Debunked! The FBI alien bodies memo – A case study in the reinvention of the wheel

reply to post by IsaacKoi


I DONT KNOW WHAT TO BELEIVE ANYMORE

THE MARCH 22, 1950 FBI MEMO ON
CRASHED FLYING SAUCERS:
Livescience.com Spins the Facts

By Robert Hastings
www.ufohastings.com

In the wake of the recent, widespread, but misguided publicity surrounding the FBI memorandum written by Special Agent-in-Charge Guy Hottel—which recounted the alleged recovery of three “flying saucers” in New Mexico—numerous articles have appropriately debunked the document, including one written by Skeptical Inquirer magazine’s managing editor Ben Radford. See:

www.livescience.com...

The supposedly just-released, supposedly important memo is neither and Radford rightly says just that. So far, so good. However, in an apparent effort to suppress relevant facts related to the UFO crash-recovery topic—facts that Radford would never mention—livescience.com has declined to post my own input. In response to Radford’s remarks I wrote a detailed comment, which received an “awaiting moderation” reply when I tried to post it. As of this date it still has not appeared on the website and seems to have been rejected. In any case, here is what I attempted to add to the discussion:

[Robert Hastings writes]

Yes, the March 22, 1950 FBI memo was first released to physicist Dr. Bruce Maccabee via the FOIA in 1977 and, no, it does not relate to Roswell but the so-called Aztec case which most researchers believe was a hoax. Ben Radford, the managing editor of Skeptical Inquirer, published by the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry (CSI), is correct about that much at least.

That said, investigators Scott and Suzanne Ramsey report that they are about to publish new information on Aztec which, they say, will raise serious doubts about the hoax theory. I am not endorsing their claim but merely reporting it here.

Furthermore, over the years, CSI—and its earlier incarnation, CSICOP—has gotten almost everything they've published about UFOs wrong. (And those pesky, almost completely unpublicized links between some of the group’s leading members and the U.S. government's nuclear weapons program are, uh, interesting. Please read on.)

Re: Roswell proper, the most credible—if chiefly second-hand—information relating to it originated with the late USAF Brigadier General Arthur E. Exon. His published comments may be found at:

roswellproof.homestead.com...

Perhaps significantly, at the time of the alleged UFO recovery in July 1947, nearby Roswell Army Air Field was the only atomic bomber base in the world, hosting the 509th Bomb Group, the post-war iteration of the B-29 squadron that had destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki two years earlier.

Why is this significant? Declassified U.S. government documents, including some accessed by Dr. Maccabee himself, confirm the reality of ongoing UFO incursions at nuclear weapons sites as early as December 1948. A small cross-section of those documents may be found at:

www.theufochronicles.com...

The linked-article above also contains the legal affidavits of the seven former or retired USAF personnel who participated in my September 27, 2010 UFO-Nukes Connection press conference in Washington D.C. All of those individuals were directly or indirectly involved in still-classified UFO incidents at nuclear weapons sites. CNN streamed the event live and a video of it, with subtitles, is at:

www.youtube.com...

An article regarding certain key CSICOP/CSI members' professional links to the U.S. government's nuclear weapons program, titled “Reporter Duped by UFO Debunkers”, may be found at my website.

Things are not always as they seem folks. Do your homework.

--Robert Hastings
www.ufohastings.com

END OF MY ATTEMPTED POSTING AT LIVESICENCE.COM

On the topic of crashed UFOs, or alleged crashes, former CIA official Victor Marchetti’s published comments are noteworthy. Prior to his departure from—and denunciation of—the agency, Marchetti had been the executive assistant to the Deputy Director of the CIA. He is also the co-author of The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence, the first book to be censored by the U.S. Government prior to publication.

In the May 1979 issue of Second Look magazine, Marchetti’s article, “How the CIA Views the UFO Phenomenon”, included these revelations:

“During my years in the CIA, UFOs were not a subject of common discussion. But neither were they treated in a disdainful or derisive manner, especially not by the agency's scientists. Instead, the topic was rarely discussed at internal meetings. It seemed to fall into the category of ‘very sensitive activities’...

There were, however, rumors at high levels of the CIA—rumors of...little gray men whose ships had crashed, or had been shot down, being kept ‘on ice’ by the Air Force at FTD (Foreign Technology Division) at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in Dayton, Ohio.”

Please note that Marchetti used the word “rumors”. Should I repeat that? Even if I did, it probably wouldn’t matter. Within one hour of this article being posted online, some blogger somewhere will write, “Breaking News: A CIA official has just confirmed that UFOs piloted by aliens have crashed and been recovered!”

And blah, blah, blah.

In any case, according to Marchetti, talk of UFO crashes was apparently circulating at “high levels” within the agency. Although he found these rumors to be unimpressive, Marchetti’s departure from the CIA occurred long before General Arthur Exon’s important revelations about the Roswell case were published in the early 1990s.

Perhaps more importantly, Marchetti also wrote, “I do not know from my own firsthand experience if there are UFOs. I have never seen one. Nor have I seen conclusive, empirical, or physical evidence that they really exist. But, I do know that the CIA and U.S. Government have been concerned over the UFO phenomenon for many years and that their attempts, both past and recent, to discount the significance of the phenomenon and to explain away the apparent lack of official interest in it, have all the earmarkings of a classic intelligence cover-up.”

--Robert Hastings
www.ufohastings.com

Originally posted by Robert Hastings
However, in an apparent effort to suppress relevant facts related to the UFO crash-recovery topic—facts that Radford would never mention—livescience.com has declined to post my own input. In response to Radford’s remarks I wrote a detailed comment, which received an “awaiting moderation” reply when I tried to post it. As of this date it still has not appeared on the website and seems to have been rejected. In any case, here is what I attempted to add to the discussion:

Hi Robert,

Curious. I was able to post there (including mentioning that Radford's article, while much better than most relevant press articles, repeated several errors made by other without apparently checking the underlying Air Force documents) without any problems.

Would you like me to try posting your comments there (attributed to you, of course)?

All the best,

Isaac

Why yes, Isaac. Thank you for offering to do so.

Please send me your private email address. I will be in the UK in July. Perhaps we could meet.

Robert
[email protected]

So, Isaac, did you attempt to post my comment? Three new ones by other people have now appeared but mine is nowhere to be seen.

Great effort issac. Good investigative work. But every good investigator should keep in mind that, just as every cloud has a silver lining, so does every case have a singularity, which points to a clue.
Here the singularity imo is that this appeared recently on the british msm, who are known for their truthfulness,
May I suggest you try and investigate , if the british aerospce had anything to do with this msm exposure.
I Wont be surprised if you stir up a hornets nest. Good Luck.

Cheers

Originally posted by Robert Hastings
So, Isaac, did you attempt to post my comment? Three new ones by other people have now appeared but mine is nowhere to be seen.

Hi Robert,

I tried twice last night. The count of the number of comments increased each time and I saw the "awaiting moderation" message, but (as you have seen yourself) neither comment has appeared - yet...

By the way, my offer to try to help you post that comment (which I would have done for anyone) appears to have considerably upset someone at the Reality Uncovered forum. See his posts about my work before I offered that small assistance:
www.realityuncovered.net...

and his post afterwards:
www.realityuncovered.net...


Oh well. That's what happens when I try to help someone in this field...

As I indicated last week, I really need to spend more of my limited spare time on my other hobbies.

Isaac

Thanks anyway, Isaac. It's clear that my input on the topic of alleged UFO crash-recoveries will never appear at livescience.com. I will have more to say on this subject later today.

Brilliant piece of work.

standing ovation.

Originally posted by Robert Hastings
So, Isaac, did you attempt to post my comment? Three new ones by other people have now appeared but mine is nowhere to be seen.

Just a quick post to note that, a couple of weeks on, I haven't had any feedback from LiveScience.Com on the post that was moderated containing your material Robert - and it hasn't appeared on the relevant webpage at:

www.livescience.com...

The only effect of my attempting to post that material seems to have been to put an end to my friendly exchanges with some of the people on the Reality Uncovered forum, which I think is a bit of a shame...

reply to post by IsaacKoi

The basic points I’ve been making are that: (1) The memo is NOT a new release (2) The memo relates to a HOAX exposed DECADES ago by a convicted con-man - Silas Newton. (3) The memo does NOT relate to Roswell

Finally a little common sense. Thankyou

... I should be spending more of my limited spare time on my new hobby. I think I may have found a hobby in which the sociological and psychological insights which (I think) I’ve gained from reading over 1,000 UFO books and reading countless related documents/articles can start to pay real financial dividends…]

That was very good work on your part. Similarly, I have been tossing around the idea of reporting on the exciting but very terrestrial activities at White Sands in the late 40's, but keep thinking, No one will want to read this unless they already agree. And why risk hurting someone who needs to hold on to certain beliefs? Perhaps I will find a way to present that report in a gentle manner.

You mentioned the sociological and psychological aspects of UFO's, and I wanted to suggest to you and to others, Carl G. Jung's work on those subjects as interrelated in his work, Flying Saucers: A Modern Myth of Things Seen in the Skies which he put together in the late 1950's. Jung did his research, and his ideas are very reasonable and above all, human. Typical of Jung, he approaches the matter by looking at the needs of the whole person and how the subject might be seen to relate to those needs.

Spiritually oriented persons may well find a comforting middle ground in Jung's little book-- especially when an important and dear "proof" of something more and something exciting turns out to be a hoax. Take heart, if Aztec and if Roswell fail a need; the need remains real, it remains important, and it can be filled.

Originally posted by Frira
That was very good work on your part.

Thanks for the kind words.

Similarly, I have been tossing around the idea of reporting on the exciting but very terrestrial activities at White Sands in the late 40's, but keep thinking, No one will want to read this unless they already agree. And why risk hurting someone who needs to hold on to certain beliefs? Perhaps I will find a way to present that report in a gentle manner.

Well, I may simply be an eternal optimist (as one or two fellow researchers in England have suggested over the years) but for quite a few years I thought it worth trying to combat the amount of nonsense being written about UFOs. I've hardly posted about UFOs here (or elsewhere) in recent months because my optimistic outlook has been challenged repeatedly during the last couple of years.

If you know anything interesting about terrestrial activities at White Sands in the last 1940s (which, in the context of your post, I presume you consider are relevant to explaining some UFO sightings) I hope you post that information. Not everyone is fixed in their views.

You mentioned the sociological and psychological aspects of UFO's, and I wanted to suggest to you and to others, Carl G. Jung's work on those subjects as interrelated in his work, Flying Saucers: A Modern Myth of Things Seen in the Skies which he put together in the late 1950's. Jung did his research, and his ideas are very reasonable and above all, human. Typical of Jung, he approaches the matter by looking at the needs of the whole person and how the subject might be seen to relate to those needs.

While I've read that book a few times over the years, I had difficulty accepting much of what Jung said in it. Jung expressed some pretty strange ideas in that book...

All the best,

Isaac

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
There is definitely some psychological phenomenon going on though you may have a better understanding of it than me. I'd say it involves things like selective memory and interpretation, confirmation bias, and a desire to believe, sometimes but not always bordering on having religious fervor.

Having been through a similar process to Isaac (not 1000 books worth though, maybe 100 plus?), I have to agree with you. The desire to believe and confirmation bias makes early steps into UFO research a complete minefield. I don't know how many times I have spent (wasted?) hours and hours only to find something that other researchers must have uncovered earlier and failed to mention later (selective memory)!

That said, this is still a fascinating topic. Behind the maze of fantasy, falsehood, selective memory and the rest is something very real that many ex military, pilots and people who have seen something they don't understand (like me) would like a satisfactory answer to. Have the military and private interests kept back information on this? The evidence is yes. If only we had access to that data too....

Originally posted by Pimander
Have the military and private interests kept back information on this? The evidence is yes. If only we had access to that data too....

As you know, this is an long-standing interest of mine. I've been working for years on identifying what material is easily available and more recently on identifying material that could be made available with a bit of effort.

Since the amount of easily available material already would fill quite a few trucks, I'm not sure how many people are actually interested in putting in the effort necessary to obtain further material.

Originally posted by IsaacKoi

Section H : Conclusion

...
Then, in another few months the process will start all over again with few people remembering the current episode.

So, basically it's your standard messed up nonsense that abounds within ufology.

Sigh.

Several Youtube videos have been posted purporting to show "breaking news", claiming to be Fox News footage from July 2012 about the release of these FBI documents.

In fact, the relevant Fox News item was broadcast over a year ago.

This is one of the "new" Youtube videos:


This is the same item uploaded to Youtube last year:


The latter (earlier) copy of the video includes a link to this thread on ATS.

Originally posted by IsaacKoi
The basic points I’ve been making are that:

(1) The memo is NOT a new release

(2) The memo relates to a HOAX exposed DECADES ago by a convicted con-man - Silas Newton.

(3) The memo does NOT relate to Roswell

The FBI has just issued a press release (dated 24 March 2013) in relation to the Guy Hottel memo that is the subject of his thread:

www.fbi.gov...

It’s the most popular file in the FBI Vault—our high-tech electronic reading room housing various Bureau records released under the Freedom of Information Act. Over the past two years, this file has been viewed nearly a million times. Yet, it is only a single page, relaying an unconfirmed report that the FBI never even followed up on.

...

So what’s the real story? A few facts to keep in mind:


First, the Hottel memo isn’t new. It was first released publicly in the late 1970s and had been posted on the FBI website for several years prior to the launch of the Vault.

Second, the Hottel memo is dated nearly three years after the infamous events in Roswell in July 1947. There is no reason to believe the two are connected. The FBI file on Roswell (another popular page) is posted elsewhere on the Vault.

Third, as noted in an earlier story, the FBI has only occasionally been involved in investigating reports of UFOs and extraterrestrials. For a few years after the Roswell incident, Director Hoover did order his agents—at the request of the Air Force—to verify any UFO sightings. That practice ended in July 1950, four months after the Hottel memo, suggesting that our Washington Field Office didn’t think enough of that flying saucer story to look into it.

Finally, the Hottel memo does not prove the existence of UFOs; it is simply a second- or third-hand claim that we never investigated. Some people believe the memo repeats a hoax that was circulating at that time, but the Bureau’s files have no information to verify that theory.

Originally posted by IsaacKoi
The FBI has just issued a press release (dated 24 March 2013) in relation to the Guy Hottel memo that is the subject of his thread:

www.fbi.gov...

The media has now picked up on the relevant recent FBI press release, e.g.:

news.yahoo.com...

The Federal Bureau of Investigation has broken its silence on the most popular file in its digital vault.

reply to post by IsaacKoi


so then why even have i in the vault at all if it is just a hoax?

Originally posted by Robert Hastings
Perhaps significantly, at the time of the alleged UFO recovery in July 1947, nearby Roswell Army Air Field was the only atomic bomber base in the world, hosting the 509th Bomb Group, the post-war iteration of the B-29 squadron that had destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki two years earlier.

Why is this significant? Declassified U.S. government documents, including some accessed by Dr. Maccabee himself, confirm the reality of ongoing UFO incursions at nuclear weapons sites as early as December 1948.

Oh, no not again.

I have never understood why this keeps being brought up, except as a way to make that old, common, and completely unfounded implication that "they" were/are somehow interested in our nuclear weapons. The number of assumptive leaps that have to be made from aliens even existing to attributing to them all sorts of (very human-like) motivations are almost too many to count. It's ridiculous, and has nothing to do with addressing the lack of credibility of the story itself, but I guess people will continue to mention it.