Gorightly Censored At UFO Mystic!

Recently, a post appeared at UFO Mystic, (a blog I once held in the highest esteem!) regarding a UFO video taken in the Northern California town of Lemoore, erroneously referred to by a certain UFO Mystic blogger (who shall remain nameless) as “Leemoore”, an egregious error that I felt brought immediate shame to what once, in an interview with Nexus Magazine, I referred to as “…the gold standard of UFO blogs. “ However, when I corrected this aforementioned unnamed blogger with dubious spell checking abilities, my post was unceremoniously removed without reason or notification, although said unnamed spelling challenged blogger went back into his or her post and corrected said error, changing “Leemoore” to “Lemoore.”

Let it be duly noted that I find such conduct unconscionable, as I have long been a supporter of UFO Mystic, and hold in high regard a number of its contributors, although I have admittedly locked horns with Greg Bishop on a previous occasion when I exposed him as a CIA disinformation agent, a claim Bishop has never denied!

Whatever the case, after this sinister censoring of yours truly occurred at UFO Mystic, I have been in almost hourly contact with my legal team, who have been working around the clock to advise me on the appropriate actions to take to address this situation. To this end, papers are now being prepared, as my lawyers continue to work around the clock and I applaud their tireless efforts, and rest assured that justice will indeed be served and my good name left untarnished.

Whether this will lead eventually to the closing down of UFO Mystic, or some sort of monetary settlement, only time will tell. The greater issue here is the protection of our freedom of speech, and the gosh-given right for people to post about UFO’s and other weird shit without censor or retribution.

To be continued….

~ by gorightly on March 20, 2010.

25 Responses to “Gorightly Censored At UFO Mystic!”

  1. I can’t imagine who at UFO Mystic would do that – unless they were a CIA disinformation agent. I know it wasn’t me because I am not a CIA disinformation agent.

  2. No, you are still in my good graces, Lesley. But yes, I was censored!

  3. The bastards…

    “)

  4. Once UFOoMystic hired that CIA Disinformation agent Greg Bishop on it lost all credibility to me.

  5. Please know:

    On March 7th, I was a guest Greg Bishop’s RADIO MYSTERIOSO, and during the final part of the show, an emailer (unknown to me at the time) asked a certain question of me, about Kent Daniel Bentkowski, there followed a momentary bit of mumbling as I pondered this odd coincidence. I had been writing about Kent just hours before. Was this a mystical synchronicity, proof of the interconnected nature of the universe?

    NO!

    It was a childish prank by none other than Mr. GoRightly! He knew full-well of my writings about Kent.

    Could this staged event have been an ingredient in these emotional circumstances at UFO Mystic?

    Mike Clelland!

  6. I now refer to that aforementioned blog as “UFO Spastic”!

  7. That’s really weird. I can only imagine that it had to have been done by the site-owners/admin people. As you may know, all of us who write for UM actually have no role in the ownership or management of the site – we just post our blog-stories. I’ve never removed anything from anyone – nor would I. It’s very odd though.

  8. I’ve never done it either. In fact, I change things that are wrong and thank the commenter publicly for pointing it out.

  9. I will neither confirm nor deny any affiliation with the CIA, and I have been acquainted with perception management tactics in AFOSI, and have, indeed, been employed by the FBI. It is my solemn duty to inform the greater UFO community that Adam Gorightly, Greg Bishop, and Nick Redfern are all unwitting disinformation agents of a covert organization, masquerading as the German language rock band known as Von Moltke. Don’t be fooled by Mr Clelland — he is on file as being the engineering mastermind behind the airship this nefarious trio employs in their travels.

  10. I don’t think I’m a CIA agent, but don’t remember.

    Seriously though, weird. It wasn’t me!

  11. Maybe it was one of your alters.

  12. Re Walter’s words: WE”RE BUSTED!
    😉

  13. So who owns the site?

  14. Its owned by the people who run Cryptomundo. The bloggers at UM are simply invited to post to UM. It’s not “our” site, in that respect.

  15. FYI, I had a couple of comments removed in 2007. After that, I felt a little discouraged and more or less stopped posting comments. After it had happened once or twice, though, I decided to copy one before I posted it. Here it is, albeit in slightly modified form. I have gone through and edited a large number of letters and posts, some of which will be in my next book, “The Mothman Speaks.” I don’t know if I’ll put this one in or not, but here it is for posterity:

    The first descriptions of Mothman cannot be broad-brushed by cryptozoologtists as “non-human.” There simply isn’t any evidence of that. Most people see a “bird-man” with human aspects. Trying to call the entities “non-human” reduces their personal and spiritual value. Almost all of the Mothman witnesses believe they saw an anthropomorphic being – a hybrid. Some say it had glowing eyes. Some described it as “angelic,” which is actually another way of saying “hybrid,” since an angel is generally considered to be humanoid. Even Tom Ury felt that there was something vaguely supernatural about his “Big Bird” sighting. This supernaturalness is indicated in the ancient Middle-Eastern lore, where cave Jinns (genie spirits) are believed to manifest as large birds like ostriches or cranes. The Egyptians placed the head of the crane on the human body when depicting Thoth and other shape-shifting deities. It is clear that those who saw a “sand-hill crane” in WV are not out of supernatural water… I challenge the cryptozoologists to come up with a couple of real, first-hand “Mothman” witnesses describing totally non-human birds. We haven’t seen any, and I doubt that we will. They can try to spin it in media articles all they want, put the proof is in the pudding. Why all the doubt about whether people can see temporary transmogrifications – chimeras? Loren Coleman repeatedly claims that the story of a key witness (Scarberry?) has changed over time, but we don’t see much evidence to support that claim. And even if she did change her story, that doesn’t in any way refute all the over witnesses. Let the crytpozoologists present some specific examples, instead of throwing out unsupported generalities. I think Loren once used the term “buyer beware” when referring to supernatural theories, but I think the same can sometimes be said for cryptozoology. The fact that the cryptozoologists have a list describing the changes necessary to dump and reframe all the various supernatural animals should be enough to raise questions. Is it really about finding unknown animals, or is it about eliminating competing theories that might undermine the social, political, and religious status quo? I imagine the answer lies in between, but with such shenanigans as the “Mothman Death Curse,” it is easy for the dialogue to become polarized.

    -Andy 1/7/07

    • For the record, I never thought it was the bloggers. You guys have been great. I looked at the design of the site and figured it was Loren, since the site looks like Cryptomundo. While it is true that Loren works overtime to make sure that Keelian interpretations of Mothman are suppressed (which, unfortunately, includes me), I don’t take it personally. Competition is a fact of life. All I can hope for is that someday, perhaps when Loren is in his rocking chair, I might get my chance to offer a different interpretation of “Mothman” to a larger audience. For the time being, I just wanted to explain why I do not post comments to UFO Mystic. I’d be happy to try again if Loren promises not to censor people. What do you think, Loren? We’re really not as bad as you think…

  16. The thick plottens…

  17. Everyone: look, I don’t have a fucking clue who is removing posts or comments, but I know for certain it’s not those of us who blog for the site! It is indeed weird, but me, Greg, Lesley etc are not the ones doing this. I’m referring this entire link to the site owner and hopefully they can figure it out.

  18. @Andy I don’t think Loren has anything to do with UFOM, but I am new there so I suppose I could be wrong.

  19. Leslie, yes you’re absolutely right. For everyone else, so it’s clear: this deletion of material at UM has nothing to do with Loren at all. the only connection is that UM is owned by the same people who own Cryptomundo. Loren blogs for Cryptomundo in the same way we blog for UM. Loren is totally innocent on all this.

    Andy: if anyone tries to delete or censor your comments, let me know and I’ll restore them. And, if you ever want to do a guest-post, let me know and I’ll be pleased to post it – unedited.

  20. Sorry: I meant Lesley not Leslie – it’s been a long day! LOL.

  21. I just had an email from someone STILL not clear on what I meant.

    Okay…me, Greg, Lesley and Regan blog for UM. Loren blogs for Cryptomundo.

    However, we don’t own the sites – we were all simply invited to blog for the respective blogs by the company that owns them, and the same company set the sites up, and also set up our relevant bio pages etc at the sites.

    That me, Loren, Greg, Lesley and Regan blog for the company should not be seen that we ARE the company. We’re not.

    And, certainly, none of us are going into each others respective sites and deleting or altering material.

    That’s why I’m taking it up with the owners: to see if anything has been changed by them.

  22. Woolheater comes clean…

    http://www.ufomystic.com/2010/03/21/gorightly-censored/

  23. Wow. First I see that there’s a new Gorightly podcast on the way, so I think “It’s my birthday!”. And then I notice this post with 23 comments – Adam’s above comment being the 23rd – which leads me to a UFOMystic post with… 7 comments.

    23 and 7… 7 and 23…

    7/23 just happens to be my birthday! It’s a sign, I’m sure… a sign that I will love the new show. I’m stoked.

  24. And my new podcast is on the 23rd!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: