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.
Considering that the Roswell Incident occurred some 65 years ago, interviewing first-hand witnesses has become more difficult each year, as they become fewer and fewer each year. I have during the past 16 years interviewed several, and each one has been valuable in perhaps getting new information, or even better for me, confirming what is already known, as I have always felt verification and confirmation remain an important part of doing this research.
Such was the case recently when Stanton Friedman, the original Roswell civilian researcher contacted me about the name of such a person he wanted me to talk to. As it turned out this individual, (now in his 90’s) lives in Roswell, so I placed a phone call to him and had an interesting 30 minute discussion with him, agreeing to meet him for coffee to continue our discussion when I returned to Roswell from a speaking engagement in Texas. That follow-up meeting lasted 1½ hours over several cups of coffee. The gentleman I interviewed was the editor of the Roswell Morning Dispatch newspaper in 1947, when the Roswell Incident occurred.
The gentleman struck me as extremely sharp for his age, with good knowledge of locations, people and most dates. During both interviews he emphasized the fact that I probably knew everything he was telling me, however I explained the importance of verification of the information we were discussing. I prepared several pages of questions and comments for our second interview and will show my questions as “DGB” and his responses as “Editor.”
By Dennis Balthaser
www.truthseekeratroswell.com
11-1-12
Originally posted by trysts
reply to post by Frank Warren
This part of the interview is really weird to me:
"After some hesitation the Colonel said, “what I saw I had never seen before, and never want to see again.”"
I would love to know what he means! Was he disgusted, terrified, or what? I would have had to inquire more, if someone said that to me. There is just no way I could have let that statement stand without needing to know more.
Originally posted by ecoparity
I'm glad you did the interview, the more witness statements the harder it is to cover up. If you have just 1 witness it's easy for people to blow off, when you have several / 10+ the odds of all of them being willing to make up "stories" reaches impossibility.
No offense and please take it as constructive criticism - the way the interview is composed is just unreadable. Structuring it as a Q&A interview but then having the editor provide all the answers from the third person is just terrible. It's extremely annoying and makes reading it difficult as people are not used to seeing this format (because it's not used anywhere else as it's just wrong). Please re-write it or give the notes to someone w/ writing abilities as the interview itself is important and deserves better.
Originally posted by ecoparity
I'm glad you did the interview, the more witness statements the harder it is to cover up. If you have just 1 witness it's easy for people to blow off, when you have several / 10+ the odds of all of them being willing to make up "stories" reaches impossibility.
Originally posted by Zcustosmorum
reply to post by Frank Warren
S+F, good thread and interesting read but it still doesn't prove anything more about Roswell, sadly. I respect his opinion and the fact he was there, but he never actually said he witnessed anything himself and the stuff he did talk about were things he had heard from other people.
I would love to know the truth here but it still isn't easy, I fear the waters may have been too muddied on this case.