Roswell crash : New whistle-blower (or hoaxer?)

With some hesitation about posting material that I think may be a hoax by, or on, a new member of ATS (“Bwise2”), I am posting below images of a 10 page fax that I have received from “Bwise2”.

“Bwise2” posted in Mirageman’s recent thread Roswell 66 Years on : Free PDF on the Incident, claiming that an elderly neighbour “Frank” had met someone when based at Tripler Military Hospital, Hawaii, around 1952 that supposedly provided Frank with information about the crash at Roswell and contact with Phil Corso. “Frank” has given his source the “code name” of “Pat”.

Bwise2 has stated that “Frank” recorded the relevant information in his diaries in the 1950s and that the relevant content of “Frank’s” diaries were summarised in the 10 pages of notes shown below.

For those not familiar with him, Phil Corso he is a controversial UFO “whistle-blower”. He wrote a book entitled “The Day After Roswell” which made a fairly sizeable splash in the UFO community in 1997. The Wikipedia entry on that book includes the following:

en.wikipedia.org...

The Day After Roswell is an American book about extraterrestrial spacecraft and the Roswell UFO incident. It was written by United States Army Colonel Philip J. Corso, with help from William J. Birnes, and was published as a tell-all memoir by Pocket Booksin 1997, a year before Corso's death. The book claims that an extraterrestrial spacecraft crashed near Roswell, New Mexico in 1947 and was recovered by the United States government who then sought to cover up all evidence of extraterrestrials.

The majority of the book is an account of Colonel Corso's claims that he was assigned to a secret government program that provided some material recovered from crashed spacecraft to private industry (without saying where the items came from) to reverse engineer them for corporate use. Corso was a Special Assistant to Lt General Arthur Trudeau, who headed Army Research and Development, and was in charge of the Foreign Technology Desk. In this position, he would take technological artifacts obtained from Russian, German and other foreign sources, and have American companies reverse engineer that technology. The book contends that several aspects of modern technology such as fiber optics and computer chips were developed by using information taken from the craft.

Colonel Corso also claimed the world was "at war" with extraterrestrials and that the Strategic Defense Initiative project was part of that campaign that was successfully concluded in Earth's favour.

Philip Corso is interviewed in the video at the link below:


Anyway, back to Bwise2’s information about his/her supposed neighbour and the information allegedly obtained from “Pat”.


Bwise2’s posts include:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by Bwise2
Several years ago my elderly neighbor and I got into a discussion about UFOs. My neighbor is in his 80's but proved to be unusually 'knowledgeable' about UFOs and explained he was based at Tripler Military Hospital, Hawaii, around 1952. He had met a man he has code named 'Pat'. Pat apparently had been based in Fort Riley June 1947.

My neighbor was giving me so much information I could not contain it all so he offered to write out notes from his old diary. His military training conditioned him to write down everything right to this day. Anyway i now have 10 hand written pages of notes mainly information provided by discussions with mystery man 'Pat' and a then there is much information about a Colonel Phil Corso.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by Bwise2
I realize this is a strange situation--and to make it worse my neighbor does not remember giving me the papers. He's going senile I think. But there are things written that i wanted to clarify with him but this seems impossible now...

I have a scanner but I've never used it. I'll give it a go. There are 10 pages and I have managed to decipher most of the words. I've had these papers for over 5 years but put them aside because I thought they may have been paraphrases from The Day After Roswell by Col Philip J Corso:

If a 1950s diary were produced which indicated that the written notes weren't simply a recent fabrication then that would - of course - be rather interesting. My first reaction was, however, to say that I wasn’t holding my breath for the diaries to be produced. It's all too common on ATS that someone claims to have evidence to support a fairly wild story, but generally that person just stops posting or posts excuses for failing to produce the promised evidence. Nothing personal about Bwise2 - I was just making an observation about previous examples of such stories.

My first question was therefore whether Bwise2’s neighbour still had the diaries from which the notes are supposedly taken.

Unfortunately, the response from Bwise2 was that (?conveniently for any hoaxer…) the diaries are not available:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by Bwise2
This morning July 8, 2013, I visited my neighbor 93 yr old -snip-. He has give me permission to only disclose some of the information he revealed today and I will honor that request. I have taken some photos which I have emailed to IsaacKoi.

Diaries were destroyed be well meaning social worker 2 years ago but plenty of evidence of service..

Mr -snip- "come out of secrecy" in 1996 but he couldn't fathom how he had ever given me those notes in 2007. Unfortunately the identity of 'Pat' cannot be disclosed. It was Frank's JOB to find out everything Pat knew about Roswell. incident. He would do this by befriending him by inviting him onto bowling team. This way (in an informal setting) he could reach all targets from any of the military services who were deliberately sent to Tripler for this purpose. Frank's orders were to "find out everything any given X knows".

So (unless and until further evidence is provided) what we have are the 10 pages of notes supposedly provided by Bwise2’s neighbour “Frank”. Those pages are embedded below.

Page 1 of 10


Page 2 of 10


Page 3 of 10


Page 4 of 10


Page 5 of 10


Page 6 of 10


Page 7 of 10


Page 8 of 10


Page 9 of 10


Page 10 of 10

My first impression upon receiving these 10 pages of notes is that they are more than a little rambling and confused, with the purported source(s) of information being unclear.

Most of the content of these 10 pages could fairly easily have been written by anyone that has read Corso's book (or seen material on the internet in relation to Corso’s claims and the similar, though conflicting, details provided by other UFO “whistle-blowers” in the last few years).

Furthermore, there are some factual issues with the handwritten information.

For example, while the notes by “Frank” supposedly relate to information supplied by “Pat” in or around 1952, but the notes include information up to the mid-1990s. Some of that information is simply wrong, e.g. reference to information on UFOs being declassified in the mid-1990s when the US Air Force’s UFO documentation was declassified much earlier than that.

The content of the documents has to be considered in the light of the actual history of the release of information about Roswell. In this connection, incidentally, I’d encourage other members with an interest in Roswell (and/or the efficient access storage/searching of the best threads on ATS) to have a glance at Mirageman’s thread Roswell 66 Years on : Free PDF on the Incident since Mirageman has been doing some interesting work to capture the best UFO threads on ATS in a collection of downloadable and searchable PDF documents. I think that is a useful endeavour and it’s a shame that more members of ATS aren’t aware of that effort and offering comments on it),


Obviously, the potential for a basic hoax would be reduced if there were further publically details available, e.g.:

(1) details of the neighbour (not least his full name, rank etc). Bwise2 has mentioned a relevant full name and sent me a photograph, but I’ve been asked not to give post that material – which rather hampers any effort to look into these details.

(2) details of the supposed source(s) of that neighbour's information (particularly the person referred to as "Pat" in the handwritten pages).


Due to basic factual errors in the content of the rambling 10 pages of notes, I don't really expect the above details to be provided and/or checked out.

reply to post by IsaacKoi


No offense...but it's hard to look over the material, even without knowing a good deal about Roswell, without considering the source.

I get solicited 2-3x's a WEEK with crap like this by people who cannot and will not make the basic requirements at ATS to post their own thread. I've yet to play front man for one of their goose chases...and I'm sorry one found a willing middle man to run the material up the ATS pole.

eeeek... When he gets 20 posts of his very own ...he can put his very own name to it and stand behind his own presentation. That's my general thinking. If that's too much to ask? So is reading his material. No offense to you, OP. Heck.. I almost did fall for the first couple solicitations I got, cold, to run other people's material.

AAARRRGGG, cursive is the dumbest thing a school ever taught anyone!

reply to post by IsaacKoi


I have some questions for you...(Bwise2) contacted you privately with this information...did he give you permission to make a thread out of it...and make it public to everyone?


Edit: I read (Bwise2) posts and it looks like he did give you permission; so I have my answer!

Hiya, Isaac!

What is the historical precedent for the term EBE or Extraterrestrial Biological Entity? When does it first show up in the ufological realm?

Originally posted by caladonea

ETA: caladonea answered her own question.

reply to post by IsaacKoi


This is interesting. I can't stand when people handwrite in cursive when it isn't legible? You know if your own writing is legible or not, I can't even make out a good bit of these "notes".

It only metions things like we already assume, minus the features of the "EBE"......

Could have been a little better description of the little guy if he really saw it, but I can't discredit the whole thing because of that.....Interesting? Yup......New info? Not really......Hoax? Nope....There isn't much there that couldn't be confirmed to call it a hoax IMO....

Roswell crash : New whistle-blower (or hoaxer?)

If I may, I would never seek to convince anyone else about this subject or any other. I may be walking a tired limb here because in the service, one of the first lessons was to never ass-u-me anything because to do so, made an ass out of u and me, lol.

Roswell is a morass of event mixed with conjecture, covered in years and years of physical historical record disappearances... and then steamed in a pot with denial.

In the end, every story should be held at bay and then, each person who takes the time to REALLY study the available evidence, producing their own opinion.

Someday, we may know what really happened but for now, we're victims of the same system that produced the magic bullet in 1963.

You just have to allow your best common sense be your guide

reply to post by The GUT


Yes...I finally did read the posts by (Bwise2) and realized (the author of this thread) was given permission; I don't know the author of this thread...but I now do realize (he or she) is a person to trust.

I really don't think questioning people is wrong; I was just curious.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by IsaacKoi

 

No offense...but it's hard to look over the material, even without knowing a good deal about Roswell, without considering the source.

I get solicited 2-3x's a WEEK with crap like this by people who cannot and will not make the basic requirements at ATS to post their own thread. I've yet to play front man for one of their goose chases...and I'm sorry one found a willing middle man to run the material up the ATS pole.

eeeek... When he gets 20 posts of his very own ...he can put his very own name to it and stand behind his own presentation. That's my general thinking. If that's too much to ask? So is reading his material. No offense to you, OP. Heck.. I almost did fall for the first couple solicitations I got, cold, to run other people's material.

No offense either, but I'm having a hard time coming up with what you might be considered as authoritative on as is IsaacKoi in his realm?

Poster needed an opinion and some technical expertise other than his own and asked Isaac for help. So what? Granted Bwise2 could very well be a scammer--rather than just a victim of a scam--but objectivity demands the information be put out there for folk to decide for themselves.

Originally posted by caladonea
reply to post by The GUT

 

Yes...I finally did read the posts by (Bwise2) and realized (the author of this thread) was given permission; I don't know the author of this thread...but I now do realize (he or she) is a person to trust.

I really don't think questioning people is wrong; I was just curious.

I respect you, caladonea, so don't get me wrong. And it's possible I didn't read it as written but it seemed to have an accusatory tone hanging off the question mark...and the info was pretty easy to determine as you found out once you looked for yourself.

Originally posted by caladonea
reply to post by The GUT

 

Yes...I finally did read the posts by (Bwise2) and realized (the author of this thread) was given permission; I don't know the author of this thread...but I now do realize (he or she) is a person to trust.

I really don't think questioning people is wrong; I was just curious.

Yes IsaacKoi is a barrister from the UK and has posted many excellent threads on the UFO topic long before I was a member. He willingly gives his time up researching the subject and posting information for us all totally free of charge with no agenda. I really urge you to check some of them out.

Ultimately it is up to you to make your mind up on if this evidence is real or false, bearing in mind these notes are from a secondary, well actually tertiary source.

At present I remain somewhat doubtful we have anything new here.

Originally posted by mirageman
Ultimately it is up to you to make your mind up on if this evidence is real or false, bearing in mind these notes are from a secondary, well actually tertiary source.

At present I remain somewhat doubtful we have anything new here.

Not to mention that the OP was fairly crystal-clear about the dubiousness of the material. I myself am of the opinion that Roswell has been used for psyops purposes and that we have no crashed craft.

I am, however, very interested in the folk who have co-opted ufology for their own suspect machinations. The usage of EBE usually sets off alarm bells for me in that regard.

reply to post by IsaacKoi

Corso is a fake. The corporations that developed fiber optic cable, lasers and the silicon transistor were represented in a show about his claims. I don't know if it was Day after Roswell or some other. Each of his claims were debunked in turn by the engineers that worked at these companies and were directly involved in these projects.

They were a little peeved in fact when it was suggested their work was associated with such claims. These projects were costly and research and development ongoing for years was the real story, not some claim by a retired colonel that he had access to a "file cabinet" filled with alien toys that were the source of their ideas and work.

Whichever show it was I saw debunked him thoroughly, in my opinion of course.

As an aside I live in Silicon Valley and was involved in computers back when. The process of shrinking transistors into smaller and smaller packages is still ongoing today. There was no magic moment that jumped the technology, its been a long process by a lot of companies to develop and advance computer chips. From the very beginning.

To put it a different way, if you handed engineers back then a chip out of a computer today that didn't know what it was, there would be no way to reverse engineer that. It is a tiny little thing embedded in a hard plastic that is so microscopic and complex it would be impossible. What would they use it for anyway. A need for it hadn't been developed either. The flow of technology in microcircuits has generated its own need, not the other way round.

The beginnings of computers were so simple and archaic compared to todays advanced state. Supposedly the engineers started with a complex alien chip... that is a ridiculous premise. There is no taking a microchip apart it is a multilayered minature map of a whole city. Whole other industries like electron microscopes vacuum sputtering systems, and miniaturizing schematics with cameras, etc., had to be developed and all that became the microchip industry.

Anyway, sorry about rambling on.

Originally posted by The GUT
What is the historical precedent for the term EBE or Extraterrestrial Biological Entity? When does it first show up in the ufological realm?

In my mind, the term "EBE" is strongly connected with Richard Doty.

I haven't previously looked into the history of the term (but will run a search overnight...) so I wouldn't like to conclusively state that Doty was the original source of the term - but certainly most of the usage I've seen of it was in the context of tales spun by Doty (e.g. Linda Moulton-Howe's discussion of a meeting with Doty inside Kirtland AFB on 9 April 1983 where one of Doty's documents referred to an alien as an "Extraterrestrial Biological Entity").

The term EBE was also used in the X-Files, which borrowed very heavily from the Doty mythology.

Corso's book (published in 1997) also used the term.

....... I myself am of the opinion that Roswell has been used for psyops purposes and that we have no crashed craft.

Yes - that could explain more than just Roswell. The UFO phenomenon provides a great cover story for all sorts of clandestine operations.