Questions for Linda Moulton Howe

[Aaron LeClair]

Originally Posted by Goody

Both Whitley & Howe have said before that the stongest aspect of the case was not really the photos; but that they found 'Chad' & that other witness to be incredibly convincing. I think it's the 'Why would somebody hoax something like this?' that's got Linda screwed.

After all, she 'IS' just a reporter.

Goody.

It's what I call OJ logic. Some people dismissed evidence that OJ committed a double murder on the bases of he doing it outside his children's home. That said it made no sense. "Why would who do it outside his children's home where they could have seen it, or heard it!?" People do things that make little sense all the time. This includes hoaxing. Sad some don't realize the reality of it. Hoaxes are a proven fact, but with some, you get the impression that they live in a world where everyone is honest 24/7.

[Lavarat]

My question for Linda is.

"have you established a contact within the intelligence community and or someone who knows what is the truth, that you might not reveal but that has told you things about what is really going on????

[Anonymous22]

Howe tends to believe in anything. The "Chad" pictures were obvious fakes and have since been proven to be so... Yet she still follows the story as if it's real. Not a credible contributor to this field.

[Loose Leaf Tea]

This drone business has me vexed. Expert opinion has dismissed the photos as CGI composites and that's all well and good; it's great that there are people who can spot the fakes. But LMH has been interviewing a variety of eyewitnesses recently who, to my soft and trusting ears, sound quite credible. Most of those eyewitnesses have chosen anonymity, so they're not after fame and fortune.
So what if the photographs are deliberate fakes designed to discredit further interest in whatever-the-hell is flying around out there?
That would be my question to LMH.

[digigeek]

Linda, when that ex colonel guy pulled a gun on you, did you wet your pants? (referencing MU interview with her)

[Anonymous22]

She's gullible and hangs out with a few weirdos. That face on mars freak for one.

[SR2]

With all her flaws, I'd still like to hear from LMH. She is one of the few writers who go out into the field to report on the paranormal. She has a long history in Ufology and has met with a lot of important witnesses and researchers.

She rarely gets challenged during her appearances on C2C and Dreamland, and I think it would be interesting to hear how she responds to tough, but fair, questioning.

[gilbavel]

If nothing else, her cattle mutilation work was groundbreaking. She was reporting on the REAL cattle mutilations and going to scientists and laboratories to get the "cutting edge" results before anyone else even thought of it.

Of late, she has been flaky. But she's sold a lot of magazines. Toothpaste, whatever. She used to be a producer for NBC in Colorado. She was a bona fide journalist at one time.

[gilbavel]

Thank you for banning the disinfo geek.

[ArizonaWill]

Question I'd ask LMH: When are you going to get a new tape recorder for interviews? It sounds like she still uses one of those old tape to tape reel machines you could buy in the 70's for $20.95 and hold in one hand. She could use a technology update since so many of her interviews sound like they took place behind the "iron curtain" back in the 50's.