Yeah, the title adds a bit of sensationalism, but if CNN follows its past treatment of
the subject, I'm not expecting too much... of course I'll watch, out of curiosity, even
though it's all too apparent that Larry King isn't the best of interviewers.
I think those who are seriously interested in this are still rather incensed with CNN's
last attempt, where they crammed too many guests into a one-hour show
(loaded with commercial breaks), knowing that they couldn't possibly treat the
subject in an objective manner.. so what's the real purpose here? Objectivity or
LJ 11/9/2007 8:15:43 PM
Well, after having watched this installment of Larry King, I must confess this
installment was just slightly better than his previous one. I'm not overly impressed
with Larry King as an interviewer..
But, despite this being another one-hour Larry King program, I enjoyed listening to the
panelists who, for at least the first half of the show, didn't have to contend with or
compete for air time against a slew of skeptics. I thought each of the guests
presented themselves pretty well. Shirley Maclaine's comments were equally
impressive as well.
I've harped on it before and will share it again, that there's absolutely no way that I
can change my position that something extraordinary did occur at Bentwaters, as
originally reported. The panelists here (Haut and Penniston) reaffirmed my belief.
I think it's noteworthy that Haut pointed out his superiors had ultimately decided to
leave the matter in the hands of the british government, since the event occurred
Nick Pope, who only appeared briefly, at least acknowledges that the UK seems
to be 'open-minded' to the subject, which I think is a step above everyone else.
The US ought to at least take the same position, in the very least. I think the public
could handle that very well.
James McGaha, a noted skeptic, comes on late in the show to totally debunk the
Bentwaters testimony, as a result of misinterpretations and improper use of their
equipment. What a complete joke.. Penniston and Haut stood their ground and
made McGaha look like an absolute moron, imo. Two Larry King shows and both
times the skeptical side was shredded.
According to their own site poll, which I should point out isn't scientific, 83% of
those who voted, voted that they believe that there is extraterrestrial life.
ONtheWAYout 11/9/2007 8:34:17 PM
I just finished watching this episode, and like you said, it was just a little
bit better than the other show. Larry king needs to continue interviewing
celebrities, such as they are, and leave the UFO business to someone else.
The thing about it though, is that Larry King is not the only person who could
jump on the bandwagon, although Larry just did a little hop and not a big jump.
There has to be some serious Media folk who could put on a show a lot better
than Larry King ever could.
This Jim character, the debunker, has to be a hired government gun that only
has one job in life, and that is to call everyone a nutbag, in his own subtle way,
and that everything that is seen or witnessed, no matter how high up the ladder
that person may be, is seeing Jupiter, or Venus or is just not seeing what they
think they are. He was quick to have an immediate answer for ALL of us,
and for ALL things. It just plain didn't happen. Especially after Haut clearly stated
that he not only witnessed the craft in the forest, but he actually touched it with his
hands and felt it, and was standing right next to the craft. Jim stated that Haut was
not seeing or touching what he did.
I just hope the conference coming up on Monday will finally tell it like it is, but I am not
going to hold my breath for obvious reasons. We have all been lied to so much,
and have had this phenomenon belittled for so long, it is time to get the last laugh,
and believe me, we will before long. It will just take the right people to do it, with
an open minded Media to get the news out there like never before. And it has to be
on a continuous and ongoing basis. Daily, weekly, hourly, nonstop until the entire
Earth knows about what is going on, whether you want to hear it or not.
Bill H. 11/9/2007 10:53:13 PM
I watched it too and could tell that this show compared to the last was absolutely pro UFO disclosure. They had interviews with past presidents like Carter who had UFO encounters of his own. I thought that there was going to be an annoucement to better explain this meeting thats supposed to happen on November 12th. I thought they had mentioned 7 or 8 high level military representatives from these countrys that were going to have a meeting. Does anybody have more in depth information about who, what and where? I must have missed that. Excellent panel tho and they all were believable and never wavered with their accounts. We'll have to wait and see what follows. Go UFO unveiling.....Bill H
LJ 11/10/2007 7:29:49 AM
Near the end of the program, Fife Symington and James Fox also commented about
how several United Airlines employees had observations, but were unwilling to go
on record for fear of losing their jobs...
I believe this is a legitimate fear that still thrives throughout big business. It
demonstrates that the subject is still taboo, if one values their job. I just don't forsee
any airline or any other major corporate entity, allowing their employees to openly
discuss ufos or other issues, which might be potentially embarrassing or subject
It seemed fine that former President Carter openly discussed having seen an
unidentified object, which he called it as being... but then he sort of backed off
of that by saying that he didn't believe these were little green men from mars (or
something along that line).. almost as if he were trying to brush it off in some
Can you imagine some corporate president or board giving their nod of approval for
their employees to openly discuss whatever they wished? No way.. public
perceptions and reputation means everything in the market.. obviously, perceptions
influence your standings and profits and profits are the name of the game. Speculation
alone can raise or lower your standings dramatically.
From a corporate view, you're just not going to jeopardize your reputation and good
standing over something that still draws laughter or is very controversial.
Unless the government decides to reverse their position, which they have dedicated
themselves to, the trend for change will be slow in coming... What's to be gained,
if the government were to move from the position of complete denial to one
which promotes 'we're open-minded' to the possibilities? Nothing is to be gained,
because this would open the door to more conspiracy theories and likely would
subject the Air Force to a task that they fought so long and so hard to get away
from... If you're on the inside, controlling the strings, you're not likely to jeopardize
your activities, funding, projects, etc... by relaxing your position.
I theorize that those who do control the strings on this ufo issue have probably
been watching public reaction over the years, but they aren't any closer to
relinquishing what they know unless there were some spectacular ufo sighting
or event. Sorry for being rather pessimistic, but I just don't believe that any
conference would amount to anything significant..
bill7907 11/10/2007 11:00:53 AM
They need to keep that pressure and let more and more people know about the subject so that pressure is made on the governement.
If we all stand up, we will eventually win this situation.
There is nothing stronger than the people.
7thson 11/11/2007 6:58:04 PM
Carter's comments were weird.
He didn't even need to volunteer that last silly self-debunking metaphor.
I just don't even know what to think or say about Carter doing this.
You may be right LJ.
Carter may have thought that by throwing out this silly disclaimer that somehow this would present him as less than looney UFO fringe.
The show was better. No ET little puppets being shaken in front of the camera by a skeptic seated between two serious UFO researchers .
No model rockets being toyed with and 15 minutes of wasted time taken up by a subject meandering former astronaut.
And I noticed this time that Larry King didn't twirl his index finger, roll his eyes back and purse his lips into that "whhoooo" sound look. He didn't give these hand signals and facial gestures that he normally does to safely distance himself from his loony UFO guests.
After all, Larry's got a career to protect.
Can't get to close to agreeing with this fringe.
But, the Brentwater case does seem so clearly sincere. Yes, all that skeptic James something threw out were the same incredibly generalized excuses. That "everyone" didn't understand what they were actually seeing and that the things they saw were innocuous nothings like lighthouse lights, planets, etc.
But when the skeptics are never there and they always do this mind boggling blanket assesment of the mental states and emtional states of the witnesses, and the actual participants of these events present such specific details and perfectly matching stories, listeners to these skeptics have no choice but to laugh them off.
From a pure logic stand point these skeptics seem to be on a junior high level compared to many of these reporting witnesses being on a college level. Those Brentwater guys seemed so much more honest and convincing than that skeptic James M.
I really can't recall any skeptic I have ever seen on TV or heard on the radio sounding anything but ridiculous.
I also wonder who pays these people to keep writing and showing up on TV shows to throw this ridiculous and illogical stuff out.
Even Stanton Friedman has often said, that he barely makes enough money through speaking fees and book sales to do what he does.
And since no one buys debunking UFO books by skeptics...how the heck can these skeptics afford to spend so much of their time doing their false propaganda thing?
I am more suspicious of these skeptics for these reasons than so called loony UFO reporters.
LJ 11/11/2007 8:41:57 PM
Enjoyed reading your comments...
I agree with ya, that that last little comment Carter added in at the end of his remarks seemed more like a save face routine than anything else.. so, I have to question just how honest he's being.
As to Larry King, I think OTWO was pretty accurate in suggesting that Larry stay
with the celebrity side of the house.. he just doesn't come across as being genuine
on the ufo issue.. of course, I suppose it's proper for any reporter/moderator to try
to remain objective, but he just lacks something.. I don't know what it is.
I will give CNN some credit however, for at least giving some air time to the subject. I
think it was several years ago, that they did a two-hour special, with Friedman and
other guests, on location in the desert as I recall. Too bad they haven't repeated
the effort with another expanded special... I'd like to see James Fox, Charles Halt
and Sgt Penniston challenge the skeptics a little more thoroughly.. the few counters
they took at McGaha were rather good, but too brief. Maybe enough viewers will
email CNN to get them to consider doing another 2-hour special down the road.
Btw, in my previous response, I misspelled LTC Halt's name as HAUT (I was
thinking of the public information officer in the Roswell case named Haut), instead of
HALT, in this case.
I also agree with your comments about the skeptical view, as has been represented
on these last two Larry King installments. I don't mind considering what they have
to say, if it's a reasonable argument... but, in these last two installments of Larry
King, the skeptics embarrassed themselves (Michael Shermer (spelling?) the first
time and James McGaha, this time around).
At least this time around, I thought the panelists had a wee bit better opportunity to
express themselves than they were able to do in the previous show. Again, I
thought Shirley MacLaine's comments were interesting as well.. she brought up
one of my favorite cases (the 1952 sightings over the capital) and indicated that
she's talked to many people about this subject. So, I admire her courage to openly
speak her views, as the others have done.
Heres the link. Today is the day for the National Press Conference. Amazing show.
Scott Elliot 11/12/2007 10:43:20 AM
I agree with you LJ. This time the UFO discussion was much more serious. The witnesses were incrediable. I couldnt believe my ears when they discribed they actually touched and inspected the black triangle craft for 45 mins before it took off. Did you see the sketch of the symbols? Maybe it relates back to the "Issac article". Anyways truely amazing and I never heard this story.
The skeptic, James McGaha, I dont understand how he could sit there, good thing not face to face, and tell them what they saw they didnt understand. It sounds clear to me. They paid debunkers are just the worse.