UFO Conjectures

Thursday, October 10, 2013

Roswell 101: A primer for those who haven’t been paying attention…

Copyright 2013, InterAmerica, Inc.

There were two incidents near Roswell in 1947, as outlined but abandoned by Stanton Friedman in his 1997 book (with Don Berliner), Crash at Corona.

The first, in late June or early July was at the Foster ranch, the other north of Roswell on July 8th .

The first “incident” became embroiled in the Mac Brazel debris scenario, that involved research balloons, and which the Army Air Force used as a diversion for the latter incident, involving an exotic aircraft accident, from which bodies were discovered and captured on film by a geologist or geologists who stumbled upon the military mop-up of that accident.

(That is the crux of the recent Kodachrome slide controversy, yet to play out completely.)

One can conjecture, and some have, that the first incident brought about the second incident, which was a reconnoiter of the scene by “associates” of that (or those) involved in the first incident.

The Mac Brazel balloon fiasco, which has absorbed David Rudiak and his skeptical nemeses, CDA, Lance Moody, Zoam Chomsky, and Gilles Fernandez, is the problematic element which has flummoxed those researching Roswell’s alleged incident(s).

Brazel may have accumulated balloon debris, but it seems to have been mixed with odd metals, which are being searched for by some of the once-ballyhooed Roswell Dream Team.

The second incident, which was the instigator of the July 8th Haut press release, about the capture or finding of a flying disk, is where the real Roswell incident began (and ended).

The Army Air Force, while gathering remnants and bodies from the July 8th accident, other Army personnel (General Ramey et al.) were actively disavowing any flying saucer crash, using the innocuous Brazel debris as a cover for the more important actual Roswell event that remains cloaked in secrecy and inept follow-up by UFO investigators, until now.

The battered Roswell Dream Team has unearthed materials that confirm extraordinary incidents around Roswell in June/July 1947, and will present their findings when they damn well please, they say..

Whether those Dream Team findings will provide an ET explanation is yet to be determined, but it seems likely, to me, that the new evidence(s) lean in that direction.

Moreover, my suggestion, earlier here, that the Muroc sighting of July 8th, 1947 is part and parcel of the Roswell incident still stands, despite scoffing by the lesser imaginative UFO buffs.



  • RR:

    Stirring it up again eh?

    Here is your response to me in the last but one topic:

    "You must remember CDA that there were two incidents: the Brazel debris fraud and then the real incident...the one which produced those infamous slides."

    Unfortunately I 'remember' no such thing. Furthermore, I refuse to acknowledge that there were two incidents, much as you wish me, and others, to do so.

    Is there going to be some great denouement, some great announcement, or some earth-shattering revelation?

    No there is not. And no the slides, if they exist, do not show alien bodies. And the Muroc episode had zilch to do with Roswell (either part 1 or part 2).

    Here is one other thing you never knew. It is the literal truth: July 8, 1947 was the date of my first ever flight in an airplane. I was very young. I have just looked in the biographical notes my mother made, and even the ticket is there: 2 dollars! It was
    in a seaplane and took off from a pontoon at North Long Beach Seaplane Base, Long Island, New York. It lasted, I believe, about 15-20 minutes. Something real happened to me that day.

    By Blogger cda, at Thursday, October 10, 2013  

  • There are still surprises about Roswell to be shared or known. Whether they are earth shattering is yet to be seen, but I'm open to new revelations, such as your first airplane jaunt....no UFOs seen I'm guessing...

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, October 10, 2013  

  • "Evidence" for two crashes from the infamous IPU Report "declassified" in 1960:

    Interplanetary Phenomenon Unit Summary
    INTELLIGENCE ASSESSMENT F i l e ref • OO1947122-A-1206
    1 . The. e x t r a o r d i n a r y recovery of f a l l e n airborne objects in
    t h e s t a t e of New Mexico, between 4 J u l y - 6 J u l y 1947: This Summary was
    prepared by Headquarters I n t e r p l a n e t a r y Phenomenon Unit, S c i e n t i f i c and
    Technical Branch, C o u n t e r i n t e l l i g e n c e D i r e c t o r a t e , as requested by A.C.
    of S . , G-2, a t the expressed order of Chief of S t a f f.
    2. At 2332 MST, 3 J u l y 47, radar stations in e a s t Texas, and
    White Sands Proving Ground, N.M., tracked two unidentified, a i r c r a ft
    until both dropped off radar. Two crash s i t e s have been located close
    t o the WSPG. S i t e L Z - 1 was located a t a ranch near Corona, approx. 75
    miles northwest of t h e town of R o s w e l l . S i t e LZ-2 was. l o c a t e d approx.
    20 miles southeast of the town of Socorro, at Lat. 33-40-31, Long. 106-28-29, w i th 3. The AST personnel were mainly i n t e r e s t e d in LZ-2 as
    t h i s s i t e contained the majority of s t r u c t u r a l d e t a i l of the c r a f t 's
    airframe, propulsion and navigation technology. The recovery of five
    bodies i n a damaged escape c y l i n d e r , precluded an i n v e s t i g a t i o n at
    L Z - 1 .
    4. On a r r i v a l at LZ-2, personnel assessed the finds as not
    belonging to any a i r c r a f t , rocket, weapons, or balloon t e s t t h a t are
    normally conducted from surrounding bases. F i r s t reports i n d i c a t e d t h at
    t h e f i r s t crash i n v e s t i g a t o r s , from Roswell AAF t h a t LZ-1 was the
    remains of a AAF top s e c r e t MOGUL b a l l o o n p r o j e c t . When s c i e n t i s ts
    - 2 -
    from the Los Alamos S c i e n t i f i c Laboratory arrive* t o inspect LZ-2, it
    became apparent to a l l concerned that what had crashed in the desert
    was something out of this world.
    5. Interviews with radar operators and o f f i c e r s from the
    Signal Corps Engineering Laboratories, Fort Monmouth, N.J., ??? were
    tracking these objects on-and-off since June 29 from Station "A", a ll
    indicated that these targets had periodically remained stationary for
    minutes at a time, then would resume their original course, flying from
    the southeast to northwest, SCEL antennas had locked onto a f l i g h t of
    three objects on 3 July and l o s t them around 2330 MST on 4 July (a V-2'
    was scheduled for launch which i s why SCEL S t a t i on "A" was able to do
    a track) It has been learned that at l e a s t s i x radar stations in east
    Texas (see detailed report in attchment A), and radar stations at
    Alamogordo AAF and Kirtland AAF, had also picked up these objects on
    the 4th as well. Using topographical maps and triangularization, a
    l a s t known position and bearing was calculated which helped search
    parties to locate the general area. Detachment 3 of the 9393rd
    Technical Services Unit, assigned to Alamogordo AAF, was responsible
    for the locating and transportation of the large sections of the
    c r a f t .
    6. A s p e c i a l radiobiological team accompanied by a SED
    and s e c u r i t y d e t a i l from Sandia Base under orders from Colonel S. V.
    Hasbrouck, USA, Armed Forces Special Weapons Project, secured the
    immediate area surrounding the crash s i t e . Select s c i e n t i s t s from
    The General Advisory Committee of the Atomic Energy Commission, most
    notably D R . J . ROBERT OPPENHEIMER, was identified at LZ-2 as well as
    other members. Among PAPERCLIP s p e c i a l i s t i d e n t i f i e d at LZ-2 were DR.
    7. Because of the stringent security measures that were in
    place at both crash s i t e s , the team was not able to gain access to the
    several locations where wreckage and bodies are being held. CIC member

    By Blogger Dominick, at Thursday, October 10, 2013  

  • Interesting that Dominick put "evidence" and "declassified" in quotes.

    I suggest he also puts "Interplanetary Phenomenon Unit" in quotes.

    And I love those ever-so-exact latutides and longitudes.

    By Blogger cda, at Thursday, October 10, 2013  

  • You know Rich at some point one has to make a judgment about the authenticity of certain documents that have found there way into the public domain. (Just like the photos that we debate). Some have a very low probability of being "real" (just like 99% of the photos) but occasionally a few (a very few) tell a story with names and dates that could possibly be the real deal. Now that's my reading on the IPU Report. There is nothing in it that's obviously wrong. Moreover, there are several things in it that are very curious--that Congressman Jack Kennedy learned about the Roswell crash from a friend of the then Secretary of the Air Force, or that there were bodies and debris taken to specific locations--that find support from other written sources and testimony. It is a VERY interesting document--real of cleverly faked--and I encourage everyone to take a serious look at it....before dismissing it out of hand. We will never get anywhere--and that goes for the alleged alien slide photos--if we simply dismiss everything that claims to be real out of hand.

    By Blogger Dominick, at Thursday, October 10, 2013  

  • CDA wrote:

    "..And I love those ever-so-exact latutides and longitudes...."

    What, exactly, do you find suspicious about the use of exact lattitue and longitude? Perhaps the supposed crash occurred near a location that had already been surveyed?

    By Blogger Larry, at Thursday, October 10, 2013  

  • I get your point, Dominick, and hope others do too.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, October 10, 2013  

  • Dominick:

    I don't think anyone connected with the Majestic Documents has claimed that the IPU document was "declassified". To be in that category, the government would have to admit (1) that the document was legitimately one of theirs, (2) that it was properly classified in the first place, and (3) that it has undergone appropriate review and has been "declassified" as a result. To my knowledge, the government has done none of the above.

    If the document is real, then it is in the same legal category as all the diplomatic communications released through Wikileaks, the NSA Snowden revelations, etc. That is, the government implies that that information is classified and admonishes government employees to not read it, lest they be in violation of national security laws. At the same time, they have not commented on the content of any particular communication. (i.e., they neither confirm nor deny.) Like the Wikileaks documents, the IPU document is purported to have been "leaked".

    Also, in spite of CDA's harrumphing, the Interplanetary Phenomenon Unit has been verified by the Army Security Agency as having been a real (although informal) organizational unit. It dealt with the UFO topic, and--when it went out of business--gave all its files to the Air Force's Blue Book. So, no quotation marks are needed.

    By Blogger Larry, at Thursday, October 10, 2013  

  • Just curious.
    When this exactly "IPU" document surfaced in the Ufology ? 1995 ? Or before Mogul "proposed" as a explicative hypothesis by Todd, Plock and after in the USAF ? Someone have a idea ?

    I read received July, 16 1995 in the "original" pdf.

    Yes, it mentions Mogul and seems surfacing 1995... So, it warned my Red Flag. ??



    By Blogger Gilles Fernandez, at Friday, October 11, 2013  

  • Larry,

    You are absolutely correct on my use of "declassification." Actually I did not quite know how to put the status of that document. "Leaked" it should have been.

    But let me push you on this. There are some amazing "revelations" and confirmations in that one document concerning 2 crashes, bodies and debris, names of officers in charge, body parts (animal?) found at the scene, security personel infected and dying, etc. How much of it do you accept as valid? If the document IS, in fact, valid then it is the smoking gun document on the crashes and the recovery.

    By Blogger Dominick, at Friday, October 11, 2013  

  • It can be shown that the Ft. Monmouth station played a huge role in the early days (CIG). I will be more specific when I get home, this evening, but it is interesting.


    By Blogger Bob Koford, at Friday, October 11, 2013  

  • For what its worth, Ft. Monmouth is apparently where the broohaha started by Senator Joe McCarthy began.

    Besides that, I have seen Ft. Monmouth mentioned several times in the early documents of the CIG/CIA. Apparently several Army radar stations were co-opted out to the CIA for domestic ease-dropping. The Ft. Monmouth station was a main hub in this organization of the first domestic listening posts. These began to be operated before the creation of even the Armed Forces Security Agency (AFSA).

    This was one reason I asked Kevin Randle if he thought it might have any connection with the Lydia Sleppy info.

    Note this reference from one of the documents I received 11 April 2013, as per a Freedom of Information request I made:

    CIA Document control # C03025298 Approved For Release 2002/06/18 : CIA-RDP79-01143A000100020027-1


    MEMORANDUM TO: Director of Central Intelligence

    SUBJECT: ORE Status Report: October 1947…"

    (Bob note-ORE = Office of Reports and Estimates)

    Turning to Page 2, Subheading

    "b. Scientific Intelligence Program

    Arrangements have been made with the concurrence of the Chief Signal Officer, Department of the Army, whereby the research personnel of the Signal Corps Laboratory, Fort Monmouth, New Jersey, are available for consultation on the scientific intelligence aspects of Signal Corps activities. The Commanding Officer of the laboratories has written to express appreciation of CIA cooperation in this field…"

    This Document signed by Theodore Babbitt, Assistant Director Reports and Estimates

    This is just one mention of the Ft. Monmouth’s radar installation being pertinent to the CIA’s National Intelligence Objectives. Other documents show how the CIA was using several Army sites for signals processing.

    By Blogger Bob Koford, at Friday, October 11, 2013  

  • So when the slides are revealed to proper public scrutiny - if ever - and they turn out to have the same level of authenticity and believability as the Santilli film, Rich will admit to being duped? No he won't, he will just go on about other things, and continue to believe that ET crash landed in New Mexico. No matter what.

    In fact, let's hear from any of the true blue Roswell believers if they are prepared to abandon their belief in a Roswell ET crash, if the slides turn out to be much ado about nothing, a hoax or misidentification or similar mischaracterization (which they will, since ET never crash landed at Roswell). That's assuming they ever come to be made available to independent scrutiny.

    Of course, none of the true believers, not Randle, Rudiak, Bragalia and Reynolds and the rest, will abandon their belief here. They won't budge from it. Their belief is unfalsifiable, that's because they are true believers. In other words, it doesn't matter where the evidence leads, their faith in Roswell is a religious one, not a scientific one.

    Skeptics such as myself, CDA, Moody, Duensing, Kimball and others (I assume I can speak for them here if not on anything else) are prepared to make predictions here: either the slides will never be made available to public and independent scrutiny (in which case we will continue to dismiss all this with a bored shrug) and some pathetic excuse will be given, or if they eventually are made public, they will turn out to be a hoax or simply mundane in whatever fashion, nothing exotic/ET at all. That is our predictions are falsifiable.

    Perhaps the true believers ought to read a little Karl Popper, couldn't hurt.

    By Blogger Lawrence, at Saturday, October 12, 2013  

  • Lawrence...

    I'm keeping an open mind.

    I am agnostic about Roswell, but do try to provide both the "believer" view here and the "skeptical" view.

    People who've read, carefully, this blog and others of ours know that.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Saturday, October 12, 2013  

Post a Comment

<< Home