It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Ramey Memo: Best Roswell Evidence Ever Found

page: 8
106
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 09:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by mab22
it would be interesting if we knew the font to recreate the picture in the same conditions and then compare, kind of hard though as you'd need to take into account camera type, distance ,lighting and paper angle,


Yeah, well, that's the whole trouble. There's just not enough information available in the photo to do any reasonable analysis. And even if the memo mentions something about a "crashed disc," whatever the context, such as quoting the mistaken first press release, there's absolutely nothing but hearsay and very shaky testimony linking it with any kind of "aliens."





posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 11:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Shrike
I keep recommending one source above others although any serious researcher can come up with similar information except that you can't interview any longer those who have passed on. But we're fortunate to have their present testimony to compare against the past. The present testimony is proof that what believers want to accept has no basis in fact.

Here are some research comments by Karl Pflock as found in his book "ROSWELL: Inconvenient Facts and the Will to Believe" (2001), page 209, and this is not best nor it illustrates the major participants' changed testimony:
"Somewhat more rooted in reality are the attempts of the Roswell Photo Interpretation Team (RPIT) and others to ferret out the meaning of words on a piece of paper Brig. Gen. Roger Ramey is seen holding in two of the photographs taken of him on July 8, 1947, as he poses beside the NYU-Mogul debris brought to Fort Worth by Maj. Jesse Marcel. J. Bond Johnson, the man who took the photographs in Ramey's office, founded and heads RPIT, which is dedicated to analyzing the images he and Fort Worth Army Air Field public information officer Maj. Charles Cashon captured in Ramey's office.

When first contacted by Roswell researchers in 1989, Johnson had very hazy memories of the events forty-two years before, but seemed to accept the weather balloon and radar target explanation. It was not long before he found the opinions of crashed-saucer proponents persuasive, and he seems sincerely to believe he was duped by the army in 1947. He now devotes much of his time to proving this through interpretation of what is shown in his and Cashon's photos. Among other things, Johnson and RPIT claim they have "'proved conclusively'" that the debris photographed in Ramey's office could not possibly have been part of a New York University balloon project flight train, this despite all the evidence to the contrary."


Which "believers" is Shrike referring to? What he has done is deliberately or ignorantly misrepresent the actual views of the VAST MAJORITY of Roswell researchers, who actually maintain that the debris in Ramey's office was indeed from a weather balloon and RAWIN weather target, but was substituted debris, not the real stuff found at Roswell. Or as Ramey's chief of staff Brig. Gen. Thomas Dubose (also pictured in the Johnson photos) said, the debris in the photos was a weather balloon cover story designed to get rid of the press. (For this heresy from one of their own generals, Dubose's testimony was deliberately omitted from the Air Force debunker's disinformation report, not even to identify him in the photos.)

In other words, nobody but the original book "The Roswell Incident" and Johnson (who was never a real researcher of any note) and a tiny coterie of followers have ever claimed the wreckage in the phots was real "flying saucer" debris. To say otherwise means that "Shrike" is either flagrantly lying or lacks even the most basic knowledge of the Roswell case. Yet he claims to be a "critical thinker" who knows exactly what happened, unlike all the "gullible believers." How can you be a "critical thinker" if you don't know the basics or have to lie to make your case?

The real "gullible believers" are debunkers like Shrike, who still think that a nonexistent Mogul balloon flight dreamed into existence by Air Force counterintelligence officers, who did all sorts of provable lying to create it, could possibly explain what happened.

Ironically, the proof is in the photos Johnson took, which show one radar target and one weather balloon, exactly the story Gen. Ramey was putting out. How did an allegedly 28 weather balloon Mogul balloon train shrink down to exactly one weather balloon? Or how did the alleged 3 to 5 Mogul radar targets shrink down into exactly one? That's 50-60 pounds of Mogul shrinking down to about 1 pound.

Or for that matter, where is all the Mogul equipment suspended from the balloons? It's not there either. Ramey said no other equipment was found, the rancher indicated no equipment was found, and intelligence officer Marcel indicated no equipment.

And where is all the Mogul balloon train rigging in the photos, some 400 or so yards worth? Not only is none in the photos, the rancher's story was none was found. Nobody else described it either.

The rancher also claimed all the rubber pieces were small pieces or "strips". But the balloon in the photo isn't a pile of pieces but a relatively intact weather balloon.

What we have here is a magical balloon that only a true "gullible believe" would believe in. Not only did it never exist in the first place (I defy Shrike to show one piece of actual Mogul documentation indicating it actually flew instead of being a total blank space in the Mogul records, just like other never-flown Moguls), it had additional magical properties of disappearing equipment and rigging, a reassembling weather balloon, and the ability to shrink down to exactly fit the quantity of debris one would expect from typical meteorological use of these radar targets, namely one weather balloon lofting one radar target.

One balloon and target is also what Ramey's weather officer Irving Newton identified in 1947, and in interviews in the present has continued to insist all there was. He has never accepted the Mogul balloon hypothesis, stating what he saw could have come from any number of weather stations. Indeed, the AP science writer stated about 100 such radar tracked balloons were lofted every day by weather stations around the country. Newton in 1947 was quoted saying it could have come from any of 80 weather stations.

Finally, let us again talk about the alleged Mogul "flower tape" on the radar targets, that the rancher Brazel also mentioned. Surely if the Ramey debris was what Brazel found, the flower tape should be there, right? Wrong! Nobody can find it, including the mystery high level photoanalysis lab the Air Force debunkers had analyze the photos Johnson took. Yet it should be in plain sight if Ramey's radar target really had it.

So Johnson's photos disprove any connection between Mogul or even what Brazel claimed to have found. Only gullible, truly uncritical debunkers who think they are "critical thinkers" believe the fantasy Mogul balloon story dreamed up by Air Force Pentagon counterintelligence officers, namely people trained and paid to deceive. The head honcho of the team, Col. Richard Weaver, was actually the head of security for the Air Force's Special Access Programs (SAPs), commonly known as Black Projects. As he told fellow counterintelligence officer, Roswell CIC officer Sheridan Cavitt when he interviewed him, "We're the people that guard the secrets." Yeah, we're going to get the straight story on Roswell from him, aren't we?

Pflock, a former CIA employee and certified hoaxer, whom Cavitt referred to as "our debunker" to Weaver, also can't be trusted in many of his statements. E.g., Pflock claimed the "flower tape" was the white strips on the foil sheets in the Johnson photos. This was Pflock not knowing what he was talking about, since the white strips were the white paper backing of the foil-paper reflector material folded back at the edges to form sleeves for the balsa wood kite stick framework (as is clearly indicated in the radar target schematic the AF published). But I bet Shrike, gullible believer that he is, believes everything Pflock has to say, even when he clearly wrong. That's all the "critical thinking" you are going to get out of skeptical gullibles like Shrike.



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 11:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by debrisfield
(snip)


Your expertise at killing the messenger is to be admired. I simply copied and pasted and added a few comments but as John Lennon sang "The way things are going. They're gonna crucify me." Don't crucify me, Roswell isn't worth dying for!

For your information, I'd rather side with a serious research like Karl T. Pflock than side with you as you don't have his credentials and your comments reflect no credentials whatsoever.

I learned about Roswell in 1957 while stationed at Sidi Slimane AFB, Morocco.

I went to the National Archives and Records Administration complex in College Park, Maryland, in 2003 accompanying my brother-in-law who was the photographer of the photos appeaging in Popular Mechanics, June 2003. The cover article was "Roswell Declassified".
books.google.com... 9jrECeZrsKpJIhG8VLVCo&hl=en&ei=AXgZTfnsN4Wclgfl2-mcDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBgQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=popular%20mechanics%20roswell %20declassified%20june%202003&f=false

I touched the Roswell debris.

What are you bringing to the table? Inane comments?

edit on 27-12-2010 by The Shrike because: Correct spelling error.



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 11:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by debrisfield
Pflock, a former CIA employee and certified hoaxer, whom Cavitt referred to as "our debunker" to Weaver, also can't be trusted in many of his statements.


I didn't know Pflock was ex-CIA. How interesting. Where did Sheridan Cavitt refer to him as our debunker ?
I already knew Weaver was an ex psychological warfare expert.



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 11:59 PM
link   
reply to post by debrisfield
 


Anyone who completes a college or university bachelor degree has been trained in critical thinking.

i.e you evaluate all evidence and then form a conclusion based on ALL evidence.

As you said The Shrike cherry picks evidence, accepts the testimony that supports his predetermined conclusion only, then ignores conflicting testimony and/or disparages the credibility of the witness with conflicting testimony.

And then insults people who don't agree with him when presented with facts he can't explain.

If The Shrike submitted any papers using these methods of critical thinking while studying at college or university he would fail the assignment, plain and simple. Its known as BAD SCIENCE. He could get some academic help, but if his work did not change he would never achieve a bachelor degree.

The Shrike would benefit from a university education.

The Shrike, I have not once said I have formed a conclusion about the Roswell incident so don't assume that I am a believer of the alien space craft theory. I am merely being objective.
edit on 28/12/1010 by Krusty the Klown because: Kan't spell



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 12:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Krusty the Klown
reply to post by debrisfield
 


Anyone who completes a college or university bachelor degree has been trained in critical thinking.

i.e you evaluate all evidence and then form a conclusion based on ALL evidence.

As you said The Shrike cherry picks evidence, accepts the testimony that supports his predetermined conclusion only, then ignores conflicting testimony and/or disparages the credibility of the witness with conflicting testimony.

And then insults people who don't agree with him when presented with facts he can't explain.

If The Shrike submitted any papers using these methods of critical thinking while studying at college or university he would fail the assignment, plain and simple. Its known as BAD SCIENCE. He could get some academic help, but if his work did not change he would never achieve a bachelor degree.

The Shrike would benefit from a university education.

The Shrike, I have not once said I have formed a conclusion about the Roswell incident so don't assume that I am a believer of the alien space craft theory. I am merely being objective.
edit on 28/12/1010 by Krusty the Klown because: Kan't spell


You can't go head to head with me. You're too young and haven't had accumulated enough life experience to make any more sense than you make in your comments above.

Ignore what I say. Put on the table the evidence that supports a crashed saucer near Roswell. Evidence that will stand up to scrutiny. I doubt that you will be able to do so regardless of your alleged superior education. Evidence, my boy. Remember, I don't have to prove a negative.

That Ramey memo could not be the "Best Roswell Evidence Ever Found". It's an impossibility. Stick to the thread.



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 12:29 AM
link   
reply to post by The Shrike
 


If you had read my posts you would have seen that I said this piece of evidence was totally spurious (look it up).

And yes I wouldn't go head to head with you because there would be no point and it would be a waste of time.

You do not use logical evaluative methods or thought processes so it would achieve nothing. You believe what you do despite evidence that says otherwise.

I actually stated I had not drawn a conclusion and you still state that I believe the saucer crash story even when I said I didn't.

I think this might be a case of you hearing and seeing what you want to hear, see and believe.

You mentioned you think Jesse Marcel was suffering from Dementia - is sounds like you know the symptoms. That makes me worry a little bit about you The Shrike, have you been for check up with your doctor lately

edit on 28/12/1010 by Krusty the Klown because: (no reason given)

edit on 28/12/1010 by Krusty the Klown because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 12:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Krusty the Klown
reply to post by The Shrike
 


You still haven't answered my question The Shrike.

Why are you here? You say you already know the answer to this issue. So why do waste your time on these threads?

Do you believe you are really helping people by insulting them?


This is the third time I'm asking this question The Shrike.

Why won't you answer it?



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 12:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Shrike
I learned about Roswell in 1957 while stationed at Sidi Slimane AFB, Morocco.

I touched the Roswell debris.



So you say you touched some ' debris'.

Would you agree that if you touched anything, it was what the Military WANTED you to touch? ( or at least had no problem with?)
And would you also agree that you have no way of proving it WAS the actual pieces collected from the Ranch?



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 01:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by annella

Originally posted by The Shrike
I learned about Roswell in 1957 while stationed at Sidi Slimane AFB, Morocco.

I touched the Roswell debris.



So you say you touched some ' debris'.

Would you agree that if you touched anything, it was what the Military WANTED you to touch? ( or at least had no problem with?)
And would you also agree that you have no way of proving it WAS the actual pieces collected from the Ranch?


appeal to authority.... *yawn*


Originally posted by mcrom901
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 



Originally posted by Arbitrageur
Even the FBI used the term "disk" referring to a hexagonal object (radar reflectors might be described as hexagonal) attached to a balloon:


what do you mean 'might be described as'....


the data reads....


FBI DALLAS 7-8-47 6-17 PM DIRECTOR AND SAC, CINCINNATI URGENT FLYING DISC, INFORMATION CONCERNING. MAJOR CURTAN, HEADQUARTERS EIGHTH AIR FORCE, TELEPHONICALLY ADVISED THIS OFFICE THAT AN OBJECT PURPORTING TO BE A FLYING DISC WAS RE COVERED NEAR ROSWELL, NEW MEXICO, THIS DATE. THE DISC IS HEXAGONAL IN SHAPE AND WAS SUSPENDED FROM A BALLON BY A CABLE, WHICH BALLON WAS APPROXIMATELY TWENTY FEET IN DIAMETER. MAJOR CURTAN FURTHER ADVISED THAT THE OBJECT FOUND RESEMBLES A HIGH ALTITUDE WEATHER BALLOON WITH A RADAR REFLECTOR, BUT THAT TELEPHONIC CONVERSATION BETWEEN THEIR OFFICE AND WRIGHT FIELD HAD NOT xxxxxxxxxx BORNE OUT THIS BELIEF. DISC AND BALLOON BEING TRANSPORTED TO WRIGHT FIELD BY SPECIAL PLANE FOR EXAMIN INFORMATION PROVIDED THIS OFFICE BECAUSE OF NATIONAL INTEREST IN CASE xxxx AND FACT THAT NATIONAL BROADCASTING COMPANY, ASSOCIATED PRESS, A OTHERS ATTEMPTING TO BREAK STORY OF LOCATION OF DISC TODAY. MAJOR CURTAN ADVISED WOULD REQUEST WRIGHT FIELD TO ADVISE CINCINNATI OFFICE RESULTS OF EXAMINATION. NO FURTHER INVESTIGATION BEING CONDUCTED.


foia.fbi.gov...



Where did Ramey get proper obscure term and shape description for a radar target?--probably scripted by military intelligence or counterintelligence

The term RAWIN in "DEM/RAWIN" was a meteorological jargon term for a RAdar WINd target. Not only was Gen. Ramey telling the press he thought the rubble in his office might be a weather balloon and radar target, he obviously knew it was judging, among other things, through his use of proper terminology. Later bringing in a weather officer (Irving Newton) for official identification was obviously just for show.

In addition, Ramey and his minions were describing the shape of the RAWIN targets as "hexagonal" (such as in the FBI telegram out of Dallas and Reuter's stories). The problem here is that a radar target might only be so described by somebody looking at the outline of a fully assembled and intact target directly from the top or bottom. But all Ramey had to look at was a torn-up target with pieces laying on the ground. It is quite impossible to deduce a "hexagonal" shape in such a state. So where did Ramey get the "hexagonal" shape description? Not from weather officer Newton, who came in later and instead called it a "six-pointed star". Only somebody quite familiar with intact radar targets might refer to them as "hexagonal", so apparently Ramey was provided the "hexagonal" RAWIN description as part of a prepared script, again possibly from counterintelligence or intelligence. (see Ramey's impossible hexagon story for details)


www.roswellproof.com...



moreover in regards to fbi's involvement....


Mr. (name blacked out) also discussed this matter with Colonel L.R. Forney of MID (Military Intelligence Division). Colonel Forney indicated that it is his attitude that inasmuch as it has been established that the flying disks are not the result of any Army or Navy experiments, the matter is of interest to the FBI.


www.abovetopsecret.com...


Originally posted by Arbitrageur
I frankly don't see how anyone can listen to Marcel's description of the debris and not conclude it's project mogul


i suppose you are referring to the infamous mogul flight #4.... in other words charles moore's hallucinations....


The number 4 flight of this experimental balloon MOGUL, the only one which could have landed near the ranch at the time….never went up.

That’s right. MOGUL Flight 4 was never launched. That is according to notes taken on that day. IT WAS A NO LAUNCH DAY BECAUSE OF BAD WEATHER JUST LIKE THE DAY BEFORE.


ufomedia.blogspot.com...



Originally posted by Arbitrageur
The Air Force report by its own admission is incomplete.


is full of holes would sound more appropriate.....



which allegedly consisted of...



"the box kite"... which came to be known as the "flying disk"...


something like this....



n the 'material' DEBRIS being the radar reflectors ONLY...

which SURPRISE SURPRISE..... they still have an original piece left....






but what about the rest of the material....





aahhh.... sheridan cavitt had described a black box in the wreckage...


Moore succeeded in locating him and visiting his house for an interview. However, Cavitt refused to talk about the incident. Years later he also refused to talk to Randle and Schmidt. However, he did talk to the Air Force invesigator and the story below is what he claimed actually happened. The astute reader will realize that Cavitt's testimony is about as solid as a Swiss cheese (full of holes).


www.nicap.org...


but according to mogul expert richard muller @ around the one hour mark....



the microphones were suspended via springs inside the 'disks'..... whilst the radar reflectors sent back the data that was being 'heard'...



then we have the balloon design contradictions.....

left only with drawings for flight#2..



which along with flights # 4 & 9 are missing in the reports....



The difficulty in reconstructing flight 4 was that aside from a diary entry, there was little information on where it flew, and only hints as to what tracking devices were on the flight. The latter was important, as radars, sonobuoys and theodolites were used initially for tracking Mogul flights, only to be later discarded in favour of radiosondes as flights proved to drift well beyond the circa 40-mile tracking range of radar. Records for other flights exist, and they show that flight 2 had rawin reflectors for radar tracking, but flight 5 had a radiosonde. Moore deduced that the fact that flight 4 was lost strongly suggested that flight 5’s use of a radiosonde for tracking was a direct result of the inability to track flight 4 with radar. Of course, if flight 4 didn’t have radar reflectors, it could not have been the source of the debris on the Foster ranch.

en.wikipedia.org...

but according to af report.... attachment #27 - table no.7 (summary of nyu constant-level balloon flights)...

flight#5 was launched on 5th june 1947... i.e. having a gap of ONLY one day with flight#4 @ june 4....


which brings us to the conclusion... that moore's 'deductions' have no basis in reality....


on the contrary.... flight#4 was more likely to have had a radiosonde...


Professor Moore also commented: "Flight Number 4 was launched on June 4 (1947) and it was tracked by the B-17 and by the radar



well... www.project1947.com...

n finally... when the af was asked why they thought they saw disks....



they show clips of payloads from nasa's experiments of 1972....








posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 01:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Schaden

Originally posted by debrisfield
Pflock, a former CIA employee and certified hoaxer, whom Cavitt referred to as "our debunker" to Weaver, also can't be trusted in many of his statements.


I didn't know Pflock was ex-CIA. How interesting. Where did Sheridan Cavitt refer to him as our debunker ?
I already knew Weaver was an ex psychological warfare expert.


Cavitt called Pflock "our debunker" in his interview with Weaver, published in the AF Roswell Report.

In explaining to fellow counterintel officer Cavitt his background, Weaver said , "I would kind of like to know how THEY did it [those who keep the Roswell secrets], because IN MY REAL JOB we handle all the Special Programs [Special Access Programs or Black Projects] that do keep all the secrets. And we would like to figure out THEY do it so we can duplicate it. Because it is very hard to keep secrets, as you well know."

Weaver was admitting he was one of the guys [actually the head guy, as stated elsewhere in the Roswell Report] in charge of keeping the secrets for the very Top Secret SAPs and would like to know how the Roswell secrets had been kept so successfully. That's an astounding statement, pretty much an admission by Weaver that Roswell had been covered up and continues to be covered up. Maybe they were still covering up that Roswell was a weather balloon.

Weaver also taught propaganda courses for AFOSI and was also implicated in the AFOSI Paul Bennewitz disiniformation operation in N.M. Weaver wasn't "ex" anything. Once a security expert and psychological warfare/propaganda expert, always one. Weaver was not exactly the guy who would spill Roswell secrets to the American public if he came across them.



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 01:30 AM
link   





posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 01:50 AM
link   
Never seen that Pentagon report before, why do they go to such lengths to dismiss it, but then I hear myself sayin, if thats the case, why dont they release the memo in photograph. I have to say time and time again you see the authorities making a complete shambles of trying to explain themselves when they shouldnt have to, so say like the Bloody Sunday murders in Ireland, if Parliament just said, "look, f**k off Ireland, we were shot at so we returned fire and there will be no investigation, investigate your Inneskillan bomb first" or to the Hysel disaster when Liverpool said they would investigate, "No, F off investigate your brutal police behavior before we comment or take a forced exit from european football"
So which came first, did the US create a Flying Saucer shaped observatory, or did they find a saucer shaped object and tried to fly it?
What if Roswell was the US trying to replicate a Flying Saucer trying to capture flight data on a disk shaped aircraft, that might explain the security, so maybe roswell wasnt an Alien crash but a test of a saucer flying, did they get the idea from a Alien craft crash which was recovered esles where?!?
I also dont buy anything where humans or aliens are mis identified as dummies, it is insulting to thing that a ballistic dummy or otherwise could be mistaken for a complex human body with guts, organs, bones ands arteries..pity the dumbass who mistakes them let alone multiple dumbasses..BELM



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 09:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by debrisfield
In explaining to fellow counterintel officer Cavitt his background, Weaver said , "I would kind of like to know how THEY did it [those who keep the Roswell secrets], because IN MY REAL JOB we handle all the Special Programs [Special Access Programs or Black Projects] that do keep all the secrets. And we would like to figure out THEY do it so we can duplicate it. Because it is very hard to keep secrets, as you well know."

Weaver was admitting he was one of the guys [actually the head guy, as stated elsewhere in the Roswell Report] in charge of keeping the secrets for the very Top Secret SAPs and would like to know how the Roswell secrets had been kept so successfully. That's an astounding statement, pretty much an admission by Weaver that Roswell had been covered up and continues to be covered up.
Is it really an astounding statement?

Because it reads to me a whole lot like page 21 of the 1994 Roswell Report which makes me wonder if you're interpreting it correctly:


An example of activity sometimes cited by pro-UFO writers to illustrate the point
that something unusual was going on was the travel of Lt Gen Nathan Twining,
Commander of the Air Materiel Command, to New Mexico in July, 1947.
Actually, records were located indicating that Twining went to the Bomb
Commanders’ Course on July 8, along with a number of other general officers,
and requested orders to do so a month before, on June 5, 1947 (Atch 14)....

The above are but two small examples that indicate that if some event happened
that was one of the “watershed happenings” in human history, the US military
certainly reacted in an unconcerned and cavalier manner. In an actual case, the
military would have had to order thousands of soldiers and airman, not only at
Roswell but throughout the US, to act nonchalantly, pretend to conduct and
report business as usual, and generate absolutely no paperwork of a suspicious
nature, while simultaneously anticipating that twenty years or more into the
future people would have available a comprehensive Freedom of Information Act
that would give them great leeway to review and explore government documents.
The records indicate that none of this happened (or if it did, it was controlled by
a security system so efficient and tight that no one, US or otherwise, has been
able to duplicate it since. If such a system had been in effect at the time, it would
have also been used to protect our atomic secrets from the Soviets, which history
has showed obviously was not the case). The records reviewed confirmed that no
such sophisticated and efficient security system existed.


The official report says if it happened it was a better security system than the one used to protect the atomic secrets. That begs the question, why wouldn't the US use the best security system they had to protect atomic secrets? So it seems to me like Weaver and the official USAF report are asking pretty much the same question.
edit on 28-12-2010 by Arbitrageur because: fix typo



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 09:20 AM
link   

I touched the Roswell debris.


I remember seeing the special on this, where they showed it on television, and the debris looked pretty pristine to me (especially for being in the desert for a bit, if actually Mogul 4). If you got to examine the debris CLAIMED as being recovered there, did it seem like it was weathered enough to you?

Did you see the balsa wood frame and any example of the flowery toy company tape Moore claimed was used, and mistaken for I-beams?

Did the foil paper have any kind of property that you feel could have been mistaken for a memory-metal type effect?

How did you get the permission and opportunity to see/touch the material?

Many thanks in advance if you're able to answer. I've always known you as a straight-shooter on this board, so certainly giving you the benefit of the doubt.
(so I'm just really curious...thanks).


The official report says if it happened it was a better security system than the one used to protect the atomic secrets. That begs the question, why wouldn't the US use the best security system they had to protect atomic secrets? So it seems to me like Weaver and the official USAF report are asking pretty much the same question.


The answer is simple. SCI. Secret, Compartmentalized, Information. Only a few know all of the pieces of the puzzle, while anyone else on the project only knows their piece. Unlike the atomic bomb program, THIS project would have been: 1) less people, 2) less involved with other branches and agencies, 3) at a more remote location, and most of all 4) easier to dismiss and ridicule. Soviet penetration of our intelligence network was pretty much already a reality as of the time of Roswell, so saying the recovery of a UFO would be "more secret" than the atomic bomb project (which was likely already infiltrated by 1947 or soon thereafter, as the Soviets had their own by '53) isn't that much of a stretch...especially after centralizing intelligence with the National Security Act later that year.
edit on 28-12-2010 by Gazrok because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 09:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by muzzleflash
Very nice discovery.

Maybe that book by Philip J Corso, "The Day After Roswell" is mostly true after all?

That's pretty ironic. We might already actually have disclosure of most of this.


maybe the story about the government taking it to their base may be true if the memo is fully deciphered. but we don't know about the part of him being invoved in the projects himself, still this memo is very interesting.



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 09:35 AM
link   

I didn't know Pflock was ex-CIA. How interesting.


He was CIA from 1966-72. Was in the service prior to this, and a long involvement with the Department of Defense, along with NICAP and other UFO organizations.



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 01:09 PM
link   
Has anyone thought of the General's motivation with the memo? By this I mean that it's pretty casual to be holding the memo, but wouldn't something of this importance not be waved about? Could he be offing a tip off as to the true nature of the incident, even though he was to tell the "official balloon story?"

Something to ponder.



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 01:40 PM
link   
reply to post by ChinScratcher
 


No, Ramey never wavered from the cover stories. I don't think he was trying to tip off anyone. He simply never even considered anyone would be able to read it years later with computer imaging, etc.

I do recall someone stating he made some pro-alien comments later, but it was just here-say really from the witness...not corroborated.



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 02:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Gazrok
 


You're comparing last a declassified balloon crashing last June to an extremely classified balloon, used as part of the Cold War in 1947.

Of course the reaction would be much more militarised and secretive in 47.



new topics

top topics



 
106
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join