From Lorie Kramer, a fellow member of the Art Bell news list, here is a collection of replies from Ray Santilli to questions in a March '96 on line forum. Thanks Lorie.
Dave
Subj: A question of money
From: Ray Santilli
To: All
Date: 20-Feb-96 17:20
I have been accused by some of profiteering, well lets look at the whole picture who has profited and who has lost???.1. Is it the broadcasters who worldwide have achieved massive viewing figures and secured lucrative advertisers??.
2. Is it the News Papers that ran the story and increased their circulation??
3. Is it the Skeptical UFO publications that found their readership almost doubled as a result of the story and the debate??
4. Is it the UFO researchers that suddenly found themselves being offered money to appear on talk shows worldwide ???
5. Is it the experts that suddenly found themselves being offered money to write for publications and publishers??.
6. Is it the Internet forums that didn't know what hit them???.
7. Is it the Special Effects experts who suddenly found a means of free publicity??.
8. Is it the many people within the media that have traded (sold) pictures of the creature, based on the fact that if it's real they think it is public Domain.
9. Is it either myself or my company.???
The point of the above is that hypocrisy runs rife, I have never tried to disguise the fact that I saw a commercial opportunity when I found the film, With regard to the above..that's a different matter. As far as the commercial aspect is concerned "let he who is without sin cast the first stone". Meanwhile something far more important has been lost in all this.
Best regards,
Ray Santilli
------------------------------
Subj: A question of money
From: Ray Santilli
To: James Easton
Date: 22-Feb-96 18:16
Dear James,Volker is one of the greatest extraverts you could ever wish to meet, he collects anything of real value, he is wealthy and has been a business associate and friend of mine for many years. Thats how I know him. Thats why I turned to him when I needed money.
With regard to your other points, I still maintain that the story of the films acquisition is true, certain non-relevant details were only changed to stop people getting to the cameraman. Yes the trip to Cleveland was 1992, Yes during that trip I met Bill Randle but he was one of many people we met. Yes during that trip I met the cameraman and NO the cameramans name is not Jack Barnet, I have always made it clear that the name had been adopted to protect the cameraman's real name..
In hindsight I could have handled the situation a little better...by not saying anything about the manner in which the film was acquired.
Best regards,
Ray
------------------------------
Subj: COLONEL MCGOVERN OFFER
From: Ray Santilli
To: ALL
Date: 05-Mar-96 18:30
I have relayed the contents of Kent's article to the cameraman.For the avoidance of doubt, I can state quite categorically that the last person the cameraman is going to place any confidence in, is an ex-military serviceman.
Of course, the outcry from the skeptics will be "I told you so" .
As far as I am concerned, in the present climate the cameraman will be doing himself and his family a disservice by going public. The phrase "A lamb to the slaughter" comes to mind.
However good his credentials he will be torn apart limb by limb.
I await the bad press.......
Best regards,
Ray
------------------------------
Subj: RESPONSE OF RAY SANTILLI
From: Ray Santilli
To: James Easton Date: 07-Mar-96 17:58
Dear James,I know it's an old cliche but "all things are possible", and this situation is changing daily.
With regard to the scenario you detail, I am not an expert, but it seems to me from what I have been told by the cameraman, There was a great deal of confusion within the services leading up to the split and also at the time of the split, That fact alone could offer an explanation....I don't know.
With regard to the facilities house, I think I am right in saying that if I release details, their name will be on the front cover of every UFO mag and it would hit much of the international press..they don't want that.....for now.
Best regards,
Ray
------------------------------
IN REGARDS TO RELEASING THE FIRST AUTOPSY ON VIDEO:
Subj: RESPONSE OF RAY SANTILLI
From: Ray Santilli
To: Dave Phillips
Date: 07-Mar-96 17:39
Dear Dave,One was enough......although I have no plans to release the first one parts of it will be GIVEN to the media in the near future.
Best regards,
Ray
------------------------------
Subj: RESPONSE OF RAY SANTILLI
From: Ray Santilli
To: James Easton
Date: 07-Mar-96 10:09
Dear James,I sent a response, which may have got lost (software problems) here goes again..
1. The cameraman had clearance over and obove what your people claim to be top secret. which is why he was sent to the scene.
2. The cameraman was part of a special division within the services. He only accounted to people within that division. When it was dismantled due to the split in the services our cameraman states that more than film footage was misplaced. Following the split a new division was established.
3. Please ask McGovern...when he filmed autopsys and why....our cameraman still states that he does not recall any autopsys being filmed before this event.
4. Our cameraman states that the seals were related to the type of event and division he worked for.
5. All film footage and stills for the division were processed internally. ` They were never allowed out at any time for processing. As far as accounting for film stock it apparently was never an issue within the division.
You see.......there is an answer to most questions.. and its not really getting us anywhere, because until I think the community. are prepared to listen to the cameraman with an open mind, I will not subject him to what is going on.
Best regards,
Ray
------------------------------
Subj: RESPONSE OF RAY SANTILLI
From: Ray Santilli
To: :Theresa/SL3
Date: 08-Mar-96 17:35
Hello Theresa,Yes he is old school, and I am certain that his only real regret is that he sold the film in the first place, it is something that I know he will always be ashamed of.
Best regards,
Ray
------------------------------
Subj: RESPONSE OF RAY SANTILLI
From: Ray Santilli
To: Steve Graham
Date: 08-Mar-96 03:51
Dear Steve,The cameraman has always maintained that it was not his business to ask questions, he just did his job. He still refers to the creatures as freaks and nothing more.
I know that comment will upset many people, but if the cameraman goes public it will only take you a matter of seconds to realize the type of person he is.
Best regards,
Ray
------------------------------
Subj: RESPONSE OF RAY SANTILLI
From: Ray Santilli
To: KEVIN
Date: 11-Mar-96 02:15
Dear Kevin,Thanks for the message. The information does not relate to the use of colour film but filters. I am told that such filters were used to increase the contrast attributes of black and white film. However I don't know
Regards,
Ray
------------------------------
Subj: RESPONSE OF RAY SANTILLI
From: Ray Santilli
To: Matthew Livingston
Date: 11-Mar-96 02:12
Dear Matthew,Yes we did, however many people disagree. at the beginning we went to kodak got the verification we wanted, then when Kodak realised what the film was all hell let lose. Kodak released a public statement which you should find somewhere on this forum.
regards,
Ray
------------------------------
Subj: AUTOPSY VERIFICATION
From: Ray Santilli
To: MARK L. CENTER
Date: 13-Mar-96 11:47
Dear Mark,I do not need to chase bootleggers because I have agreements in each country where other people do that for me.
By the way the only proof I need that film has been abandond is the fact that the military are keeping as much distance from the film as they can.
Regards,
Ray
------------------------------
Subj: AUTOPSY VERIFICATION
From: Ray Santilli
To: Bruce Maccabee/RE
Date: 15-Mar-96 17:48
Dear Bruce,Your point is taken, I am by no means an expert. Maybe there were ten crashes, who knows?, however I am certain from all that has occurred since we went public with the film that there is more to the Roswell story than a UFO crash.
I am certain, once again from my own experiences following the film, that when the focus is changed a new picture of the events surrounding that area in 1947 will emerge.
Best regards,
Ray
------------------------------
Subj: AUTOPSY VERIFICATION
From: Ray Santilli
To: Joseph J. Stefula
Date: 15-Mar-96 02:11
Dear Joseph,The one thing we learn't since all this started, is that for the last 20 years everybody has been concentrating on ROSWELL. The question we now ask is WHY when the event so clearly occurred near Socorro at the end of MAY 47.
Regards,
Ray
| 
| 
| 
|
|
| 
| ||
|
| 
|