Combat Diary Number 7

'The chair she sat in, like a burnished throne, glowed on the marble, where the glass
held up by standards wrought with fruited vines From which a Cupidon peeped out
(another hid his eyes behind his wing)
Doubled the flames of seven-branched candelabra Reflecting light upon the table as
The glitter of her jewels rose to meet it, From satin cases poured in rich profusion;
In vials of ivory and coloured glass Unstoppered, lurked her strange synthetic perfurmes,
Unguent, powdered, or - troubled, confused And drowned the sense in odours; stirred by the air
That freshened from the window, these ascended In fattening the prolonged candleflames,
Flung their smoke into the laquearia, Stirring the patter on the coffered ceiling."
T.S. Eiot The Wasteland

"To define 'thinking' in such a way that the activity which Shakespeare pursued in composing the speeches of Hamlet, or Ulysses, or Lear has to be dimissed as 'non-thought', is to let thinking fall into that rationalist trap from which it is likely to emerge a cripple, full of animosity against that other deformed creature, mutilated in the same operation: the Romantic emotion. If thought, stripped of imaginative feeling, and emotion, stripped of imaginative thought, become the dominant modes of thinking and feeling, the outcome is the 'Leid-stadt', that unsufferable city of sorrows, or the Waste Land, in which the spirits of Nietzsche, ad well as Rilke, as well as Mr Eliot feel ill at ease."
Erich Heller, The Disinherited Mind

In Combat Diary 7, poor Panzerben begs forgiveness of Laurel Oplatka and Mother Hall tries to rival Andy in cursing, which is a very silly thing to do.
The Brentford Polonius gives praise and consequently, the Bad Man can now die, having achieved something that no-one on Earth has ever achieved.
Mac Tonnies and George Hansen referee, and Laurel Oplatka gives inspiration to all concerned.


Question: Why did 2,500 hysterical American women faint recently?
Answer: They saw the length of the Bad Man's sentences.
Prize Winner: Wendy Connors 

Wendy wins a night out at the Chippy Bar in Brentford Leisure Centre with Toxic Shock, The Brentford Polonius, and Moody and Sankey.

From: Colin Bennett <>
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 10:54:41 -0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 14:18:23 -0500
Subject: Re: Corso - Bennett

>From: Laurel Oplatka <>
>To: <
>Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 19:07:33 -0800 (PST)
>Subject: Re: Corso - Oplatka

>>From: George Hansen <>
>>To: <
>>Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 19:36:41 -0800 (PST)
>>Subject: Re: Corso - Hansen

>>>From: Mac Tonnies <>
>>>To: <
>>>Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 11:06:45 -0800 (PST)
>>>Subject: Re: Corso - Tonnies

Dear Laurel,

My goodness darling please forgive a chauvinist pig for not
seeing that your Christian name indicated that you were of the
fair sex. I apologise again. Well, Laurel you started a fair old
battle, didn't you? You must think you parachuted in on the
battle of Stalingrad! Welcome to the best WebTV in the Western
World. There's blood on the floor, casualties galore, hoaxes and
tricks, ritual cursing, cultural fear, paradigm jumping,
unrequited love,and even the occasional complete disappearance.
We've got here everything bar cannibalism, incest and human

>Why do I insist upon reading/pondering/experiencing the hugely
>erudite, vastly witty and transcendental mind of Mr. Bennett? My
>introduction to this 'UFO thing' (referring to it as a phenomena
>no longer even makes sense to me), was by way of the Lorenzen's
>APRO - their works and friendship - which I respected very much.
>I also indeed respect Stanton Friedman and Richard Hall.

Thank you for your assessment of my work. Mr George Hansen in a
recent post, agrees with you:

>>Judging from some of the comments on Colin Bennett's posts, I
>>gather that many ufologists do not appreciate just how pertinent
>>postmodern and deconstructionist theory is for ufology.

>>The intellectual vertigo that some may feel after reading
>>Bennett is altogether similar to that experienced by
>>establishment scientists who read the UFO literature.

>>Unfortunately, most ufologists are trapped in beliefs in
>>literalism and in the transparency of language, beliefs shared
>>by both scientists and religious fundamentalists--the major
>>antagonists of ufology. This is no accident.

>>Those who denounce Colin Bennett's approach are woefully
>>ignorant. There is a massive amount of pertinent theory
>>supporting his approach. Ufologists are welcome to ignore that
>>work, but if they do, they should not be surprised at their
>>reception in intellectual circles. Their sneers at Derrida are
>>only too telling.

Unfortunately there are just a few people on this List who don't
agree with such assessment of my work. But I will convert them
in time before you very eyes, Laurel. The problem is that some
people are resisting postmodernist conversion. My mission is to
convince them to think of a postindustrial reality as regards
the UFO, so well summed up recently by a post from Mac Tonnies:

>>>I don't think open-minded science and Bennett's postmodern (or
>>>whatever you want to call it) take are mutually exclusive at
>>>all. But when one starts to push the other out of the
>>>investigative arena, we're in deep trouble. Bennett's "Looking
>>>for Orthon" and Hynek's "The UFO Experience" are equally
>>>relevant. They relate to the subject in unique, but very
>>>meaningful, ways.


>>>Bennett redefines and mutates our fundamental approach to the
>>>UFO enigma as ably as Vallee. (And when he's not forced to
>>>constantly defend himself, his prose is remarkably agreeable.

>>>I urge Bennett's detractors to read "Looking for Orthon" and
>>>"Politics of the Imagination," available by clicking the URL below:


But some ufologists have grave difficulty with postmodernist
abstractions as others have difficulty with the nature and
theology of the transcendental Eucharist. I intend to do
something about this. But some people want to disbelieve. One of
my parishioners as it were is Andy Roberts, an archetypal
disbeliever if ever there was. He is a bit of a Stalinist
Ufological commissar whose soul I am absolutely determined to
save from the purgatory of factual dialectics. This boy is built
for disbelief, big time. This boy has a habit. He fixes on
disbelief like it was going out of fashion. Furtive folk sell
this stuff at his school gates, and this boy is a sucker for
their wares. He would disbelieve anything. He needs disbelief
like actors need cocaine, Catholic priests need young men with
teddy bears tucked under their arms and this List needs light

The boy Roberts has a very great but wounded soul. The pain of
his habit of disbelief causes him to roar and bay to the moon
during certain times of the lunar phase. I am working on an Andy
Roberts wall chart for schools shops, and factories. This will
show the exact times he goes out and howls, cursing every single
Ufologist from Chipping Norton to Alabama who should or would or
could possibly believe in alien presence.

He has another peculiar habit even more absurd and dangerous. He
interviews people and takes notes and he calls this being real.
He reaches real conclusions and writes real books and knows real
people. Everything about him is real.

This is why he is worth saving. Such innocence about reality
must be sacred.

I will heal this fallen realist if it is the last thing I do.
Though he thinks I am the devil incarnate and will fill the
jocund air with bellows extraordinary when he reads this, I have
a kind of love for this brute, and an infinite nostalgia for the
real world he lives in. This is a world of pre-postmodern
appearances in which real doctors cure real people, policemen
arrest real criminals, real enemies get attacked by real
soldiers, and what you see is what you get. This reality trip is
intense, sacred mystical, and profound, though it is not
advisable to tell him so. Occasionally he finds things that are
not real, and howls and bays at his favourite targets: UFO
sightings, long words, claims of alien presence, abstract
reasoning, and his favourite piece of unreality: highly
intelligent well-spoken middle-class Home Counties women
writers. All these things are unreal to him. And unreality is
bad. May blessings be upon thy limitedoptions, Andy Roberts. A
box of partially-real gray scales is on its way to thee both for
thy inspiration and thy comfort.

In comparison, Richard Hall (a believer, I believe) is a very
and nice rather saintly American gentleman, though not of my
parish, unfortunately. Though a clever and sophisticated good
writer, he succumbs far too readily to the goad, and threatens
to have no more to do with me almost every single post he
writes. Unlike some other notable people I could mention, dear
Richard always comes back for more. He loves it all. I suspect
we have in Richard someone who is on his way to postmodern Rome,
after having experienced similar doubts to those of Cardinal
Manning, so eloquently described by Lytton Strachey in his book,
Eminent Victorians, a phrase that describes Richard exactly. Of
late I have parted company with Richard purely over metaphysical
issues. The great world argues about money, property, sex,
ambition, and new cars. Only Ufologists as part of a Last Days
culture argue about such edifying abstractions.

I am ready to receive the confessions of either Richard Hall or
Andy Roberts at any time night or day. They may contact me
through e-mail should either of them want confidential advice
about a change of faith to postmodernism, a thing not to be
taken lightly.

As regards dear Andy, his ingrained Protestantism is more
difficult to deal with than Hall's purely intellectual
difficulties. I have to apply some crude methods to make Roberts
to pay attention to matters of belief, that is things between
the real and the unreal. Whenever I don't hear his curses coming
towards me for some time, I tempt him out from his river bank
with a piece of his favourite fried fish on the end of a line,
and when he is in the net, I attempt to give him that spiritual
instruction without which life is meaningless. This calms him
down, and he squats by the waters side side as I read him
poetry, his head on one side as a dog listens to high-pitched

Laurel, I bet you do not get letters like this in every post.
But I want to rescue both these men, introduce them to the
postmodern ideas of Charles Fort, and concept of a non-
mechanical reality. I want to save Andy Roberts from becoming an
Arthur Scargill figure, howling on the edge of the long-gone
Yorkshire coalfield, pining for the last years of the old
traditional British collier working-class. As for Richard Hall,
I am (was!) the only person at the moment who is trying to stop
him settling down for naps in the afternoon at his club and
waking in terror with my face before him. Surrounding us here on
the List are hundreds of equally interesting Ufological folk who
have taken the wafer quite of their own accord.

This is Web TV this is, Laurel. Every single things here is a
postmodern act of some kind. God help us all when this List gets
the technology for individual Web cameras. I would hate to be
cursed and sworn at by Andy Roberts in his birthday suit first
thing in the morning, or ticked off for not being "factually
objective" and "scientific" by Richard Hall whilst he is
polishing his silver or riding to hounds.

Not that I am against scientists. If I were God I would give
them a grant. But it would be a hell of a lot smaller than the
swine get at the moment.

Laurel, welcome to the greatest social comedy of the age:
Ufology. Enjoy it now whilst ye may. It gives the very best in
joy -- a secret and private and totally elitist decadent
indulgence. The peasant soaps and vulgar media and guilded
prizes are not yet here, neither are the spoilt-brats of pop
music, the only spoilt brat on the List being the much-abused
ME. And nobody gets a penny for anything at all. Contrary to
reports, what Ufologists earn would not keep rabbits in a hutch,
and don't let them tell you otherwise.

All that said, you have found strange and exotic flowers blooming
unseen on the floor of an enchanted forest. This is because the
great outer world knows almost absolutely nothing about the
books and manuals and performers (in most cases a far better
word than author) on this List, and in that I include myself.
UFO authors are part of a survival cult. Our only consolation is
that in these Last Days, our books will probably be the last
books to be read! The last irradiated human beings will hold
up copies of Mothman and Passport to Magonia as final proof
that Mind has only tenuous connections to physical circumstances.

For some, finding Ufology is rather like finding the house in the
forest in Alain-Fournier's Le Grand Meaulnes. Were the
great world to touch us, the spell would be broken, and
Ufology would not be there in the morning, just a round
circle in the grass full of the ghosts of all the dancing figures
of the night before. I have a suitcase packed for that moment,
and like Le Comte de Saint Germain, I won't be seen again
for a hundred years until that next round of comic intellectual
festivities called "advances" and "breakthroughs" begins its
Great Cycle again

Like Adamski, and indeed Andy Roberts (and Hall if he did but
know it), I am a hopeless UFO romantic. The List does not get
entertainment like this with every post. A few hate me for it.
They are always the same people in dreams and history:
humourless destroyers of poetry and inspiration, dreams and the
infinite intuition. To talk of metaphor, image, symbol, any
abstraction, sends them up like a Roman candle, fills them with
cultural fear. They are the crucifiers of all imagination, and
the idea of the irrational inspiration is identified with all
moral evil.

Like Charles Fort, I have great difficulty with the concept of
objective fact. I think it is the greatest socio-political con-trick
of all time. My genes must far older than mechanism. To talk
of measuring anything with set marks is absurd to me as it
would have been for Moses. Yes, I am trained in measurement
and calculation, I know all about it, I am even quite good at it,
but I never trust it. We talk about measurement, we are tragically
committed to the culture of measurement, even though we know it is
absurd, just as we know that the inside of everyone's head is bigger
than the mountains they see. A few still refer to measurement as the
source of enlightenment. A good cure for that is to look at pictures
of oiled sea birds. That's the end of the measurement Age. God help us
all to face now "what rough beast slouches towards Bethlehem
to be born".
But as you will see Laurel, a few here on this List prefer sober
measurement and calculation, charts, statistics, films, all equipment
of the dialectical apparatus of cultural interpretation, all the stuff of
Andy's "reality", although I think that particular bear is well on his
to Rome. His energies alone will eventually defeat fact. He will
return to the psyche. I say to the last believers in fast food fact that
once you have had a UFO experience as I have had, the last thing
you want to do is measure it. How many feathers on an
angel's wing? How big? How long?Keep off the grass.

Third Republic. Angels what? What time? What what? "What seas
what shores what grey rocks and what islands what water lapping
the bow/And scent of pine and the woodthrush singing through the
fog/What images return/ O my daughter_I made this, I have
forgotten/ And remember_" (T.S. Eliot, Marina)

Well Laurel,
Looking forward to reading many more List posts from you!

Colin (Bad Man) Bennett

PS what is you next question? Whilst I wait for this, I sit here
in London surrounded by Mosque raids, threats of gas and
chemical poisoning, nuclear suitcase bombs, and hotels and
country houses overflowing with armed Taliban, all cashing their
Social Security cheques at the local Post Office. Before the
alien god attacks, I ponder an uncertain interpretation of the
Randle/Friedman dialogues. Fragments of plain text are indeed
merging, but very slowly. Myself and my Team all have a long way
to go yet before we have cracked the code. Let's hope we make it
before the Apocalypse. I would like to post even a part solution
to the List before that time.

From: Richard Hall <>
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 22:17:49 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 17:52:45 -0500
Subject: Re: Corso - Hall 

>From: Colin Bennett <>
>To: <>
>Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 19:02:21 -0000
>Subject: Ref: Corso

>>From: Richard Hall <>
>>To: <>
>>Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 19:15:39 +0000
>>Subject: Re: Corso - Hall

>Talk about a marriage of convenience! I will leave others to
>judge the surprise nuptials of Richard Hall and Andy Roberts.
>May they live happily ever after and have many children. I'd
>like to drink to the blushing bride, but I don't know which one
>it is (answers on a postcard, please!).

>But what I want to talk about is Richard accusing me of
>insincerity. Now if Richard wrote, as I do, extensively in the
>outer world as distinct from his tiny cosseted realm of Ufology,
>he would realize that in the media and journalistic world at
>least, accusations of insincerity mean always that the target
>has realized that he or she is being satirized and does not like


I am a member of the U.S. Author's Guild and have published many
books and articles, including quite a few on other subjects than

>Yes Richard I am satirizing you and your collection of facts
>and certainties worthy of the Jurassic Museum. You and Ufology
>both had better grow up and learn to take being satirized. If I
>can take it, why can't you? As I said in a previous post, the
>Brentford Polonius did a good job of satirizing of myself, and I
>had to take it. Satire would give Ufology some of that wit,
>sophistication and polish it lacks utterly, as the po-faced
>"scientific" part of it at the moment could described as
>depressing as a visit to a Salvation Army cottage-hospital for
>dogs in 1890.

Satire is making jokes about people and events, not studying
them in any serious manner. Jonathan Swift you ain't. I was much
amused by Josh Goldstein's post about you today, not so much by
his apparent Freudian slip in calling you "Colon" but by the
cogency of his remarks and the way he expressed them. Your
verbal diarrhea forces me to do major snipping, because I don't
have the time to write an encyclopedia.

>There comes a stage in the development of both a culture or
>indeed a human being where it either becomes strong enough to
>see itself as silly on occasion or not. If not, it dies sure as
>eggs is eggs.

There is a great deal that is silly in so-called "UFOlogy" (a
misnomer if there ever was one), including the notion that
reading and focusing on the most dishonest and unreliable
sources available will somehow help us to approximate the truth.
Fort did believe in approximations as you well know.


>But to the point. Your offer, Richard, to have nothing more to
>do with me was like being attacked by a run-over ice cream cone.
>Not even the wily Polonius von Brentford would have copped out
>like this. Be that as it may, I accept your surrender
>unconditionally. So you want to get out of the ring do you? You
>say you don't want to fight me anymore? You've had enough? So
>soon? Great - so that's two down, a couple of hundred thousand
>to go, and I hope they all buy the book. You've obviously have
>been hurt bad, so OK, I won't attack or satirize you any more if
>that is really what you are asking, and I think it is. Post away
>as if I didn't exist. But I will be watching for any
>backsliding, and if you attack me again, I shall reply in even
>stronger satirizing terms once more.

How does one "fight" an octopus who keeps changing the grounds
of discussion and evading the fundamental issues with his
tentacle-waving. I'm still waiting to learn how you make
decisions in every day life.

>Now your Andy Roberts is a different kettle of fish. Your
>Roberts loves pain. And the last thing he'll do is bunk out of
>the ring when the going gets rough, and it is going to get very
>rough indeed. I like that. This is going to be the best show in
>town. The cobwebbed dovecotes are all a-flutter I understand,
>and the old Pantomime Dames of Scientific Ufology are stamping
>their little feet. I am informed by countless folk that the UFO
>updates List offers the very best entertainment on the web, and
>I am proud to play a small part in what one private e-mailer
>called the Greatest Private Vaudeville on Earth.

I think Andy Roberts sincerely believes that UFOs are all
misidentifications of prosaic or exotic phenomena. I utterly
disagree with him and have said so all along, including in the
post that you are misrepresenting in your zeal to score
rhetorical points. Your problem (like that of Moseley and other
obfuscators) is that you are far more interested in taunting,
game-playing, and joking around than you are in trying to
establish the truth about the UFO phenomenon or phenomena.

So, by this message I am not entirely ignoring you, but you have
a great conceit to think that you have somehow defeated me. It
seems to be impossible to get you to honestly, sincerely, and
meaningfully debate the core issues. If that continues, than I
will not waste any further time and effort on you. Unless you
answer my repeated question about your epistemology, this will
be my last response. Because it is a total waste of time, not
that your seemingly subjective and nihilstic ideas have

- Dick

From: John Rimmer <>
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 00:30:24 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 04:54:09 -0500
Subject: Re: Corso - Rimmer

>From: Colin Bennett <>
>To: <>
>Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 19:02:21 -0000
>Subject: Ref: Corso

>Satire would also help Ufology develop more sophisticated
>languages. As a sub-culture, Ufology has developed only three
>main low-level languages: FactSpiel, DocBox, and SeClass
>(security classifications). These constitute some of the best
>Orwellian Newspeak of our time. As writing styles, immediate
>garroting by an editor would be best such authors could expect.
>I have heard of rumours of other lesser-known languages of the
>deep interior of our own heart of scientific-consumer darkness,
>such as Archspeak (archivespeak) and Labev (laboratory evidence)
>and Reschmmuter (Yiddish for research talk). These latter are
>religious languages, known and used only by a few holy men of
>the secret intellectual sales department. They are mainly
>verbal, although I have heard of apocryphal stories of published
>fragments from collectors who have paid a lot of money for them.

I must sit down and sip delicately on a cup of Aunt Augusta's
Revivifying Herb Tea for Tired Librarians, for I do feel that I
am moving towards some sort of agreement with Mr Bennett's - so
far - one man campaign to encourage art and imagination in
ufological writings.

Of course this has always been the aim of Magonia magazine, but
it seems to have passed Mr Bennett by. My records, scrawled in a
spidery Chancery hand on the backs of old catalogue cards from
the Private Case collection at the British Library - show that
he subscribed to Magonia for a mere two years, neglecting to
renew his subscription perhaps because of the financial disaster
caused by the failure of his books to rival the output of
Jeffrey Archer or Dame Catherine Cookson. As a result he may
have missed some of our more magical moments, such as a
discussion of Italian Futurism and robots with twenty-foot

Yes, I have to agree with him that too many UFO books are mere
collections of telephone numbers, heights, angles, and
ludicrously mis- estimated speeds and distances. I hope that I
may have avoided the worst of this tendency in my own submission
to the genre, "The Evidence for Alien Abductions", released, or
possibly escaped, in 1984. I recall with some pleasure a
practicing Chaos Magician congratulating me on what he
considered the best opening sentence of any chapter in any UFO
book, or possibly any book at all: "When Harry Joe Turner was
kidnapped by the aliens from beyond Alpha Centuri he was driving
$80,000 worth of tomato ketchup through Virginia."

Personally, I prefer it more in the Portuguese version: "Quando
Harry Joe Turner foi raptado por alienigenis, vindos de Alfa do
Centauro, ele viajava atraves da Virginia com um carregamento de
sumo de tomate no valor de 80 000 dolares."

Although the Dutch version brought better royalties (sales, I am
told, peaked in Curacao, Aruba and Surinam) I was never as
impressed by the translation: "Toen Harry Joe Turner werd
gekidnapt door buitenaardsen die afkomstig waren van een planet
voorbij Alpha Centauri reed hij met een vracht tomatenketchup
ter waarde van tachtigduizend dollar door de Amerikaanse staat
Virginia." I feel it lacks the fado-like plangency of the

I would, of course, rather it had been *West* Virginia, but you can't
have everything!

I am currently re-reading John Keel's "Mothman Prophecies", and
marvelling at how precisely he defines the nature of the
experiences of individuals and communities surrounded by
baffling ufological and Fortean events. Keel is perhaps
practicing 'gonzo journalism' before such a concept was
recognised. Far from being the supposedly disinterested observer
or 'rational' investigator, Keel himself forms part of the
events he reports. This has made him an object of scorn amongst
some on this List, who consider that he is, particularly with
the renewed interest in his work following the Mothman film -
somehow "bad for ufology", as if ufology were a branded product
or a political party.

Where Keel triumphs is in recreating the atmosphere of UFO
flaps, and allowing us to understand how people are caught up in
the dream-like events that surround them. I am sure that if
every one of the hundreds of strange phenomena that Keel
recounts in "Mothman" and his FSR articles (poetically entitled
"From My Ohio Valley Notebook", which many of us sing to the
tune of "What a Friend we have in Jesus") were investigated in
the approved Hall-way, few would survive the rigors of such an
autopsy. But that of course is what it would be, the autopsy of
plastificated corpses, as pointless as that conducted in a
disused brewery in Brick Lane a few weeks ago. For Keel is
describing living things, reporting living people and giving a
voice to living beliefs. Keel's witnesses are not recording
instruments to be played back, edited, re-recorded and then pie-
charted, codified and pinned onto wall- maps in a room over a
Chinese Restaurant in a low-rent area of one of our great

When Mr Bennett has finished writing about Edward Ruppelt, and
completed his exciting novelisation of the life and times of
Andy Roberts (our greatest living Yorkshireman now that Henry
Moore is dead) he might turn his pen towards England's own John
Keel, the provincial journalist, Daily Mirror stringer, poacher,
poet and part-time hypnotist, Arthur Shuttlewood.

Now virtually forgotten in his own land, Shuttlewood almost
single- handedly created a Magic Kingdom in the small West
Country town of Warminster. Yes, I know the photograph that
started it all, and filled the pages of the national newspapers,
was a button or a paper plate, but that misses the point.
Shuttlewood created art. He created an alternate world where
people stood on windy hilltops and shone flashlights into empty
skies; where space brothers from Aenstria made telephone calls
without putting any money in the phonebox; where men could run
into pubs shouting "He's had a physical contact!" and not get
thrown out. Where little orphan children sat transfixed as
corruscating galaxies of lights tumbled across the arc of the
heavens in a medley of colour and wonder. Where the English
language was transformed by a wild talent which whipped
adjectives to within an inch of their lives, and made five verbs
do the work of one!

Mr Bennett, Arthur Shuttlewood is the only fit subject for your

I must go, as Mrs Rimmer is bringing me my much needed cup of
Revivifying Herb Tea, the foxes are howling in the churchyard
over the grave of John Dee, and tiredness numbs my typing

Farewell for now!

John Rimmer
Magonia Magazine

UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' 
Location: > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2003 > Jan > Jan 21 

Re: Corso - Hansen
From: George Hansen <>
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 09:26:48 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 16:32:31 -0500
Subject: Re: Corso - Hansen

>From: Josh Goldstein <>
>Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 01:28:48 +0100
>Subject: Re: Corso - Goldstein

>I would highly recommend that you and all Listerions
>follow what is being learned in neuroscience.

>I follow UFO research for one primary reason.
>That is to see what in the field of study can
>pass the muster of real science.

Yes, "real science," real "truth."

Like religious fundamentalists, Goldstein, of the neuroscience
persuasion, dares not read the literature of competing
denominations (e.g., anthropology). To do so would subject him
to the jeers and sneers of his brethren.

The canon of his denomination is sacred, and everything must be
interpreted according to it.

Christian fundamentalists denounce papist ideas as of the devil.
They shun talk of magic or mysticism. Their intellectual
descendants, the neuroscientists, maintain the same prohibitions
-- markers to signify the boundaries of their sect. The taboo is
strong. For neuroscientists and their acolytes to read works
outside their denomination would endanger their very souls.

They cling to their "truth." They shout it from the ramparts of
academe. But they sense that it is decaying, and that is why
they are shouting.


The Trickster and the Paranormal

UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' 
Location: > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2003 > Jan > Jan 22 

Re: Corso - Oplatka
From: Laurel Oplatka <>
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 01:53:33 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 07:53:41 -0500
Subject: Re: Corso - Oplatka

>From: Colin Bennett <>
>To: <>
>Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 10:54:41 -0000
>Subject: Re: Corso

Dear Colin,

I thank you whole-heartedly for your recent ultra-sane,
mind/psyche expanding, often flat-out hilarious and
iconoclastically intelligent post! Yes, it was a truly (along
with your other List posts) delightful, entertaining, absorbing,
and unequivocably "wide" read. It now lives in my "Saved" Webtv

First, with all due respect to Dick Hall, I have to disagree
with his evaluation of your satirical powers, i.e., "Jonathan
Swift, he ain't".. no, you are not, because, in my opinion, you
have surpassed Swift in both wit and souffulness.

Initially, I found the humor (which possesses a surrealistic
Monty Pythonesque subtext, and is reminiscent of the audacious
satire of William S. Burroughs), in your prose to be a kind of
"secondary gain", but now it's experienced as being
representative of the Marshall McCluhan syndrome. In the 1960's,
McCluhan's "The Medium is the Message" came to the fore in many
discussions relating to Kubrick's film, "2001: A Space Odyssey"
which was deemed a prime and apt example of his (McCluhan's)
"communications theory". I see this process at work here in your
writings, Colin - in that your prose, to me, is experientially
expansive. The style (form) and content of your writing IS
"one". Through the very artistry and inventiveness of your
prose, the "essence" of post modernism is "expressed" and may be
experienced by the reader who opens to it.

And this is perhaps somewhat akin to Magonia Rimmer's comment
re: J. Keel - "Keel himself forms part of the events he

Further, it has occurred to me that you, Colin Bennett, are to
"Ufology" what R. D. Laing is to Psychiatry. In his book, "The
Politics of Experience", Laing (as noted by Rollo May), "goes
beyond the usual theories of mental illness and alienation, and
makes a convincing case for the "madness of morality". Your
"Objective factualism is but one game" and "My genes are far
older than mechanisms" observations are reflected
philosophically in this excerpt from Laing, ("Transcendental
Experience") about a man (as recorded by Karl Jaspers), who
underwent a sort of mental breakdown in an attempt to bring
himself closer to his higher source of life. He did not undergo
conventional psychoanalysis or "treatment", but rather, through
his own efforts, overcame his affliction and experienced an
"illumination". This enabled him to experience, via
transcendental mode, " a self just like that of other people
(which) grew in me again but behind and above it stood a greater
and more comprehensive self which impressed me with something of
what is eternal, unchanging, immortal and inviolable..... I
believe it would be good for many if they were acquainted with
such a higher self and that there are people who have attained
this goal in fact by kinder means". This, to me, expresses
pleasingly an example of one aspect of PM. And I found relevant
to your appeals (aimed at some of your detractors), these
ponderings of Laing: "Many people (used to) believe that the
"seat" of the soul was somewhere in the brain. Since brains
began to be opened up frequently, no one has seen "the soul". As
a result of this and like revelations, many people do not now
believe in the soul. Who could suppose that angels move the
stars, or be so superstitious as to suppose that because one
cannot see one's soul at the end of a microscope it does not

But I do not think your intent is to say that science is to be
supplanted in toto, am I right? To my sensibilities, this
"issue" is not an either/or proposition. Does this not echo the
suggestion of Mac Tommies: "Bennett's 'Looking for Orthon' and
Hynek's 'UFO Experience' are equally relevant" ? If they are not
found to be mutually exclusive, then, in considering both of
these works, could not (much of) today's Ufology be synthesized
and ultimately transcended into some sort of (not to be cliche')
new paradigm?

There are some writers who use as their sole reference something
like Espenshade's (mechanical) "Composition and Rhetoric"....
and there are others, such as yourself, (erudite, anachronism-
busting, richly open) who have absolutely exceeded, say, Ray
Bradbury's approach in "Zen In the Art of Writing".

When more than one "mode of reality" is widely considered, when
PM is no longer trounced, when the 'inner and outer' are somehow
conjoined (not in the pseudo-esoteric cultish sense), when what?
(Please fill in blank____), If and when the these "events"
occur, perhaps (then) we won't be ruined. To this end, here is
Laing again:

"As a whole we are a generation of men (and women - my addition)
so estranged from the inner world that many are arguing that it
does not exist; and that even if it does exist, it does not
matter. Even if it has some significance, it is not the hard
stuff of science, and if it is not, then let's make it hard. Let
it be counted and measured. Quantify the heart's agony and
ecstacy in a world in which, when the inner world is first
discovered, we are liable to find ourselves bereft and derelict.
For without the inner, the outer loses its meaning, and without
the outer, the inner loses its substance."

Colin, all of the above is why I dig your Orthon, your poetry,
your posts and your persistence.

My Next Question:

As you mentioned, the subject of one of your upcoming projects
is the analysis of the Randle/Friedman dialogs. Do you think
that some chunks (re: content) of the Hall (polite and
unflappable here)/Rudiak debates (Ramey Memo), and the
Hansen/Goldstein deliberations are mirrored versions (or as Dick
would have it,"subsets" - just kiddin') of the original Corso-
generated Bennett/Hall wars?

Best Regards to you, your group and all pets,

Laurel Oplatka

UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' 
Location: > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2003 > Jan > Jan 22 

Re: Corso - Tonnies
From: Mac Tonnies <>
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 07:15:00 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 12:39:35 -0500
Subject: Re: Corso - Tonnies

>From: Laurel Oplatka <>
>Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 01:53:33 -0800 (PST)
>Subject: Re: Corso


>But I do not think your intent is to say that science is to be
>supplanted in toto, am I right? To my sensibilities, this
>"issue" is not an either/or proposition. Does this not echo the
>suggestion of Mac Tommies: "Bennett's 'Looking for Orthon' and
>Hynek's 'UFO Experience' are equally relevant"? If they are not
>found to be mutually exclusive, then, in considering both of
>these works, could not (much of) today's Ufology be synthesized
>and ultimately transcended into some sort of (not to be cliche')
>new paradigm?

Whatever form this new paradigm takes, it will have to encompass
the likelihood that UFOs are something altogether stranger than
simply misidentified phenomena or "alien spaceships."

Jacques Vallee has pointed out that the 'aliens' and their
apparent frequency of activity (i.e., taking soil specimens,
etc.) are inconsistent with ET visitors. Therefore he suggested
that we're actually dealing with a multidimensional intelligence
that's engaging us in a playful (?) metaphorical dialogue. By
insinuatinmg themselves into our belief structures, 'they' (if
this term is even applicable) have been able to hide from us by
becoming our mythology.

Possibilities like this demand a radically new and flexible
paradigm, and it seems to me that the ideas of Bennett and
George Hansen are on the right track. The UFO intelligence is
indeed "liminal". It appears to require this in order to operate
in a psychosocial context, disturbing intellectually fashionable
"nuts and bolts" materialism but at the same time remaining just
over our evidential horizon.

Maybe we're dealing with literal ETs after all. But if we are,
it appears they're involved in a long-term agenda much more
portentous and subtle than simply checking out our nuclear
installations, providing unsolicited health check-ups, and
playing chicken with airplanes.

Mac Tonnies

Transcelestial Ontology, Theoretical Ufology and Postmillennial Studies

Next page