspiracy theory is, the more left they seem to lean.

I offer no insightful hypothesis about this phenomenon re: a bent toward radicalism, paranoia, "David Syndrome" nor any other possible explanation. Just an observation. Take it or leave it for what it's worth. Flame on if ye must.

Originally posted by Tuning Spork
Y'know, it's interesting that you'd say that. I've noticed more and more that conspiracy theorists tend to lean left.

In fact, the more outragous their conspiracy theory is, the more left they seem to lean.

(snip)

Flame on if ye must.

Naw...no

RAW DATA:

The Brutal Truth and Common Sense is found in the middle...in the "in-between" place.

Politics interfering with science
news.bbc.co.uk...

politicalhumor.about.com...

zfacts.com...

PLEASE notice that in the above graph...which comes from the Current White House btw...the RISE in our DEBT is coming from the 'Tax-cutting right' and they are also SPENDING more than the 'left'.

I'd rather be furthest away from owing more and more money to the Chinese, Russians and other countries.

Well...maybe that's why King Georgie Jr. decided to STOP publishing the Feds F3 number at all anymore.

Sometimes...TRUTHS are BRUTAL aren't they?

Bob...

Originally posted by tezzajw

Originally posted by JimO
I don't disclose internal communications with my clients, any clients, ever.

Thanks for your reply, JimO.

Your above quote suggests that even if you have communicated with Boyle, that you will not disclose any details. This contradicts your earlier quote, where you stated that you 'will post the results'.

Please clarify this contradiction.

Thanks for your time, I realise that it is not in infinite supply.

I thought I had summarized his comment, just not reproduced the message and headers verbatim. He had written to Robert about MSNBC's website only -- and then Robert, who had attacked me based supposedly on a Boyle 'admission' that nobody at NBC had authorized my inquiry, then attacked NBC for not denying they had authorized my inquiry, and therefore 'assumed' that they HAD. I got dizzy.

Originally posted by JimO

Originally posted by tezzajw

Originally posted by JimO
I don't disclose internal communications with my clients, any clients, ever.

Thanks for your reply, JimO.

Your above quote suggests that even if you have communicated with Boyle, that you will not disclose any details. This contradicts your earlier quote, where you stated that you 'will post the results'.

Please clarify this contradiction.

Thanks for your time, I realise that it is not in infinite supply.

I thought I had summarized his comment, just not reproduced the message and headers verbatim. He had written to Robert about MSNBC's website only -- and then Robert, who had attacked me based supposedly on a Boyle 'admission' that nobody at NBC had authorized my inquiry, then attacked NBC for not denying they had authorized my inquiry, and therefore 'assumed' that they HAD. I got dizzy.

Well your 'summary' is certainly one-sided since we don't KNOW exactly what Mr. Boyle actually wrote to you do we?

Sort of how you 'summarized' comments about Mr. Johnston by using page 2 from a Swedish UFO article where the article was actually an attack on Mr. Hoagland and NOT Mr. Johnston.

Isn't that called "mis-direction"?

Bob...

Originally posted by JimO

Originally posted by tezzajw

Originally posted by JimO
I don't disclose internal communications with my clients, any clients, ever.

Thanks for your reply, JimO.

Your above quote suggests that even if you have communicated with Boyle, that you will not disclose any details. This contradicts your earlier quote, where you stated that you 'will post the results'.

Please clarify this contradiction.

Thanks for your time, I realise that it is not in infinite supply.

I thought I had summarized his comment, just not reproduced the message and headers verbatim. He had written to Robert about MSNBC's website only -- and then Robert, who had attacked me based supposedly on a Boyle 'admission' that nobody at NBC had authorized my inquiry, then attacked NBC for not denying they had authorized my inquiry, and therefore 'assumed' that they HAD. I got dizzy.

I hope you don't get dizzy Mr. Oberg but HERE is what Mr. Boye sent me and it SPECIFCALLY STATES:

"Dear Robert et al.: The message I sent you specifically said that Jim
Oberg was not working on behalf of NBC or msnbc.com, nor at the behest
of those news organizations. I take no position on what Jim might say in
other forums."

So Mr. Boyle did NOT 'supposedly admit' you were NOT working for NBC News or MSNBC...he SPECIFICALLY stated it.

So WHY did you sign Ms. Ferrari's email inquiry AS a NBC News Space Consultant when according to Mr. Boyle (and apparently HIS boss as well) you were NOT authorized to pursue this line of inquiry for NBC in ANY form?

Bob



[edit on 23-12-2007 by rhw007]

Return-path:
Return-path:
Received: from ms-mta-05 (ms-mta-05-smtp.nyroc.rr.com [10.10.4.107])
by ms-mss-01.nyroc.rr.com
(iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.10 (built Dec 26 2005))
with ESMTP id for [email protected];
Mon, 12 Nov 2007 12:15:29 -0500 (EST)
Received: from hrndva-mx-09.mgw.rr.com (hrndva-mx-09.mgw.rr.com [24.28.204.28])
by ms-mta-05.nyroc.rr.com
(iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.10 (built Dec 26 2005))
with ESMTP id for [email protected]
(ORCPT [email protected]); Mon, 12 Nov 2007 12:15:29 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mail5.msnbc.com ([207.13.120.89]) by hrndva-mx-09.mgw.rr.com
with ESMTP; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 12:15:11 -0500
Received: from MSNBC-VW1.exchange.msnbc.com ([3.4.4.68])
by mail5.msnbc.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon,
12 Nov 2007 12:14:59 -0500
Received: from MSNBC-EX-MAIL1.interactive.msnbc.com ([3.4.4.83])
by MSNBC-VW1.exchange.msnbc.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon,
12 Nov 2007 09:14:58 -0800
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 09:14:57 -0800
From: "Alan Boyle (MSNBC-JV)"
Subject: RE: To the science editor
In-reply-to:

To: [email protected]
Cc: Michael Wann
Message-id:

MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C8254F.8D123EF8"
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Thread-topic: To the science editor
Thread-index: AcgkBhW5AAdDShxyQWGQHWvvWYD32wBNQ1UgAASq/fA=
X-MID: 1681827409
X-RR-Connecting-IP: 207.13.120.89
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
References:

Original-recipient: rfc822;[email protected]
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Nov 2007 17:14:58.0295 (UTC)
FILETIME=[8D471870:01C8254F]
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 071111-1, 11/11/2007), Inbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C8254F.8D123EF8
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Dear Robert: Jim is employed by NBC News as an analyst on a consultant
basis - basically a freelance vendor - and not on a full-time basis. He
has other interests and other clients in addition to his work for NBC
and msnbc.com, and this is one of those other interests. He isn't
pursuing this discussion in response to an assignment from msnbc.com,
and his comments don't make that implication. The most relevant comment
in the material you cite would be his observation that "all material I
obtain is usable for them or other clients" - which is self-evident when
you think about the nature of the consultant business. All the best,
Alan Boyle, science editor, msnbc.com

=20

________________________________

From: Michael Wann=20
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 6:49 AM
To: Alan Boyle (MSNBC-JV)
Subject: FW: To the science editor

=20

=20

=20
=============================================================================



Return-path:
Return-path:
Received: from ms-mta-03 (ms-mta-03-smtp [10.10.4.10])
by ms-mss-01.nyroc.rr.com
(iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.10 (built Dec 26 2005))
with ESMTP id for [email protected];
Mon, 12 Nov 2007 14:52:43 -0500 (EST)
Received: from clmboh-mx-12.mgw.rr.com (clmboh-mx-12.mgw.rr.com [65.24.7.66])
by ms-mta-03.nyroc.rr.com
(iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.10 (built Dec 26 2005))
with ESMTP id for [email protected]
(ORCPT [email protected]); Mon, 12 Nov 2007 14:52:43 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mail4.msnbc.com ([207.46.169.50]) by clmboh-mx-12.mgw.rr.com
with ESMTP; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 14:52:43 -0500
Received: from MSNBC-VW1.exchange.msnbc.com ([3.4.4.68])
by mail4.msnbc.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon,
12 Nov 2007 11:52:41 -0800
Received: from MSNBC-EX-MAIL1.interactive.msnbc.com ([3.4.4.83])
by MSNBC-VW1.exchange.msnbc.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon,
12 Nov 2007 11:52:41 -0800
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 11:52:40 -0800
From: "Alan Boyle (MSNBC-JV)"
Subject: RE: To the science editor and FCC
In-reply-to:
To: Robert Williams ,
"[email protected]" ,
Keith Olbermann , TechNews
Cc: Kevin J Martin , Michael Wann
Message-id:

MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C82565.9540030E"
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Thread-topic: To the science editor and FCC
Thread-index: AcglYAbtZdlO46BCR82YurCB3qIw7AABJSpg
X-MID: 1738722295
X-RR-Connecting-IP: 207.46.169.50
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
References:



Original-recipient: rfc822;[email protected]
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Nov 2007 19:52:41.0446 (UTC)
FILETIME=[95C15860:01C82565]
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 071112-0, 11/12/2007), Inbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C82565.9540030E
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Dear Robert et al.: The message I sent you specifically said that Jim
Oberg was not working on behalf of NBC or msnbc.com, nor at the behest
of those news organizations. I take no position on what Jim might say in
other forums. Please do not twist these brief comments to your own
purposes. I'm taking the liberty of also forwarding this e-mail to my
supervisor just to keep him posted on this issue. Best, Alan Boyle,
science editor, msnbc.com=20

=20

Boy, as the 'Ken Johnston credentials' and his accusations of NASA coverup and fraud continue to disintegrate, you really, really are frantic to distract attention from that debacle, aren't you?

Originally posted by JimO
Boy, as the 'Ken Johnston credentials' and his accusations of NASA coverup and fraud continue to disintegrate, you really, really are frantic to distract attention from that debacle, aren't you?

No I am not..but I WOULD like to start at the BEGINNING...

At that happens to come when YOU...as a "NBC NEWS Space Consultant" sent that email to Ms. Ferrari with what I and others perceive as an intended SMEAR campaign against Dr. Ken Johnston.

THAT IS THE BEGINNING of the questioning of credentials.

YOU say you HAD the authority to use the term "NBC News" since 'someone' from 'some department' within NBC hired you.

You also stated that Mr. Boyle NEVER said NO ONE at NBC hired you...well look above...He DID say it.

Why would he, and presumambly HIS boss say you were NOT working for NBC news and you say you were when sending that email to Ms. Ferrari?

So again....YOUR credentials in USING the "NBC News" as a signatory for the email...which would put a LOT more emphasis on the inquiry that just "Space Consultant" is in question.

You also have not explained why you used a Swedish UFO site as a 'source' for Ken Johnston when the entire article is really about Richard Hoagland and not Ken Johnston.

Again, from my perspective, it allowed you to get Ms. Ferrari to read something that was PRESUMABLY said...even the article is questionable on this...that the comments were unverifyable that they were censured...sp how do we KNOW the following was truely said by Mictchell in that Art Bell interview?

"In the Art Bell interview Mitchells coments of Hoagland finally drops down to such a level they had to be censured. Or what do you say about this:
- Hoagland must have been masturbating too much and whakened his brain cells out of his little pecker."

THAT is the line you particular wanted to implant in Ms. Ferrari's mind?

And without verification that such was said in actuallity?

YOU picked the source and it was nearly ENTIRELY about Richard Hoagland and NOT Ken Johnston.

It is also inaccurate at this site in that the article states:


"Hoagland don't want to go as far as to say that NASA has polished their pictures to prevent the public to find anomalies, but at the same time he posts this picture (se above) that has nothing unusual on the Goddard Space Centers copy, but on the Houstons-copy has a reflection of something that Hoagland belives is a huge glass-debris and points at the possibilty that NASA has retouched it to hide the fact."

When in actuallity in nearly all of Chapter 4 of the Dark Mission the authors ARE accusing NASA of airbrushing negatives and also misfiling and mislabeling Apollo and other Lunar data on numurous occasions. So that site you cited as a 'source' isn't much of a REAL source at all except for you to get Ms. Ferrari to read that ONE page of the article.

So...if YOU say NBC hired you and Mr. Boyle and his BOSS at the Space News department saw you were NOT working for NBC News...then what justification did you have in using NBC News credentials on a "private" inquiry?

Bob...

Robert has decided that NBC News was never interested in the Hoagland book. Oh?

Sadly for Robert's grip on reality, there's one person he does trust, who is quite explicit that NBC did have an interest in the story: Dick Hoagland.

Russian Media Publicity Explosion (Nov 13, 2007)
www.enterprisemission.com...

FALSE STARTS AND 'NEGATIVE GREETINGS' CONFOUND AMERICAN MEDIA EFFORTS
To be fair, a number of mainstream American press entities -- such as the Washington Post -- did show up. They didn't actually write anything, but they were obviously curious.
NBC Nightly News wanted to interview Ken and me for their evening network news broadcast. Unfortunately, they wanted to conduct the interview on MONDAY night, BEFORE the Tuesday press briefing. ..


Now, what was that complaint that my inquiries about Johnston's credentials were somehow evil because NBC was never interested in Hoagland and his reliance on Johnston's stories?

Especially since Hoagland was writing stuff such as "On Tuesday, October 30, 2007, Dr. Ken Johnston -- former Manager of NASA's Data and Photo Control Department during the Apollo program -- presented breakthrough evidence with me at the National Press Club in Washington, DC..."

... when my independent investigations, which included asking JPL about this very question, were indicating that Johnston was never in charge of any irreplaceable lunar image archives, but rather seems to have been a 27-year-old shipping clerk in the lunar laboratory whose task (an important and honorable one, to be sure) was to ship off moon samples (and photographs of them) to the REAL scientists.

As to "Dr." Johnston, that academic title appears to be based on a misinterpretation or misrepresentation of a certificate Johnston seems to have bought many years later from a short-lived mail-order company in Colorado, labeled "Doctor of Metaphysics" (NOT "Doctor of Philosophy", which a REAL 'PhD' requires) from a 'seminary' with no campus, library, or faculty -- just a printing press.

Naturally, the answers to the questions I've been asking are severely damaging to Hoagland's book and thesis -- hence the demonization of the questioner by fanatics such as Robert.