George Knapp Interviews UFO Whistle-Blower Colonel Philip Corso (ATS Exclusive)

page: 7
117
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 15 2009 @ 02:53 PM
link   
Brad Sparks' article does seem to nail some damning stuff, in particular Corso's alleged relationship with Frank Wisner.

When I first read the book, I did think Corso was a bit of a blowhard who tended to put himself at the centre of events. However, he put the book out when he knew he wasn't going to live much longer, and I gave him the benefit of the doubt on that basis.

Now I have to wonder whether his memories are confused or whether he's just making it all up. I'm slow to come to definite conclusions but what I've seen isn't encouraging, I have to say.

It's interesting that Corso mentions Frank Hand. Clearly Hand was well connected and trusted - he was one of the frontmen behind the Hugan Hand bank ripoff - but this seems a little out of his remit from what we know.

Confused geezer or implausible hoaxer? I just don't know at the moment. Which is fine, because "I don't know" is my default position on most things.




posted on Aug, 15 2009 @ 02:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nivcharah
A couple years ago, George Knapp interviewed someone on the local news who is a Las Vegas resident stating he can get a UFO to show up anywhere, anytime and all he has to do is think about it.

I missed the news coverage of it, but heard a snippet on a local radio talk show the next morning. They took this man to a location not disclosed in advance (so he couldn't plan it with someone) and chosen by the news team. He thought about the UFO and it appeared within a minute (maybe only seconds). He didn't even use a headset.

Not certain why the govt thinks they need one! They should learn telepathic communication instead.


If this is completely accurate wouldn't that guy be the most important person on Earth? So why are Las Vegas news teams just reporting on movie stars and murders when they have the biggest story in history?


M



posted on Aug, 15 2009 @ 03:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by rich23
Brad Sparks' article does seem to nail some damning stuff, in particular Corso's alleged relationship with Frank Wisner.

When I first read the book, I did think Corso was a bit of a blowhard who tended to put himself at the centre of events. However, he put the book out when he knew he wasn't going to live much longer, and I gave him the benefit of the doubt on that basis.


I don't have the reference - maybe it's online somewhere. Corso condemned co-writer/ghost William Birnes for inserting things he never said. Later caught in an embarrassing position of having to reiterate things attributed to him in his book.

Birnes probably won't talk, so an open question what Corso originally claimed and what got distorted and added on.

Looks to me as if Birnes just went through the UFO literature and inserted Corso wherever he could fit him in with minimal documented conflict. Like the connection to MJ-12, Wilbert Smith, etc.

There probably are facts and real events sprinkled through the book, but on the whole it can't be considered much more than another hybridized piece of fiction. These sensationalistic faux biographies have been a staple of mass market publishing for a long time.


Mike



posted on Aug, 15 2009 @ 10:05 PM
link   
reply to post by mmiichael
 


Dear mmiichael

Unfortunately I have not read his book the day after Roswell as it is not easy to get around here.

I have to say however this is a very good thread to support your theory. But it has not changed my mind about the whole episode.



posted on Aug, 15 2009 @ 10:42 PM
link   
reply to post by BO XIAN
 



Great thread. S&F

Great post BO XIAN. Starred - and thanks. So true that older people tend to mix things up a bit. Just means we have to pay better attention, imo.

Someone said the claims can't be verified, as with all the other whistleblowers' claims. ...Seems to me it's just arithmetic - add 'em all together and sum it up.




posted on Aug, 16 2009 @ 03:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pathos
Even though Mr. Knapp's interview has some type of credibility, I would not call it the smoking gun on the subject of UFOs. It is an interesting piece of work, which will be debated for several decades.

Some questions come to mind after watching this video and they include:
Does this film show definitive proof that there are aliens visiting Earth?
No. Even though you can look up some of his science, he does not provide facts that can be measured, tested, or touched.

Is Mr. Corso telling the truth?
Debatable. Since this video was taken when Mr. Corso was an older man, the reliability of his memory comes into question. Someone could easily say that he was suffering from Dimensia.

Could Mr. Knapp have staged or edited this interview for his benefit?
(No offense to Mr. Knapp).

Since I personally do not know the man, I would have to question his overall motive. Sure. He could have edited and staged this interview. If you watch anyone of the clips (start to finish), you can see that some type of editing was done. My question is "Why?"

Why did Mr. Knapp edit these videos? What is missing from them?

EDITED FOR CLARITY

[edit on 13-8-2009 by Pathos]



The Corso interview was indeed missing a heap of footage. From what I saw however was good and informative. I have read Corso's book and I can totally believe that Corso is telling the truth. I myself was fortunate to witness a large UFO being chased by a fighter jet last year so I have no doubt of the UFO/ET existence.

What I'm concerned about here is George Knapp's credibility. Because he himself has been accused of being a debunker. He was accused of being a part of AVIARY. A CIA UFO/ET Security and Suppression Network. He stated this quote:

"The Aviary? Give me a friggin break. Eventually, these guys all see or hear the chatter. They laugh about it, not because they feel superior to the masses, but because they can't look each other in the eyes without busting up. Since I have sometimes been accused of being an Aviary functionary myself, I appealed to the high priests for a bird name of my own. I was informed that "Buzzard" was the only one left. (Let's see---Falcon,Condor, Owl, Penguin, Blue Jay...damn...I'm left with Buzzard?) Then I found out that Buzzard---or maybe Vulture--was already taken by alleged CIA contract killer and JFK hitman Gordon Novel. I'm not crazy enough to pilfer HIS bird name. For crying out loud, who the hell is running this birdcage anyway?"

Now that statement would imply he was not involved in this network. Or it would simply to have been said to throw off the seekers of the truth.

Either way I still have my doubts on his credibility. But who am I to question this?

Corso in my view was dead on the money as far as his story is concerned. The US government and the New World Order are not telling us sh*t when it comes the the truth of the UFO/ET exitence on this planet.



posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 12:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by MAC269
reply to post by mmiichael
 


Dear mmiichael

Unfortunately I have not read his book the day after Roswell as it is not easy to get around here.

I have to say however this is a very good thread to support your theory. But it has not changed my mind about the whole episode.


Hi Mac - my friendly "foe"

I truly hope you've take the opportunity to read through the Brad Spaks critique of the Corso-Birnes book.

I won't bother to get all hot and bothered over what the book claims, except to note that on trying to match up names, dates, places, recorded event - the book turns out to be an outrageous pack of lies from beginning to end.

Fiction masquerading as factual history aimed ant an undiscriminating audience. I think all but the most hardcore UFOlogists quietly distance themselves from this embarrassing calamity.

Self-promoting lies flow fast and easy in the present day world of UFO investigation. Pointing this out is not malign skepticism, it's just stating self-evident facts.

Whatever may have happened at Roswell, you won't get the straight good from those professional whores who are determined to to squeeze a buck out of inventing one story after another. Were I seriously involved with the field I'd be clamouring for these charlatans to be booted out. No one should waste their time and pay money to be deceived.


Mike








[edit on 17-8-2009 by mmiichael]



posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 01:01 PM
link   
Good news...

I spoke with George yesterday and he has been following this thread. We created an ATS account for him, "George Knapp", and he will be participating in this thread soon.


Springer...



posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 07:17 AM
link   
Great series and Thanks. I came across something which may or may not add to this discussion. I looked for Wilbert Smith and one of the more interesting articles backs up what Lt.Colonel Corso had to say about the pillars. It can be found at: http//www.pararesearchers.org/UFOs/wsmith.html

I hope I entered this correctly.

admin edit: Added BB Code to make link clickable...

[edit on 8-22-2009 by Springer]



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 09:28 PM
link   
reply to post by mmiichael
 


Dear mmiichael

Yes I got that point and it would seam that this account of Corso is totally of the wall.

Have you seen this other thread?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

About the crash debris???

You never know one day we just might get something spectacular. That is if human nature doesn’t get in the way like it has already.



posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 05:29 AM
link   
Got to love the debunkers.... as Corso said, the Army just loves you guys, how does it feel to be missled? You go on and on about how this or that could not have happened based on some info from a so called relilable souce, but all the long you yourselfs are the ones being missled.
So I guess even if your not a "paid" debunker working for (........) , your still in a way working for (........) only your a volunteer.

Great interview, cant wait for more of it.




posted on Sep, 9 2009 @ 04:55 AM
link   
Greetings to ATS members:
First, I'm sorry it has taken me awhile to wade into your discussion about the Corso videos. Although I often slip in to see what ATS folks are talking about, I have been reluctant to jump in with both feet. I asked our mutual friend Springer if it would be appropriate for me to join the conversation about the Corso material and he encouraged me to do so. Had every intention of doing so sooner but have been juggling quite a few things, both personal and professional. Hope you don't mind my input since I am now a member myself.
Second, I was anxious to see how people would react to the Corso tape, what sort of give and take might be generated, and did not want to editorialize or otherwise influence the conversation, at least not until it had a chance to unfold on its own. It's not an experiment. I am simply curious. I've released snippets and soundbites in the past, but 75% of the stuff in these clips hasn't been seen by anyone since the footage was recorded.
Third, as always, ATS members have raised pointed, pertinent questions and issues about the material. I expected no less. There are a heck of a lot of things I'd like to say in response, but it will take a lot more space than the 4000 characters allowed per post. Maybe the illustrious Springer can organize some sort of venue or format where I could go into as much detail as possible, or have a real time exchange, though I'm sure there is plenty that I can't answer.
Fourth, I have no interest in "overselling" the Corso material. it is what it is. What it isn't--as a few ATS folks commented--is absolute proof of anything. It's just a piece of the puzzle, and you are all welcome to take it or leave it. I have no dog in this fight, and by that I mean I am not writing a book or hawking a screenplay about Col. Corso. It was my good fortune to meet him and interview him a long time ago. The footage has been sitting in my office for a long time. Springer offered me the chance to share it with a larger audience. In general, I believe Corso, for reasons I can explain in detail at a future time. The story clearly has flaws, which seems to be true for all tales told by UFO whistleblowers. My personal opinion is that this is not entirely accidental. We can get into that if there is enough interest from the members.
Fifth, there was no editing of the raw footage, other than cutting into bite-sized pieces for presentation here. The stops and starts and gaps are not from any post-editing session. They exist because of how the interview session was shot. Sorry to admit it, but I was the cameraman. A group of us flew from Las Vegas to met Corso. I took along a small video camera and recorded most of the conversation, but I was standing in a narrow section of a motorhome, and every once in awhile, I had to stop recording just to take a breath. It is abundantly clear that the footage was shot by a rookie. Meet the rookie in question. Nothing sneaky about it. I just had to take a break now and then but tried to pick times where the subject matter wasn't as critical.
Sixth, I shot another extended interview with Corso. He flew out to LV and faced a more pointed Q and A session. I plan to post those segments in a few days and hope you will check them out.
One other point--I see that a lot of you listened to the first segment, or second, but the other pieces of the interview haven't been viewed by a big chunk of the members here. I think seg. 5 is the most interesting one of the bunch, since that is where Corso describes the alien he allegedly encountered. Take a look. And in a few days, I will ask Mr. Springer to post the second interview. After that, I have a few more tidbits to round out the story, then maybe we can have a more direct give and take about your other questions and concerns.

Regards to all,

George Knapp



posted on Sep, 9 2009 @ 01:15 PM
link   
Thanks for the personal comment George. I hope u didn't think I was talking out of turn regarding your possible involvement with AVIARY.

I'll look forward to more interview material with Col Corso.....

Thanks!



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 12:42 PM
link   
Welcome Mr. Knapp, and thank you for the videos!



Originally posted by George Knapp
"...Third, as always, ATS members have raised pointed, pertinent questions and issues about the material. I expected no less. There are a heck of a lot of things I'd like to say in response, but it will take a lot more space than the 4000 characters allowed per post. Maybe the illustrious Springer can organize some sort of venue or format where I could go into as much detail as possible, or have a real time exchange, though I'm sure there is plenty that I can't answer."


I find Mr. Corso fascinating and tend to view his lack of effort to establish a base for some of the astounding things that he states in the videos as lending credibility to his story (BS artists generally work the "sell" much more, while Mr. Corso seems to be recalling from memory, very matter of fact-like in his delivery). I would love to hear as much detail as you can offer in as many posts as you would be willing to provide!


"...In general, I believe Corso, for reasons I can explain in detail at a future time. The story clearly has flaws, which seems to be true for all tales told by UFO whistleblowers. My personal opinion is that this is not entirely accidental. We can get into that if there is enough interest from the members."


INTEREST!!! INTEREST!!! INTEREST!!! (apologies for the caps, but...)



"...Sixth, I shot another extended interview with Corso. He flew out to LV and faced a more pointed Q and A session. I plan to post those segments in a few days and hope you will check them out."


Looking very much forward to those!



posted on Sep, 21 2009 @ 10:00 AM
link   
reply to post by George Knapp
 


Am I ignorant of something here? What happened to this thread - and to Mr. Knapp??

And I was so looking forward to more...



posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 01:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Yukitup
 


I'm curious about this thread as well. I always come back to Corso's case when things are slow here in UFO&A.

I find his story, even if fluffed up a bit, is rather believable. All the mud that's been thrown at it doesn't stick.

Has dust settled? Has everyone picked his/her side of the fence on this?

Did Mr. Knapp said there are more interview footages to come?

edit on 17-12-2010 by TinkererJim because: poor grammar
edit on 17-12-2010 by TinkererJim because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 28 2011 @ 10:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by StevesResearch

Originally posted by BO XIAN
reply to post by breakingdradles
 


I don't find those inconsistencies all that remarkable.
I think postulating that he was a rabid thorough-going disinfo agent primarily or only . . . is too much of a stretch.

It seems the more extraordinary the claims the more we scrutinise. It's understandable but sometimes a little unfair.


Thanks for your kind words. It is understandable.

However, I virtually never read much of an effort to put ourselves in the author's place. Would we be all THAT different in our narratives? I doubt it. People are pretty conventionally human, most of the time . . . the world over. WE are mopre alike than different.

So, to me, reflexively chronic, haughty, smug, self-righteous naysaying just because of a knee jerk response or some sort of proof that one's 'equipment' is bigger . . . is really annoying to absurd.

There have to be better ways to clarify, seek more info, question appropriately without coming off as super arrogant jerk of the year.



posted on Jul, 28 2011 @ 10:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow
reply to post by BO XIAN
 


Someone said the claims can't be verified, as with all the other whistleblowers' claims. ...Seems to me it's just arithmetic - add 'em all together and sum it up.



Thanks for your kind words.

I quite agree. IIRC, one of the reasons atheist C.S.Lewis became a Christian was because the Gospel narratives etc. were not some polished production . . . but very human narratives full of human flaws instead of some polished Hollyweed disinfo number.

I think a LOT of UFO narratives are exactly like that--full of humanness. And therein are GREAT CLUES as to authenticity. And I think that sort of thing--that part of the story is typically very hard to quantify. It is a kind of intuition thing to assess it.

And, imho, most naysayers are "HYPER RATIONALISTS" who pretend that the RELIGION OF SCIENCE is truly precise, pristine, the purest truly truest true truth proven by the law of the Medes and Persians etc. etc. etc.

What balderdash. Even science now acknowledges that certainly at the quantum level, things are far from exhaustively predictable and precise.

In any case, I've never observed HYPER RATIONALISTS to have great qualities or quantities of intuition. I don't think they assess nuance very well.

They don't feel comfortable until all the science journals in lock-step fashion have verified some truth as straight from whatever magicsterical papal body that science has deemed the purveyor of truth and the holy grail. And even then they'll still quibble. Sheesh.

OF COURSE there are disinfo agents.
Of course there are opportunists
Of course there are looneys.

AND

there's a big bunch of simple common humans experience very extraordinary things trying to wrap their normal thinking and existence around preposterous events and experiences. We ought to be able to at least afford to give them the benefit of the doubt, it seems to me.

Thanks for your kind reply.



posted on Jul, 28 2011 @ 11:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Enderdog
 


Thanks for your kind reply.

I agree entirely with your excellent post.

I have a question.

What is so difficult in understanding . . . how to put it . . .

What is so difficult--even for the scientific minded--in picking up on a myriad of cues that a given narrative is a typical, more or less authentic narrative?

Instead, if it's high quality and internally congruent--then it's too perfect and suspect.

If it's NOT high quality and super internally congruent on every tiny detail--then it's an obvious fraud.

One has the feeling that they'd Crucify Jesus Christ THE TRUTH IN PERSON because even HE didn't meet their cock-a-may-me irrationally prissy standards..

/rant



posted on May, 11 2012 @ 07:16 PM
link   
What so hard to believe about his story. The crux of his story is that a UFO crashed, the miltary retrieved it, decision makers decided to keep the information from public (hence reason for cover up), the use of the foreign technology divison as a effective mechanism to diseminate the hardware unsuspecting and transparently into the private contracting industry for back engineering, self regulating secruity they own the patent if they keep their mouth shut, he was the sort of liasion/coordinator middle man for this activity between his army boss and industry.

People with all the doubts and using the hes a loon angle cause he made this riduclous comment or that, you know get a life which is real. Think for youself !

The only sad thing is the critisim bashinghe received will deterother people like him, retired in the know who will be thinking why cop the same treatment. People should grow up and protect brave people who step forward.





top topics
 
117
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join