Do you make a habit of suggesting that people lie to get what they want? Is this suggestion based on your own way of acting?
Keep in mind you're talking to a guy who has written and is selling a book claiming the ghost of Neil Armstrong came to him and confirmed that he was playing golf with him in Hawaii when he was supposed to be on the Moon. Would an author making absurd claims of that magnitude have much compunction about lying about his identity over the telephone, or suggesting that others do likewise?
Mr. Chin is a PGA golfer. That he is the professional-in-residence at a military golf course should not make him any less accessible to me than any other professional golfer.
It's a couple hours yet before the sun rises in Hawaii, so I have some time to think how best to parse our author's cryptic and disturbing statement. Plus, I won't call until I confirm that the author claims Chin is who verified Neil Armstrong's previous identity. The author didn't say, so I'm not going to just call up some random guy and ask about something that wasn't even alleged.
A picture of the author with Mr. Chin means nothing unless the picture itself contains detail that verifies something besides the fact that the author met Mr. Chin and had his picture taken with him. I have dozens of pictures of me with famous people. Those pictures don't prove any and all claims I might make about those famous people. The contact information for Mr. Chin is easily Googled. So it's pretty easy to parlay a picture posed with a celebrity and some quick Googling into the notion that someone
could verify the author's story, but for some reason won't.
The author's puzzling suggestion that Mr. Chin might not want to talk to me seems more intended to prime me for the likelihood that Mr. Chin, as a nationally-ranked golfer and sports personality, might not want to bother talking to some researcher in Utah about a story that has practically nothing to do with golf, and involves simply one of many amateur golfers he likely encounters during the course of his profession. Or priming for me for another likelihood that if I do get hold of him, he'll likely (correctly) state that he has no recollection of anything the author claims; our author will want to write that off as some kind of secret-keeping or stonewalling.
See, he has to cover all the bases. He has to have a contingency for all possible outcomes of my conversations with David Chin, that somehow feed into his conspiracy theory. The rub is that any information that would be privileged only for military ears is not going to be given to me simply by my claiming to be "military." That's why -- once again -- this author's story continues to sound more like a bad mystery novella and less like reality. At every turn he consistently gives us a comical caricature of how he thinks the U.S. military operates. He wrongly likens it to the British military, he wrongly suggests he as a non-American civilian played at a military-only golf course, and now he's suggesting that I can cut through anticipated red tape on the phone simply by asserting verbally that I'm a U.S. serviceman. Or conversely he's suggesting that unless I'm in the military I won't get access to the confirmation of the "secret" information ... that he gives out freely to anyone who asks.
But no, I have no intention of lying to get the information I need to test this author's conclusions. And frankly the suggestion that I do so is dishonest, distasteful, and hopefully not an indication of how United Kingdom chartered accountants are wont to conduct business. If Mr. Chin will speak only to military officers about this author's claims, I have a plethora of U.S. Navy officers I can ask to intermediate that discussion.
At present I still require from this author a clear statement of exactly what he expects Mr. Chin to confirm on his behalf.
