Your guess is correct. My intent was to report as objectively as I thought I could, not to moralize. That’s up to the reader. Enjoy the book!

Greg, I haven’t finished yet, but it seems that it would depend on your intent. Was the intent to give us the history/facts, or was it to expose/attack the military?

I assume you were giving us a historical context; the opinions of what did what to whom, and why, (like Doty, Moore, not to mention the military, and for that matter, Bennewitz’s actions, desires) are for the reader to decide.

That’s my two cents. As I say, I’m enjoying it very much, but haven’t finished. (Just now at the part where Bennewitz thinks he’s getting signals that make sense in his apartment filled with electronics; what an image!)

Wiki leaks sounds like a great college sociology project and that’s about it. With no way to verify the source, data becomes useless. Of course there is no such things as “untraceable”

Jess

… now where is my tinfoil hat and my copy of the pnakotic manuscript?

Your cover is blown “Alan.” Indeed, that slow, ominous knock at your front-door from the MIBs could appear anytime now…

“Trust no one,” as some TV show or other used to advise us.

Of course you know if you continue with this line of reasoning, you’ll be receiving a visit from our agents.

Most of what’ll appear, especially initially, will probably be only of interest to a few, even if the material is genuine.

I mean, to some, it might seem trivial to point out that ‘Greg Bishop’ is really a Mr. Potato Head style photo of Nick Redfern crudely sketched over with iron filings, but ask yourself why the Dark One would choose to give his ‘altar’ ego the surname of a church prelate? Add to which, it’s a scientific fact that ‘Greg’ probably means something like, “I am Satan’s Son”, (in, er, Transylvanian, or one of them languages no one knows, or has ever heard of - probably), and then you might begin to see why it’s not so trivial after all.

But until we start getting hard hitting ‘real life’ apocalyptic style exposes like my Redfern one, Wikileaks is more likely to be a forum for hoaxers to take a leak on the minds of those with easily overheated imaginations.

Or don’t you agree - ‘Greg’?

I don’t know. There is some merit to Lyndon Johnson’s quote about “Let’s make them deny it” i.e., if the offended party reacts, it’s just fuel for the fire. Also, the offended party may just spin the info on wikileaks with their own “leak” so that people don’t know what to think (or to think exactly what they are told.) All you have to do is pander to people’s preconceived notions or “common wisdom” about a subject to get them on your side.