UFO Conjecture(s)

Saturday, February 09, 2013

To be, or not to be: Roswell

Copyright 2013, InterAmerica, Inc.

Here’s where I am about Roswell….


In early July 1947 a geologic party (not archaeologists!), in New Mexico, forty miles due north of Roswell stumbled upon an Army recovery-team gathering the remnants of a crashed craft and bodies that were in it.

Some members of the geology group surreptitiously documented what was going on.

(That documentation has been seen by members of Kevin Randle’s Roswell Dream Team.)

This crash was the impulse for the Haut press release.

Concomitantly, Mac Brazel came across pieces of balloon debris scattered around the Foster farm; balloon debris from a lightning strike (in mid-June, 1947).

Brazel’s findings, eventually collected by him, Marcel, and Cavitt, were used by the Army as cover for the flying disc that they were in the process of examining.

Brazel’s debris was hysterically confused by Jesse Marcel Sr. who had heard about the crashed “disc” but who was not part of the recovery operation.

Why not?

The found disc discovery became a top priority, secret operation, not to be entrusted to even senior members of the Roswell Army Base.

The crashed disc recovery was an Army headquartered (Washington D.C.) operation.

I assume that the Army’s discovery of the crashed disc came about by a triangulation of radar blips that disappeared off radar scopes, but which created an alert that sent select Army personnel to the area north of Roswell.

The radar aspect is disputed however, as you can read here:

How the Army was alerted to the crashed disc remains a question.

The geologists didn’t alert the Army. The geologists came across the recovery operation after the fact.

The initial hubbub (1947) – newspaper and radio announcements and Brazel’s flighty sojourn to Roswell with tales of debris – is tangential to the actual crashed disc event.

That event was encapsulated by secrecy and remoteness from any population center.

And the geologists were sworn to secrecy, as evidenced by how the new material was found and has surfaced.

Stanton Friedman’s Marcel interview in 1978 was hamstrung by Marcel’s inadvertent mental duplicity (he wasn’t really part of the recovery operation but did hear about it in the swirl of Army gossip around the Roswell Army base).

Marcel put together a story where he inserted himself and Brazel into the recovery mix.

Why he did so is up for discussion, by Marcel and Brazel are irrelevant persons in the actual Roswell incident.

They became integral by the inept or extraterrestrial circumlocutions of UFO researchers after 1978.

Now what really happened near Roswell?

An accident of some kind in which bodies were found took place north of Roswell in early July 1947.

The Army was alerted – how? That is up for grabs.

Geologists, in the area, came across the Army’s recovery operation and documented, surreptitiously, what they were seeing.

That documentation, seen by some Roswell researchers, indicates that Brazel’s debris story is totally irrelevant to the Roswell event and has confused and continues to confuse Roswell aficionados.

The photos of debris, belabored by Roswell buffs, which purportedly show elements of the “disc” mentioned in the Haut press release, do, indeed, show what Brazel found and Marcel collected at the Foster ranch, but that debris has nothing to do with the “disc” discovery north of Roswell.

The Army, wisely, used Brazel’s propitious balloon debris discoveries to defuse the flying saucer announcement that Walter Haut’s press release produced and which was actually the gist of the Roswell incident or, rather, event.

This puerile presentation of mine derives from these Roswell elements:

The Haut press release

The subliminal, dismissed accounts of an archaeological party – which has turned out to be a geological group – rumored to have come across a “crashed flying saucer with bodies near it.”

Anthony Bragalia’s uncovering of Battelle’s work with “memory metal” allegedly from a Roswell-related flying disc.

The Roswell Dream Team’s discovery of “documentation” supposedly from a Roswell incident in 1947.

(That discovery supportive of a significant “accident” in the area of Roswell in 1947.)

When and if Kevin Randle’s Dream Team brings forth, if it can, what it has found during its current Roswell fact-finding investigation, others skilled in the Roswellian detritus can put together a more thoroughly explained account of what happened near Roswell in July 1947.



  • The IPU Report discussed in an earlier blog mentions the radar tracking of two "unidentified aircraft" that "dropped off" the scopes on July 3, 1947. One allegedly fell 75 miles northwest of Roswell while the other fell 20 miles Southwest of Socorro (The exact lattitude and longitudes are specified in the Report). Two points of interest here. One, the radar installations that did the tracking were located in East Texas and at White Sands Proving Ground in N.M. (not Roswell). Second, the IPU Report states that the bulk of the debris recovered was at the Socorro site while the (5) bodies were recovered at the Northewest site....which may mesh nicely, Rich, with what you are suggesting today. At least there are (as yet) no obvious conflicts between what the "new" Roswell information might be and what the IPU Report claims (in great detail I might add).

    By Blogger Dominick, at Saturday, February 09, 2013  

  • So Randle and his 'dream team' will proffer a Roswell narrative which requires of one a belief that most of the significant witnesses are liars.

    Why are field notes from a group of geologists which have strangely only recently surfaced of greater weight than decades of established testimony?

    By Blogger Ross Evans, at Saturday, February 09, 2013  

  • Ross...

    It's what the geologists provide in the way of evidence. which isn't mine to share.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Saturday, February 09, 2013  

  • RRRGroup

    I see. Then one wonders why Randle et al have not seen fit to share with the world the fruits of their investigative efforts.

    My suspicion when Randle announced the 'dream team' reinvestigation was that this would be an initiative light on actual investigation, and would instead focus on the real motivation: reframing the Roswell narrative in a way which accords with the preconceptions held by those in team 'dream'. Recent developments are suggestive of that assessment being entirely accurate.

    By Blogger Ross Evans, at Saturday, February 09, 2013  

  • If the man in the middle of the photo is the geologist, I recognize him (well, that's what he probably looked like decades ago). Came across him looking for something Bill Jr. had said. It probably was coincidental, but there it is.

    In July in the desert, in my experience, if one meets anyone it will be 'mad dogs and Englishman' -- unless they are on the job. So, a state employee, most likely a surveyor, or oil or water geologist. Not archaeologist.

    "How the Army was alerted to the crashed disc remains a question."

    On that, I will stand pat, and await developments.



    By Blogger Don, at Saturday, February 09, 2013  

  • Ross...

    My "assessment" here is hypothetical mostly.

    Randle's Dream Team should, we hope, provide a full assessment, with facts and new information that shows Roswell buffs what the "incident" really was.

    They are working diligently to separate fact from fiction.

    I've taken what has appeared over the years, back-tracked to the 1947 time-frame and think what I'm suggesting is right.

    New evidence should back me up in part or totally....we'll see.

    There is an ET bias among Dream Team members but they could expirtate that bias should facts indicate otherwise.

    These are not evil guys hoping to convince UFO devotees and Roswell buffs that extraterrestrial beings crashed in Roswell if the "facts" show otherwise.

    But something exotic happened near Roswell, and that something has been muffled by the accretions of UFO investigators with a yen to find ET all over the UFO phenomenon.

    Rudiak, among the Dream Team members is stubbornly ET oriented.

    But the rest? Not entrenched but inclined to believe that the Roswell event was an ET event.

    It might have been, or it might have been something rabidly mistaken as an ET event, initially but found to be something else later on.....shortly after the early dust-up(s) exacerbated by Brazel loopy intervention and much later by Stanton Friedman who slanted Marcel and others away from what really happened to what Mr. Friedman wished had happened.

    The verdict is still not in, and I've had to adjust my view based upon further scrutiny of the rumored new "evidence" which doesn't gel in a way that I thought it did from what I had heard.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Saturday, February 09, 2013  

  • Don:

    The photo is metaphorical.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Saturday, February 09, 2013  

  • "The photo is metaphorical."

    Too bad. Looks like Noel Lamb and maybe it is.



    By Blogger Don, at Saturday, February 09, 2013  

  • The Man in the middle, Don, is Jack


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Saturday, February 09, 2013  

  • Rich,

    Can you tell us if this is Bragalia-level research?

    And, if so, does he have his imaginary witnesses in place?


    By Blogger Lance, at Saturday, February 09, 2013  

  • I don't know what Anthony Bragalia's Dream Team research is, Lance.

    I am not exactly privy to the new discovery but got an inkling from checking back through some old Roswell accounts and talking with Nick Redfern.

    Imaginary witnesses do not factor into the new "evidence."

    That evidence stands on its own.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Saturday, February 09, 2013  

  • I am getting lost in all this - is this yet another 'crash' site or is it the one supposedly involving the Roswell fire dept? (Remember Frankie Rowe and her dad?)

    Also, what precisely is stopping Kevin's team from bringing forth this evidence right now, (unless, of course, they haven't got it)?

    I get the feeling that you are trying to spin this out into a big but unsupported story. Has anyone verified the geologists' diary notes, or is it all going to fizzle out along with Barney Barnett's diary, Anderson's dad's diary and the archaeologists supposedly present at the San Augustin site?

    It is becoming too much for reasonably intelligent people to digest. Perhaps you need an exceptionally high IQ (above Mensa level) to understand Roswell!

    By Blogger cda, at Sunday, February 10, 2013  

  • Christopher...

    You (and others) have got to forget everything you picked up and ingested about Roswell over the years.

    That's confusing you.

    Forget San Augustin....it's a fixation that mars your Roswell prowess.

    Simplify your resurrection of Roswell information and mythology.

    Randle's Dream Team wants to cement its legacy so they placed themselves in a compromised position by agreeing to legal stipulations that prevents them from disclosing a "truth" that goes to the heart of the Roswell event.

    They've painted themselves into a corner, so the Roswell truth will come forward from persons or entities not tied to its history or research.

    Roswell is, in essence, a simple but potentially profound story.

    We'll have to wait to see how it plays out.....after 66 years, a few months shouldn't weigh too heavily
    on us, should it?


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, February 10, 2013  

  • Dominick:

    It looks hard to say exactly how consistent this new information is with the IPU field report. The IPU report mentions two Landing Zones (LZ). LZ-2 is the one discussed at greatest length and is the one for which map coordinates are given as Lat. 33-40-31 and Long. 106-28-29. If you convert this location from degrees-minutes-seconds to GPS coordinates and plug it into Google Maps you will discover it refers to the Trinity test site—the location of the first atomic bomb test in July of 1945. Given that that location lies entirely within the boundary of the White Sands Proving Ground (or WSPG, as it was known then) it is unlikely (but not impossible) to have been the site the geological party happened across (plus it does not correspond to the description "40 miles due north of Roswell).

    About LZ-1, the IPU document says only that it was about 75 miles northwest of Roswell, that first reports from investigators, who were from Roswell AAF base, indicated that LZ-1 was the remains of MOGUL balloon train. However, the report goes on to say that “other bodies” that looked as they had “been dissected as you would a frog” were found NOT FAR from LZ-1. Clearly, bodies, whether human or alien would not have been transported by weather balloon. So, the IPU report actually refers to 3 distinct locations of interest.

    It sounds as though the Geological team’s report COULD fit the description of the location “not far” from LZ-1, if there was also some kind of physical craft and/or debris associated with that site that is not mentioned in the IPU report. LZ-1 is placed about 75 miles northwest of Roswell and the geological team’s discovery is described as 40 miles due north of Roswell. Would the approximate 35 mile separation be considered “not far”? I don’t know.

    Could Mac Brazel have seen both sites? That would seem to explain a lot of the confusion surrounding his testimony. He may have seen BOTH ordinary balloon detritus AND exotic technology and bodies.

    By Blogger Larry, at Sunday, February 10, 2013  

  • Larry...

    Your erudite observations are splendid.

    But let me accent that Brazel's observations, debris, and intervention(s) are irrelevant and troublesome -- they confuse the matter.

    Forget Brazel, and clear your mind of his "additions" to the story (by others mostly), and you'll go a long way to finding a new, proper view of the real Roswell event.

    David Rudiak's often brilliant scrutiny is marred by his fixation on Brazel and the Mogul debris or lack of it.

    Others should see Mr. Rudiak's mistakes as endemic to their own.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, February 10, 2013  

  • I love the phrase


    This, coupled with "MAJIC ACCESS"
    and "TOP SECRET ULTRA" plus the gigantic MAJIC typed diagonally across page 1 give the overall impression that the person who typed it on a dirty old typewriter c. 1995 wanted to show off his great knowledge of US security markings as they existed in 1947.

    I assume he got most of his ideas, and some of the names, from the MJ-12 papers of 1987, plus a bit of reading & research.

    But his spelling is pretty bad in places and his English too.

    I only hope that the geologists' notes that RR talks about, and supposedly made at the scene, are of a higher standard than those of the IPU writer.

    By Blogger cda, at Sunday, February 10, 2013  

  • Going out on a limb here (smirk), but I expect this latest "explanation" will prove to be as tantalizingly insubstantial as all that have gone before, backed up by the usual questionable documents, misinterpreted and taken from context statements, degraded memories, biased analysis, etc., etc. I also predict the Roswell gang will over-heatedly argue it ad nausea and some new online feuds will develop.

    Wake me when it's over. I'll be power napping.

    By Blogger purrlgurrl, at Sunday, February 10, 2013  

  • "Randle's Dream Team wants to cement its legacy so they placed themselves in a compromised position by agreeing to legal stipulations that prevents them from disclosing a "truth" that goes to the heart of the Roswell event." Sounds more than a little self contradictory. Translate. To paraphrase this. We wanted to cement our legacy and we cannot reveal what we found because we tied our own hands. Sounds oddly familiar. Much ado about nothing.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Sunday, February 10, 2013  

  • Ah....my cynical little Roswellian compatriots:

    Randle's Dream Team is striving to get at the Roswell truth by they sometimes falter.

    Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose, as Gilles might say.

    The new evidence is more substantial than memory or notes.

    The legal hamstring was an accoutrement to see the evidence I think.

    Those who agreed to it were foolish and not far-thinking.

    I am prohibited from revealing as much as I know a few things: my lame reconstruction of the early Roswell tale, Nick Redfern's caution about the legal issues, and a loyalty to Anthony Bragalia whose Roswell discoveries are for him to bring forward. not me.

    However, I am not beholden to any stipulations that prevent me from going rogue with what is known by the Dream Team and some outsiders (who are apparently privy to the new discovery also).

    Let me say this: the new evidence is being shopped around, it seems.

    The person holding the evidence wishes to capitalize upon it by offering disclosure to TV networks and other venues.

    That is unforgivable as once the rabble (or public) gets involved, the "evidence" will become tainted by their input, which would be even more disastrous than letting the UFO crowd get their hands on it.

    That said, I again encourage you who visit here and are interested to look at Roswell's early reportage and some writings after the fact.

    You'll discern information that has been passed over in order to favor, errantly, the Brazel/Marcel nonsense (mogul balloon debris which is involved but only as a distraction).

    Some of you have been coerced into thinking Brazel, Mogul, Marcel, the Foster ranch, et cetera are relevant because those things have been hyped and debated, ad infinitum, ad eternum, ad nauseum at Kevin Randle's blog and UFO Updates.

    They aren't.

    The are inadvertent red-herrings, placed topside by such persons as David Rudiak and Mr. Randle who has allowed them to remain in place and forward in the comment section of his blog.

    CDA, a brilliant skeptic, has been flummoxed by the Roswell nonsense at those venues.

    Don Ecsedy has been distracted by Roswell minutiae that is so unimportant that it needs the label of "trash."

    And Bruce or PG, here, are too quick to overlay their skeptical patina before the new evidence is laid out.

    They can't take my hints at face value -- face value -- and look at Roswell with new eyes either.

    Roswell's mythology has infected all of us I'm afraid.

    And cleaning out that infection will take time and "evidence" that is here now with more to come, so long as keepers of that evidence bring it forward without care for their legacy or fame (or some kind of monetary recompense).

    That's it....you skeptical bastards.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, February 10, 2013  

  • Hints are just that. They aren't evidence. New pieces of evidence trumpeted in advance by Ufologists inevitably turn out to be easily refutable or simply a matter of personal (mis)interpretation.

    Only hard evidence (something in the public domain that has a chain of indisputable documentation proving it to have been in existence since 1947) will sway me to the side of Roswell holding any significance or even having a non-ET back story.

    I'm not now nor have I ever been a skeptic about there being a true phenomenon behind many UFO experiences. Roswell, however, stinks to high heaven, while not being nearly as interesting or compelling as UFO cases that draw far less attention from Ufology.

    Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me consistently, shame on me and the burden of proof is squarely on you.

    By Blogger purrlgurrl, at Sunday, February 10, 2013  

  • Everything you write here is true PG.

    But one can't dismiss out of hand what is said to be potentially new Roswell evidence.

    It's provenance is being tested even as I type this.

    But I agree....Roswell does stink, mostly from the rotten swill that has been presented as the crux of the press release and event itself over the years and even now at certain blogs.

    And yes, there are many other UFO sightings and encounters that intrigue, with better core materials and lacking the accretions by faulty witnesses and biased UFO researchers.

    But I prefer to keep an open mind about Roswell based on some of Tony Bragalia's legitimate findings and what one can find amongst the extant early Roswell reportage.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, February 10, 2013  

  • Scepticism in the face of yet more Roswell unsubstantiated innuendo and inference without evidence has become a necessity for even considering the remote possibility of anything other than conflated hubris.
    You hint at having a card up your sleeve as so many others without substantiation and consequently you have become instrument \ player of circular rumors that falls into a familiar pattern.
    It is what it is and is simply not worthy of further loose confabulations based on what you, not we claim to know.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Sunday, February 10, 2013  

  • Bruce:

    You, like many others, have had enough about Roswell. You are tired of it, as am I actually.

    But if you and others would look at Roswell, with new eyes -- your own -- you'd see that there's something there.

    I don't have anything up my sleeve.

    I'm privy to what is new and startling to some.

    I think it opens the Roswell story to new reflection.

    You take a sour look at my suggestion to look at Roswell freshly.

    You think I'm creating a new Roswell confabulation, and that may end up being so.

    But your aggravation with my hints seems to be based upon something other than a distaste for more Roswell crap.

    (I know that that stems from, but others reading here do not.)

    Your views are not far removed from reality.

    But they seem cynically premised.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, February 10, 2013  

  • I blame Roswell on Stanton Friedman and Larry King. Today, I've reached the point not caring what did or didn't happen there. I've read the last I'm ever going to read about it. No mas.

    I find, for example, Shag Harbour much more interesting and possibly fruitful. It even has eyewitnesses to the object's crash, and I believe some military documentation. But, oh yeah, I forgot that took place in Canada, so it's not as important as Roswell.

    Xenophobia is alive and well in American Ufology.

    PS: I'm not Canadian.

    By Blogger purrlgurrl, at Sunday, February 10, 2013  

  • I am not aggravated as there's nothing said here or in the the miles of verbiage elsewhere on Roswell to get under my skin, compared to more grounded issues ( which do), but I am simply noting what others have not, that that you seem to have moved from the audience to the stage, and I am not casting any sort of dour attitude about it and I regret if I did give that impression inadvertently. Of course, for whatever reason, you chose not to disclose what you are hinting at that you know, and that does not spoil my breakfast or even dinner. However, all this being said, just when you think this entanglement could not get more entangled, it does, yet it sits there as lifelessly as a pile of dried and anomalous poo on a carpet calling for a clean up. If it ever is cleaned up, then what? I think those of us who are interested in the actual root causes of the phenomenon outside of Roswell, do not care whether the poo is picked up because outside of the window, odd things are still occurring and have occurred. In a sense Roswell is a form of navel gazing on a operatic platform that runs from A to Z back to A as a one trick pony.
    Its a big world out there..

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Monday, February 11, 2013  

  • You're right of course, Bruce.

    But when I (or anyone) gets pummeled by "news" that a new Roswell discovery tells us what really happened there in 1947, we have to react....after all this is a UFO blog and Roswell is an underpinning tale that supports the UFO meme.

    My point in posting about this is twofold: to let readers here know that another Roswell expose is afoot and also to try and out the new information before it gets to the public at large, which will make the discovery an object of scavengery, by the great unwashed.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, February 11, 2013  

  • We can perhaps agree that another chapter of vested exploitation by banging drums and tooting horns about all of this is yet to occur. We are in a sort of languid dead zone, a post-editorial topography of examining what has been examined in order to find where we fell off the map and got snookered by every con and shill in town. Sort of living in the past in search of the political and social foibles of the human condition rather than that of our hunt for what is both inexplicable and incommensurable.
    I don't think the two can be separated easily. Looking forward by looking backward while in the present is our lot. I predict when this soap opera expires, it will be a footnote that will lead to further half baked "conclusions" while nothing has been concluded for those of us who still cannot give a cogent explanation for "foo fighters" I think our shared interest in this topic of Roswell is disproportionately large in comparison to other aspects of the phenomenon in terms of paying off as you had alluded to in the sunk cost metaphor. I wish the Dream Team the best of luck, but have no confidence any of this will solve anything. A sort of nice embroidery to hang on the wall.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Monday, February 11, 2013  

  • As I get more feedback about the new discovery I'm inclined to agree Bruce.

    If I can get vagabond Nick Redfern to weigh in, he might provide some clarifying perspective about the new "evidence."

    The Dream Team is functioning and on the trail of new Roswell information but when I hear that it is beholden to self-imposed legal restraints, I'm concerned.

    Do they want the truth or do they want to play ball with the establishment -- which will dead-end anything related to truth.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, February 11, 2013  

  • "Some members of the geology group surreptitiously documented what was going on."

    That's great. Finally, a document written in 1947. I look forward to being able to read it, and hear the story.

    But, if that is the evidence to be presented, what could it have to say about your "Brazel Scenario"? What you have presented about it isn't evidence for it directly as there apparently is for the '2nd site'.

    Throughout the Roswell story, the Brazel site has commonly been considered not the crash site. It has always been the '1st site', connected to the real crash site or '2nd site' via the hypothesis of a pre-crash explosion or entanglement.

    You have presented the "Brazel Scenario" as a logical deduction, on the principle of simplicity or perhaps Occam, not as something found in the new evidence.

    Do I have that right?



    By Blogger Don, at Monday, February 11, 2013  

  • PG:

    You may not be Canadian, but remember this:

    The whole of the MJ-12 junk that pervaded the UFO field in 1987 and is still extant, with lots of extra bits and pieces 'hanging on' stemmed from a certain Wilbert Smith, a Canadian engineer and UFO contactee and kook of the 1950s. He actually wanted to build an actual working UFO in his lab near Ottawa.

    Yes all the MJ-12 and 'Majestic' garbage originated from his infamous memorandum (poor fellow) although he could never have realised its effects on ufology that lay far into the future.

    By Blogger cda, at Monday, February 11, 2013  

  • Don:

    You like to make assumptions by reading into text what isn't there.

    Did I mean "writing down something" by noting the geologists documented their observation?

    As for Brazel, you keep trying to bring that guy into the dialogue.


    You have some inordinate affection for him and his loopy tale?

    He's out.....If someone (anyone) mentions Brazel once more, in the context of my current postings about Roswell.....well, you know.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, February 11, 2013  

  • Rich: "Did I mean "writing down something" by noting the geologists documented their observation?"

    It is a reasonable assumption. Photos? Even better.

    "As for Brazel, you keep trying to bring that guy into the dialogue.


    You have some inordinate affection for him and his loopy tale?"

    Because you have brought him up, and constantly, in your articles and responses to posts. No one else introduce Brazel in this discussion except you. You have an opinion about him and it seems you believe your opinion about him is supported by this new evidence. All I'm asking is what it could be.

    Also, the "loopy tale" wasn't told by Brazel, not originally.



    By Blogger Don, at Monday, February 11, 2013  

  • Don:

    My mentions of Brazel were akin to warning signs near thin ice.

    But you (mostly) keep testing the ice.

    Forget Brazel.

    If I mention him, ignore my mention.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, February 11, 2013  

  • R-squared:

    I am taken aback by the implied 'UFO True Believer' leanings you have written here!!!

    ....what's next, you'll claim that the Pope went FIGMO????

    By Blogger Kurt Peters, at Monday, February 11, 2013  

  • KP...

    Don't be alarmed.

    I'm merely "reporting" what I've been given information about.

    I've always thought something happened near Roswell in 1947 -- something odd or exotic.

    As to it being an ET event, that's up for grabs in my mind.

    I'm inclined to see Roswell as a quirky episode that has attained mythological status because of the machinations of UFO researchers.

    In that, I accept CDA's view about Roswell, and France's Gilles Fernandez.

    But there are some sneaky footnotes to Roswell that leave open the ET door, a crack.

    I'm still on hold about it, however.

    As Don Ecsedy has it -- I may appear to be a pseudo-skeptic -- but I'm still a skeptic, with an open mind though.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, February 11, 2013  

  • Rich: "As Don Ecsedy has it -- I may appear to be a pseudo-skeptic -- but I'm still a skeptic, with an open mind though."

    I apologize if what I wrote was confusing. I was referring to dear "Zoam".



    By Blogger Don, at Monday, February 11, 2013  

  • Don:

    You don't have to apologize....I think I am a pseudo-skeptic.

    (Kurt Peters picked up the vibe.)

    Like CDA, deep down I think we both see UFOs as ET oriented.

    Now Zoam....that guy is a rabid skeptic....brilliant and loopy both.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, February 11, 2013  

  • .."(Kurt Peters picked up the vibe.)"

    I am not now, nor ever have been, a member of The Beach Boys!!!

    By Blogger Kurt Peters, at Monday, February 11, 2013  

  • Rich:
    Have the dream team found the original to the photo discussed here ? http://aliensthetruth.com/UFO.php?view=1&ID=24

    Or give us all another clue!


    By Blogger Chainsofthesea, at Monday, February 11, 2013  

  • No, Douglas...

    It's new material, totally.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, February 11, 2013  

  • Part 1
    CDA wrote:

    “I love the phrase


    Yes, I know that anything that whiffs of American Exceptionalism really ticks you off. However, the US actually did emerge from WWII at the top of the heap economically, technologically, militarily, and politically. Also, practically everything that the US knew about security and intelligence practices at that time, had just been taught to us by the UK—specifically, Winston Churchill acting through William Stephenson. Nor is the US alone in choosing self-agrandizing security code words; consider that the highest classification code word within NATO is “COSMIC”.


    “This, coupled with "MAJIC ACCESS" and "TOP SECRET ULTRA" plus the gigantic MAJIC typed diagonally across page 1 give the overall impression that the person who typed it on a dirty old typewriter c. 1995 wanted to show off his great knowledge of US security markings as they existed in 1947.”

    Ultimately, I don’t know if the IPU document is real or not. I can make arguments both ways. I don’t automatically assume it’s fraudulent just because it describes events which are outside of conventional wisdom. For now, it’s in my “grey” basket.

    But, if you want to make a fair and intelligent critique of the IPU document, you should at least start by comprehending what the classification markings purport to say. To begin with, there is a cover page preceding the actual text of the report. This is a possible indicator of authenticity because a cover page is an important element in maintaining control of classified material. Among other things, it tells the reader whether he/she is authorized to continue reading what follows. You consistently misrepresent the document as being a “Top Secret Ultra” document. It is not. All the classification markings except “ULTRA” have been lined out. When a classified document goes through re-classification review (as this one purports to have done) it is standard practice to place a line through previous classifications, but leave them readable and in place. This provides a record of the classification history. Classification markings without a line through them are presumed to still be in effect. If someone schooled in the US system of security (or the UK system, for that matter) were to come across that document, they would conclude that the highest level of classification of the document is “ULTRA”

    The cover page bears historically correct stamps indicating that the document was received and logged into the files of the Army Assistant Chief of Staff, G-2 (i.e., Intelligence and Counter Intelligence) on July 22, 1947. Note that many of these markings, including the gigantic “MAJIC” one are made by rubber stamps, NOT by typewriter, as you erroneously suggest. This can easily be seen by the facts that they are not aligned along the horizontal and vertical, are somewhat uneven in the application of printing force, and sometimes have cuts and blemishes on the printing surface. One especially interesting example is the time stamp consisting of a day-of-the-month counter connected to a little arrow, pointing to the month abbreviation. In 1947 that was the pinnacle of office automation technology; other examples of the use of that time stamp can be found on other, undisputed War Department documents from that era.

    By Blogger Larry, at Monday, February 11, 2013  

  • Part 2

    The original classification of “Top Secret” was purportedly authorized and applied to the document by the Army Assistant Chief of Staff, G-2, upon receipt. Again, this is another possible indication of authenticity. Most people don’t seem to know it, but only a few individuals at the top of the military/intelligence hierarchy are authorized to classify, re-classify, and de-classify documents at the Top Secret level. I don’t think the purported CIC agent could have done so, and for that reason, I suspect that the “Top Secret” markings placed at the top and bottom of each page (SOP) that were subsequently lined through, were typed there by the G-2 office. The document was purportedly created a couple of months BEFORE the National Security Act of 1947 took effect, so the stamp indicating that the Army was still under the War Department (instead of the Department of Defense) is technically correct. Thus, the initial classification level of the document was simply, War Department “Top Secret”—an ordinary military classification which, I trust no one would find incredible.

    Be that as it may, after the War Department became the DOD in September 1947, the office of Joint Chiefs of Staff (J.C.S.) was created, with organizational authority over the individual military services. The first Joint Chief was named in 1949, so presumably sometime after that date, a copy of the report was given to the J.C.S., and stamped (not typed) “J.C.S. File Copy”. Again, this is 100% in accord with military protocol of passing critical information up the chain of command.

    In 1960, (exact date unclear) a new paragraph on the cover page was typed (aligned horizontally and vertically) and then signed, and ostensibly countersigned by the head of the NSA (Gen. John Samford) and head of CIA (Allen Dulles) indicating the document was being reclassified, to “ULTRA”, a level supposedly above Top Secret. Both Samford and Dulles did, in fact, occupy those positions at that time. The existence of the CIA was known in 1947 as soon as the National Security Act was signed. The predecessor agency to the NSA was the Armed Forces Security Agency created in 1949 by Truman issuing a classified executive order. The existence of the NSA was a highly classified fact for many years, which is why it was sometimes referred to as “No Such Agency”. Although its existence was known publicly in 1995, when the IPU memo surfaced, I don’t know if the fact that John Samford was its director in 1960 was known at that time; that would be interesting to research. Preexisting paragraphs, probably describing the authority by which the War Dept. classification had been implemented, penalties for disclosure, etc. were obliterated with an opaque marker, since the document then had a new owner.

    The reclassification to “ULTRA” level was done by applying a rubber stamp to the cover page and then typing the word “ULTRA” at the top and bottom of each page of the report, in proximity to the lined-out “Top Secret” classification that had been applied by the War Department. The cover page stamp contained two lines, with the words “Top Secret” on the upper line and “ULTRA” on the lower line. By lining out the words “Top Secret”, the overall classification remaining is “ULTRA”. This would imply that there were at least two, and perhaps three levels of classification that could be applied with one stamp. By leaving the stamp imprint unmodified, the classification would be “Top Secret ULTRA”. By lining out the word “Top”, one could produce a “Secret ULTRA” classification. By lining out “Top Secret”, one could produce a simple “ULTRA” classification.

    By Blogger Larry, at Monday, February 11, 2013  

  • Part 3

    Is this type of designation ever seen elsewhere in the US classified world? Yes, in the AEC realm. The secret information that was protected by the Atomic Energy Act of 1946 was designated as “Restricted Data” (RD)—a generic descriptor that could be analogous to “ULTRA”. Today, RD is further subdivided into at least two subcategories, “Secret RD” and “Top Secret RD”. When you get cleared into that world, you get assigned one of those clearances (unless there's a higher one that is not public knowledge). In principle “ULTRA” could even be an undisclosed category of RD, two or three “points” above the H-Bomb classification level (i.e., Top Secret RD).

    In any case, the classification level of the document was “ULTRA”, not “Top Secret ULTRA”, the classification level was stamped, not typed, and it was ostensibly put there in 1960, not 1947.

    Once again, you are frequently wrong but never in doubt.

    By Blogger Larry, at Monday, February 11, 2013  

  • Larry, thanks for your very informative discussion of the "classification" designations on the IPU Report document. We are all in your debt on that. You say that the document may well be authentic. Is there anything in it that strikes you as obviously false? I would love your reaction to the statement in the IPU Report that asserts that the FBI "interest in the stored craft at Los Alamos" was "curtailed" and access was denied. This corresponds perfectly with the rather cryptic Hoover handwritten note at the bottom of an FBI memorandum (that researchers have puzzled about for years) where Hoover says almost exactly the same thing. If the IPU Report surfaced BEFORE the Hoover handwritten note,(does anyone know?) this goes a long way toward establishing the authenticity of the IPU document.

    By Blogger Dominick, at Tuesday, February 12, 2013  

  • Dominick....

    The IPU report is rather tangential to the posting topic, but I'm allowing it as you and Larry (and CDA) seem to find it fascinating and pertinent.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Tuesday, February 12, 2013  

  • Thanks, RR, for allowing this discussion. Tangential? Perhaps. Yet if the IPU Report is authentic, then Roswell (your posting topic) is solved with or without any "dream team" revelations.

    By Blogger Dominick, at Tuesday, February 12, 2013  

  • Yes. Dominick....you make a point.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Tuesday, February 12, 2013  

  • Hey R-squared:

    I just found the Blog of the self-admitted Wizard of Ozwell, which explains how he/her/it directed the snake-oil-researchers towards the successful over-promotion of the event....

    ...and, it seems, the blogger is, like yourself, in the Wolverine State, so..... time to come clean, eh?, R-squared? :


    By Blogger Kurt Peters, at Tuesday, February 12, 2013  

  • KP:

    You've discovered Michael Swords site.

    He's a real UFO researcher.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Tuesday, February 12, 2013  

  • PG wrote:

    > I blame Roswell on Stanton Friedman

    Friedman has a lot to answer for. I've recently read all the early reports of the Hill case and find Friedman's retelling is wrong on pretty much every detail. He's a partisan who lets his beliefs trump fact. Marcello Truzzi, Karl Pflock, Kevin Randle, Jenny Randles and James Moseley all have said so in writing (though Friedman tells his readers that only diabolical skeptics disagree with him).

    > I'm not Canadian.

    I am! So I would like to make a plug for Canada's sensible ufologist, Chris Rutkowski, in the form of a prediction:

    The Dream Team will either:

    1) never publish a credible full report


    2) will publish an incredible full report without Chris Rutkowski's signature on it

    You read it here first.

    By Blogger Terry the Censor, at Wednesday, February 13, 2013  

  • Although RR permits further debate over the so-called 'IPU Report', I am reluctant to take this much, if any, further.

    Dominick writes: "Yet if the IPU Report is authentic, then Roswell (your posting topic) is solved with or without any "dream team" revelations".

    Indeed it would be. However, RR need not worry as this IPU Report is as phony as the 747 airliner once 'discovered' in a lunar crater.

    There is no such thing as "U.S.MAJESTIC INTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY", and never was. There is no such thing as "MAJIC ACCESS" either.

    If Dominick or Larry disbelieve me I challenge them to go directly to official records or archivists or anyone else in authority and find that such a designation or group ever existed.

    I do not have to be familiar with all the US military procedures and protocols to know that these descriptions are fictitious. They were invented by a forger during the 1990s, someone who wanted to show the UFO fraternity that he could 'improve' on the original MJ-12 forgeries. It is merely one of a series of fakes paraded during that period.

    Further, it is inconceivable that any of the top scientists named therein would have kept their knowledge of ETs visiting our planet secret for decade after decade (to their deaths) without informing fellow scientists. The idea that they, or anyone else, would have been forbidden to pass on this knowledge to the scientific world is dotty in the extreme.

    No, I am not going to check so-and-so's diary to see if he met Truman or Eisenhower on a certain day. Such research would be useless as there is never any indication of what they were discussing.

    The original of the IPU Report will, I guarantee, be non-existent. As will the originals of all the other fake documents.

    If you doubt me, please locate the originals. (And please do NOT make excuses for your failure to do so).

    The forger had seen FBI director Hoover's hand-written notes at the end of the memo in question (released with a huge batch of FBI papers in about 1976) and had simply copied something similar onto the phony IPU Report he composed during the 1990s.

    So get to it: find out all about "U.S.MAJESTIC INTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY". It sounds a tremendously exciting organisation.

    I await your discoveries.

    But this is not really supposed to be the topic under discussion.

    By Blogger cda, at Wednesday, February 13, 2013  

  • Christopher (CDA) has thrown down the gauntlet fellows...


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, February 13, 2013  

  • I agree with Chris about IPU, and imo, it is CIC/AFOSI pixie dust, at best a 'tracer'. Pure marketing.

    Any IPU story will begin and end with CI.



    By Blogger Don, at Wednesday, February 13, 2013  

  • CDA claims to know that the IPU Report under discussion was "invented by a forger in the 1990's." Who was the forger and how did you discover this information? Further, what rational incentives would explain the time and research required to create such a document? To dazzle the UFO community? To what end? You can't be serious. If the documents were forged (always a possibility), we need a far better explanation than CDA (or anyone else) has provided for motive.

    CDA also claims to know that designations such as MAGIC ACCESS are totally fictitious since, of course, there is no mention of such designations in "official records" or from anyone in "authority." But, CDA, if this project were super-secret, and allegedly hidden away and lied about for decades, why do you think there would be any official records to access? And even if there were, why would those in "authority" provide access to them?

    CDA has things quite backward. IF, and I say IF, such a super-secret project existed, and if information about it were leaked, there is absolutely no reason why anyone in "authority" would acknowledge its existence or allow researchers to discover "official" records. They would maintain almost complete silence...which is what they have done. Governments can keep secrets and destroy records and they may (I say may) well have done that here.

    So how can we take up CDA's challenge and "prove" that the document is real? We cannot. The best we can do is demonstrate by factual research that the claims and dates and names in the document are incorrect. And that's why the burden of "proof" in this case with respect to an alleged leaked document is REVERSED. The burden of proof is actually on those who maintain that the document is a forgery. Authority will never acknowledge its "real" (if it is) so the burden MUST fall on those who claim it's a fake. Prove it. Demonstrate errors of logic or fact...and then the document falls of its own weight regardless of any official or unoffical records.

    By Blogger Dominick, at Wednesday, February 13, 2013  

  • Dominick picks up the gauntlet.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, February 13, 2013  

  • So Dominick is saying that the government may well have destroyed all the original papers relating to the said event. This echoes Orwell's 1984!

    Applying this logic we could assume that in the event of the genuine discovery of ET on earth (perhaps the most momentous scientific event in the earth's history) the US authorities may have created many records relating to it and then destroyed them all afterwards to preserve the great secret! Is that how science works? I do not think so.

    One wonders what the whole purpose of space research & exploration is.

    It is similar to going to the moon (or maybe Mars in the future) but carefully destroying all documents and records to this effect and forcing those astronauts who went there to keep their mouths shut, just in case they found some ET life there.

    Boy, this takes some beating. It really does.

    And the forger? How about that Tim Cooper and/or his infamous "Cantwheel" informant? Where have they got to lately anyway?

    But really, I feel we are getting nowhere with this debate and that further discussion is pointless.

    By Blogger cda, at Wednesday, February 13, 2013  

  • R-squared:

    ...I received a hint from a correspondent that there was, in the middle 1990's, an expose in Milwaukee Magazine that exposed The Roswell Dream Team Darling, Don Schmidt, as at least, a confabulator!

    ..the author was said to be one Gillian Sender... Google searches however could not find any transcript...scrubbed perhaps?

    ...anyway, I found this indirect confirmation from Roswell General Officer Randle:


    ...perhaps the overly wordy Rudiak, the overly silent Rutkowski, or the overly full of himself Professor Bragalia might deign to comment??

    By Blogger Kurt Peters, at Thursday, February 14, 2013  

  • " RRRGroup said...


    You've discovered Michael Swords site.

    He's a real UFO researcher.


    Tuesday, February 12, 2013"

    ....you have apparently never been to his nest......

    By Blogger Kurt Peters, at Thursday, February 14, 2013  

  • I assume KP that you mean something other than an "informal conversationalist" for Mr. Schmidt.

    But since it's your word, I'll take it as the one intended and I don't see it as an epithet.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, February 14, 2013  

  • ....my bad.... I also await comment from "Yum..Mashed potatoes" Carey, of course!!!!

    By Blogger Kurt Peters, at Thursday, February 14, 2013  

  • As for Michael Swords, he, like Jerry Clark and the gamut of UFO geezers I often excoriate, is a UFO report accumulator.

    But Mr. Swords, or The Professor -- something like The Maestro in a few Seinfeld episodes -- has an inclination to present hoary UFO material, and for that he deserves kudos of some kind.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, February 14, 2013  

  • P.S.S. sorry to abuse the daily maximum posting allotment, but this too seems to be relevant:


    By Blogger Kurt Peters, at Thursday, February 14, 2013  

  • If there was a nuclear bomb test, the geologists would have detected it with seismology equipment? And if there was a nuclear explosion, the EMP it created could have knocked out the electronics on civilian aircraft in the area...

    By Blogger Parakletos, at Sunday, February 17, 2013  

Post a Comment

<< Home