Phone call from Jack Shulman: Another Jason Leigh?
From: campbell@ufomind.com (Glenn Campbell, Las Vegas)
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 1998 17:06:00 -0800
|
This afternoon, I got a phone call from Jack Shulman, president of
American Computer Company. ACC, which makes itself out to be a large
corporation, is a never-ending source of amazing revelations about
alien technology from the Roswell crash.
Shulman called to complain about the "Ed Wang" reference on my Shulman
page (www.ufomind.com/people/s/shulman/). I cited Ed Wang, a prolific
ACC supporter, as a possible pseudonym of Shulman. Shulman told me
this reference was defamatory, and he said he had been talking to has
corporate legal counsel about it. Shulman's implication was that if I
didn't remove the Wang reference, I would be sued.
Shulman went on at length, at least ten minutes, and so many claims
were made in that short time that I can't remember them all. All I can
say is, he sure sets off my "Dr. Jason Leigh" detector.
You might call this "intuition," but I think it is something more
specific. Shulman exhibits a characteristic style of speech that I
have heard before, and that indicates to me a high B.S. level.
Features of this speech include:
-- NAME DROPPING. Art Bell, Jeff Rense, Stanton Friedman, Stig
Agermose, Henny van der Pluijm, Philip Corso, and several others were
mentioned in Shulman's monologue - repeatedly. He referred to Friedman
as "Stanton," as though they were close. Shulman also mentioned Bell
Labs and said he used to work there.
When trying to detect lies, I think it is useful to analyse the kind
of words used. Shulman's speech contained a high proportion of proper
names, and a low percentage of what I call "content words" -- words
that actually say something. A liar uses other people's names to try
to give himself credibility. He is trying to impress us with who he
knows instead of what he can do.
There is another reason to name-drop. If you recite a list of real
people's names, as Shulman did a couple of times, and you throw in a
couple of your own fake aliases, then it makes the fakes seem to be
real, too. I wish I could have written down all the names Shulman
gave me, but he went through them too fast. "Marcus Sheridan," was
mentioned at the beginning of one list, and its position suggests to
me that it is a fake. I asked Shulman for the name of his lawyer --
who supposedly found the derogatory Wang references on my site -- and
Shulman supplied it without missing a beat ("Daniel Grossman," or
something similiar). From the context, I would wager that this lawyer
is either not real or not really representing Shulman. (In any case, I
am ready to accept whatever legal challenge Shulman raises.)
-- PRESSURED SPEECH. This is the tendency to fill the air with words
without letting the other party speak. In our ten minute
"conversation," I said very little. When a person is lying, they
usually have a need to keep talking and talking. They feel that they
need to control the conversation.
-- OVERCOMPENSATION. In conversation, a liar tends to return
repeatedly to the subjects he knows he is lying about, even if it is
irrelevant. He needs to emphasize his innocence again and again. As
Shakespeare would say, "Methinks he doth protest too much." A person's
protests are a very good indicator of what issues they are sensitive
about.
In Shulman's case, the strength of his protest about Ed Wang not being
him -- to the point where he considers it "defamatory" and is
supposedly consulting his lawyer about it -- suggests to me that he
really might be Ed Wang.
Shulman also seemed to have a need tell me that he is not responsible
for the "transcapacitor" claims on his website, that they came from
anonymous sources. Without my asking, he emphasized that he had never
read Philip Corso's book (whose claims are suspiciously similar to those
on Shulman's website). This information was irrelevent to his reason for
calling. Instead of just saying, "Ed Wang isn't me; could you take
this off your website," Shulman had to dump on me much more
information than I needed, while giving me little information to
correct the Ed Wang problem.
-- INAPPROPRIATE DETAIL. In the course of his protest, Shulman
mentioned that Ed Wang had once come to his office. I asked him to
describe Wang, and Shulman did -- in great detail. Again, I wish I
could have written it all down but it went by too fast. Shulman
described Wang as "a young guy, about 44" (which isn't young in my
world and seemed older than Shulman's voice). Wang is a tall Asian
("very oriental" I think Shulman said). Shulman described what Wang
was wearing, right down to the certain type of moccasins he had on.
Shulman ended by saying, "I have a very good memory, by the way," as
if recognizing the excess detail and trying to correct for it.
All this detail was useless to me. While Shulman claims that he isn't
Ed Wang, he hasn't been able to provide anything meaningful about the
real Ed Wang -- even though Shulman claims an attention to detail and
Wang is supposed to live in Shulman's neighborhood.
-- GOVERNMENT OPPRESSION. Although it was irrelevant to the
conversation, Shulman needed to tell me about how the government was
harassing him. There had been "intrusions" at ACC, Shulman said,
without being specific. Shulman seemed to mention several incidents of
harassment, but provided no details.
As with name dropping, claims of government oppression are used by
liars to give themselves credibility. They must be important people
for the government to devote so many resources to them.
-- TELEPHONY. Shulman's protest that he was not Ed Wang could have
easily been handled by email. All he would have to do is tell me the
URL of the document in question and what was wrong with it. Shulman
has never emailed me, however. Instead he chose to phone me. Why?
When you write a complaint by email, you have to state your position
in black and white. You have to include some specific facts. The best
sociopaths prefer speech over writing because it makes it easier to
evade the facts. On the phone and in person you can more easily
convey anger and other emotions that provide a smokescreen for your
real intentions. Claims made on the telephone are rarely recorded, so
you don't have to be held accountable for them.
In my opinion, Shulman closely fits the Dr. Jason Leigh model. Like
Leigh, Shulman has created a fine mess for himself. At any time, he
could just stop communicating and walk away from his lies, but it is a
compulsion, and he can't stop. He must create email aliases to support
his lies, then desperately deny that they are him. One wonders what
will happen as his world unravels.
Will he pull another "Waco"?
Glenn Campbell
+---------------------------------------------------------------
| UFOMIND MAILING LIST - Supporting the Ufomind Website
| http://www.ufomind.com/misc/ - Glenn Campbell, Moderator
| Submissions to: ufomind@lists.best.com
| "unsubscribe" (in body) to: ufomind-request@lists.best.com
|
| RELEVANCE OF THIS MESSAGE: UFO personalities
|
| Index: Jack Shulman
| Index: Lies & Deception
+---------------------------------------------------------------
Created: Mar 13, 1998
