It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Xtraeme
James, I don't think you realize that summaries on websites are frequently wrong and written by people who are less than in the know. What you did in that section is unabashedly manipulate what Salas said to frame it in a way that was convenient for your argument.
The only reason I even bother to mention November flight and Echo flight is to show the man clearly recognizes the chain of command as you've described it, though you obviously have a spin here.
You're talking about the statements he made in a section that discusses his attempts to find confirmation, while I'm talking about statements he made describing what was actually going on on March 16, 1967. I'm trying to show that the only reason he settled on a date of March 16 and not some other date is because of his claims that my father called him at the LCF on March 16, 1967
You're not an idiot James.
If this was put before a judge you'd get slammed with libel. This is so clearly a misinterpretation of what's written that it's blatantly obvious to any fact-checker.
Originally posted by Robert Hastings
I will print out your list of questions, read them on the flight, and have answers for you sometime over the weekend.
Originally posted by James Carlson
6. If UFOs were present, why did Lt. Col. Chase, the Malmstrom UFO officer, affirm repeatedly that UFOs were not involved?
30. If UFOs were involved in the Echo Flight Incident, why was NSA not involved in the investigation?
Salas, however, doesn't discuss any of this until 15 years later, after both Roy Craig and Lt. Col. Lewis D. Chase have died and can no longer discuss the matter or defend their reputations. And his take on the whole thing amounts to one, inflammatory statement: Lt. Col. Lewis D. Chase LIED to FTD to avoid discussing missile failures with a military unit outside of his chain of command!! And all of this when FTD WAS his chain of command.
... [Salas] was in completely virgin territory, here – territory that should have been a warning to him, because legally (if he was an honest man and we actually had any reason to believe that he was telling the truth) he should have assumed that whatever true facts he was about to make public were still highly classified, and as far as the Department of Defense was concerned, it really didn’t matter what his reasons were for breaking the law,
But if he was telling the truth... well, someone representing either the Department of Defense or the U.S. Marshals Service would have visited him.
And the fact that the Air Force apparently decided not to prosecute him for what they usually consider to be a very serious crime doesn’t really add much to his credibility.
I made a quick scan of the provided literature and can say at least this much: your writing style is far, FAR too informal; If you're attempting to discredit something, don't use incessant hyperbole, statements of opinion, or vulgar language (unless quoted); it would also behoove you to heavily edit your writing when dealing with the Salas individual; I get the impression you have a vendetta, and your point will most certainly be lost on people if they think your sole purpose is to drag the man through the mud. I have particular tastes when it comes to presentation and writing style, and I find that the inclusion of such techniques tend to a.) make me uninterested or b.) discredit the work, as it strikes me as unprofessional, and with a potential axe to grind. Take it for what you will.
Originally posted by Robert Hastings
Yes, the Big Secret can only be kept for so long. We Earthlings are all in for a very interesting future. Hope I live long enough to see a bit of it.