UFOs Confront Soldiers During War, Says Ex-Air Force Intelligence Officer

originally posted by: GENERAL EYES
What about the reported sighting of "Foo" during WW2?

My grandfather was a stateside USAF test pilot and confessed to a family member after this retirement about having seen a few "unidentified lights" while in the skies during that time frame. He was straight as an arrow and never touched drugs.

Yep! I suppose these pilots were on drugs as well....

en.wikipedia.org...

The first sightings occurred in November 1944, when pilots flying over Germany by night reported seeing fast-moving round glowing objects following their aircraft. The objects were variously described as fiery, and glowing red, white, or orange. Some pilots described them as resembling Christmas tree lights and reported that they seemed to toy with the aircraft, making wild turns before simply vanishing. Pilots and aircrew reported that the objects flew formation with their aircraft and behaved as if under intelligent control, but never displayed hostile behavior. However, they could not be outmaneuvered or shot down. The phenomenon was so widespread that the lights earned a name – in the European Theater of Operations they were often called "kraut fireballs" but for the most part called "foo-fighters". The military took the sightings seriously, suspecting that the mysterious sightings might be secret German weapons, but further investigation revealed that German and Japanese pilots had reported similar sightings.[9]

On 13 December 1944, the Supreme Headquarters Allied Expeditionary Force in Paris issued a press release, which was featured in the New York Times the next day, officially describing the phenomenon as a "new German weapon". Follow-up stories, using the term "Foo Fighters", appeared in the New York Herald Tribune and the British Daily Telegraph.[10]

In its 15 January 1945 edition Time magazine carried a story entitled "Foo-Fighter", in which it reported that the "balls of fire" had been following USAAF night fighters for over a month, and that the pilots had named it the "foo-fighter". According to Time, descriptions of the phenomena varied, but the pilots agreed that the mysterious lights followed their aircraft closely at high speed. Some scientists at the time rationalized the sightings as an illusion probably caused by afterimages of dazzle caused by flak bursts, while others suggested St. Elmo's Fire as an explanation.[11]

a reply to: Aquariusdude

Yep! I suppose these pilots were on drugs as well....

That is certainly possible and not something I considered before.
Flying High - American Pilots Pop 'Go Pills' - Then Go Kill

But the taking of amphetamines isn't just limited to pilots in Afghanistan. The surgeon said that combat pilots in the U.S. military have been popping pills for the past 60 years. This, according to my reckoning, takes us way back to World War II. It is common knowledge that the British issued stimulants to their pilots during the Second World War and, according to some reports may have offered sedatives to airmen during the conflict in the Falklands.

The head honchos in the U.S. military don't agree. Although psycho-stimulants have been in common use in the military for six decades, it wasn't until 1960 that they were officially sanctioned. The first widespread, although undocumented, use probably occurred during the Korean and Vietnam Wars. During the Vietnam War, the drugs of choice for members of the U.S. military were opiates. A 1971 study undertaken by Professor Lee N. Robins, PhD, showed that almost half of those serving had been using either opium or heroin. While military commanders did in no way sanction the practice, they obviously chose to turn a blind eye. Immediately following the Gulf War, U.S. pilots were given questionnaires in an attempt to quantify the use of Dexedrine. Analysis showed that 65 per cent of pilots used amphetamines during combat. So, two-thirds of American bomber pilots routinely fly while under the influence of a potentially dangerous drug. A drug, which if ingested by a civilian pilot or even a driver would inevitably lead to a term of imprisonment.

Foo Fighters during WW2 are well documented.
In the book PT 109, JFK wrote about seeing strange lights at night, even in the water.

Foo fighters were seen sometimes by ENTIRE CREWS..Are you trying to say that the reason these men saw these objects were due to mass hallucination caused by drugs?Really?

Career U.S. Air Force pilot Duane Adams often related that he had witnessed two occurrences of a bright light which paced his aircraft for about half an hour and then rapidly ascended into the sky. Both incidents occurred at night, both over the South Pacific, and both were witnessed by the entire aircraft crew. The first sighting occurred shortly after the end of World War II while Adams piloted a B-25 bomber. The second sighting occurred in the early 1960s when Adams was piloting a KC-135 tanker

originally posted by: Aquariusdude
Here we have credible witnesses reporting an incredible phenomenon.These witnesses are well trained and because of this we should take there statements very seriously.

What makes you say this? Do you know the witnesses and their level of "UFO identification training?" Even skilled pilots can be mistaken. Particularly during war, when all kinds of weird stuff (built by the military) is flying around.

a reply to: Aquariusdude

Foo fighters were seen sometimes by ENTIRE CREWS..Are you trying to say that the reason these men saw these objects were due to mass hallucination caused by drugs?Really?

Lets see. I just reread my post and didn't say anything like that. Are you hallucinating?

Though friendly fire incidents sometimes happen by "entire crews" also. How would you account for that?

Career U.S. Air Force pilot Duane Adams often related that he had witnessed two occurrences of a bright light which paced his aircraft for about half an hour and then rapidly ascended into the sky. Both incidents occurred at night, both over the South Pacific, and both were witnessed by the entire aircraft crew. The first sighting occurred shortly after the end of World War II while Adams piloted a B-25 bomber. The second sighting occurred in the early 1960s when Adams was piloting a KC-135 tanker

How many people is the "entire crew"? 3? where are their statements?

There at two ways to totally deny the existence of UFO's
1) Sightings are many but physical evidence is missing. Could it be that all "physical evidence" is grabbed by the authorities and is thus unavailable? That speaks to a large conspiracy by multiple countries. What is the likelihood of enemy country's co-operating and so efficient in their activities?
2) If they are only passing through and do not have a persistence in our reality it means nothing can be found.

Perhaps our governments have craft beyond the limits of today's understanding of physics. That does not explain historical sightings.
OK I'll stop here getting a bit off topic.

originally posted by: JadeStar

originally posted by: Aquariusdude
www.huffingtonpost.com...

The public rarely hears about interactions between military personnel and unexplained aircraft -- especially during wartime.

As time goes on, however, UFO stories stuck behind red tape begin to see the light of day. The Vietnam War saw its share of UFO activity in the 1960s.

One close encounter, in 1968, involved the crew of an American patrol boat that reported two glowing circular craft following them in the demilitarized zone that separated North and South Vietnam

The crew aboard a second patrol boat later reported seeing the UFOs over the first boat and a flash of light, followed by an explosion that completely destroyed the boat. These Vietnam reports included close observation of the unknown aerial craft which appeared to house pilots

You'd have an aircraft flying along, doing around 500 knots and a UFO comes alongside and does some barrel rolls around the aircraft and then flies off at three times the speed of one of the fastest jets we have in the Air Force. So, obviously, it has a technology far in advance of anything we have.

Here we have credible witnesses reporting an incredible phenomenon.These witnesses are well trained and because of this we should take there statements very seriously

Didn't a lot of VIetnam vets do psychedelic and other mind altering drugs? Didn't a lot of them end up in mental institutions?

Can we really say they are credible witnesses given the psychological stress of war?

And a lot of them didn't...

a reply to: Iscool

And a lot of them didn't...

But which ones saw the real UFOs?

a reply to: AquariusdudeHad I not seen UFOs myself, I likely would have been a skeptic...But there's no going back now...

originally posted by: ZetaRediculian
a reply to: Aquariusdude

Foo fighters were seen sometimes by ENTIRE CREWS..Are you trying to say that the reason these men saw these objects were due to mass hallucination caused by drugs?Really?

Lets see. I just reread my post and didn't say anything like that. Are you hallucinating?

Though friendly fire incidents sometimes happen by "entire crews" also. How would you account for that?

Now you are insulting me..You tried saying that the reason pilots witnessed these foo fighters were due to drug use..In cases where entire crews witnessed the aerial phenomenon this is impossible..

And obviously friendly fire is a bit different then seeing strange aerial phenomenon don't you think?

a reply to: Scdfa I am aware of the lights over DC in 1952. None of them landed on the Whitehouse lawn in broad daylight except in a movie. My scenario is suggested as a way of telling the US population that "it was us all along and there is nothing to worry about."

a reply to: Aquariusdude

Now you are insulting me..You tried saying that the reason that pilots witnessed these foo fighters were due to drug use..In cases where entire crews witnessed the aerial phenomenon this is impossible..

No. You tried to say they weren't on drugs and I pointed out that not only were they are on drugs, the military actually provided them. The rest came entirely from you.

And obviously friendly fire is a bit different then seeing strange aerial phenomenon don't you think?

Yes, people die in friendly fire. Misidentifying something in the air is rather trivial. don't you think?

originally posted by: TrueMessiah

originally posted by: Scdfa
What a brilliant and insightful post, thank you for this. I, too, am reluctant to label anyone's posts as disinformation, but there are a few posters here who engage in that sort of activity on a very steady basis. At any rate, your response to jadestar was highly appropriate.

You know I always do what I can to help out.

Members need to be aware of how their counter arguments can be seen as counterintuitive with a penchant for being disinformation, even if unintentional.

imo, you haven't actually "helped out" at all. In fact, what you've done by accusing people of being "disinformation" agents, for pointing out that all these witness accounts and incredible stories really don't add up to anything, if there is not one shred of solid evidence to back any of these claims up, is spreading "disinformation" yourself. Your a blind believer!

Like most UFO stories, If you read a little into it, it starts to become clear that the person making the claims is either lying, confused or mentally ill. This particular story just seems to be a case of friendly fire, there really is nothing to the story to assume it was a UFO in the first place.

But then the blind believers will all say, "oh, but people have been seeing pretty bright lights in the sky for years, just go buy the book [insert title here] it's all there".

Just because you have seen bright lights in the sky, doesn't mean it's a UFO. How about a little bit of rational thought on the issue? Rather just making this whole UFO subject another new age religion, of blind faith.

originally posted by: ZetaRediculian
a reply to: Aquariusdude

Now you are insulting me..You tried saying that the reason that pilots witnessed these foo fighters were due to drug use..In cases where entire crews witnessed the aerial phenomenon this is impossible..

No. You tried to say they weren't on drugs and I pointed out that not only were they are on drugs, the military actually provided them. The rest came entirely from you.

And obviously friendly fire is a bit different then seeing strange aerial phenomenon don't you think?

Yes, people die in friendly fire. Misidentifying something in the air is rather trivial. don't you think?

Misidentifying enemy aircraft is not the same as witnessing aerial phenomenon that cannot be explained.Military pilots know very well what normal aircraft are capable of..

The first sightings occurred in November 1944, when pilots flying over Germany by night reported seeing fast-moving round glowing objects following their aircraft. The objects were variously described as fiery, and glowing red, white, or orange. Some pilots described them as resembling Christmas tree lights and reported that they seemed to toy with the aircraft, making wild turns before simply vanishing. Pilots and aircrew reported that the objects flew formation with their aircraft and behaved as if under intelligent control, but never displayed hostile behavior. However, they could not be outmaneuvered or shot down. The phenomenon was so widespread that the lights earned a name – in the European Theater of Operations they were often called "kraut fireballs" but for the most part called "foo-fighters". The military took the sightings seriously, suspecting that the mysterious sightings might be secret German weapons, but further investigation revealed that German and Japanese pilots had reported similar sightings.[9]

On 13 December 1944, the Supreme Headquarters Allied Expeditionary Force in Paris issued a press release, which was featured in the New York Times the next day, officially describing the phenomenon as a "new German weapon". Follow-up stories, using the term "Foo Fighters", appeared in the New York Herald Tribune and the British Daily Telegraph.[10]

In its 15 January 1945 edition Time magazine carried a story entitled "Foo-Fighter", in which it reported that the "balls of fire" had been following USAAF night fighters for over a month, and that the pilots had named it the "foo-fighter". According to Time, descriptions of the phenomena varied, but the pilots agreed that the mysterious lights followed their aircraft closely at high speed. Some scientists at the time rationalized the sightings as an illusion probably caused by afterimages of dazzle caused by flak bursts, while others suggested St. Elmo's Fire as an explanation.[11]

Take note that these objects could not be shot down or outmaneuvered...

a reply to: Aquariusdude

Misidentifying enemy aircraft is not the same as witnessing aerial phenomenon that cannot be explained.Military pilots know very well what normal aircraft are capable of..

First you need to go read the link I provided. A misidentification is a misidentification. Its really not much of a stretch that seeing a light in the sky might be misidentified by pilots that are on amphetamines with a lack of sleep. 95% of sightings turn out to be identified so that must mean that things get misidentified pretty often. I don't know of any stats that show pilots being immune to misidentifying things.

Take note that these objects could not be shot down or outmaneuvered...

That means these things have the same thing in common with things that aren't really there.

originally posted by: ZetaRediculian
a reply to: Scdfa

Jade, when a person realizes they are in a hole, the first rule is; stop digging.

Ha ha! I haven't seen you stop digging since you have been here!

That's 'cause I'm digging for the truth, son.

In regards to Jadestar, and others, stating the obvious can sometimes be helpful.

One can set up belief systems for both + or - views on the reality of seeming high tech in our environment... UFOs... but the argument can reduce to 'how do we know what we know?'

If we are honest with ourselves (and have a smidgen of neuroscience, information theory and philosophy), the amount of 100% verifiable info is ... wait for it... 0%... so we have to move in the realm of probabilities and hope for the best.

Seen in that light, the naysayers and debunkers have a better % chance of their side being more "truthful" based on our common knowledge pool of what tech is currently possible, how big space is, how poorly people observe and keep secrets, etc... which means rational people who have seen UFOs personally, and/or have concluded that other rational people have seen them, have to function in a small community and are cut off from the larger society.

It's a frustrating, literally alienating place to be... we (who know as best we can some reality for UFOs,) know we experienced something remarkable, but have to continually debate with the people immersed in the consensus reality narrative that says "no, you were high, stupid, insane or mistaken"... sigh. Heck, I've been three of those things at times... maybe all four!

Knowing consensus reality is missing a big piece of info can lead to a bunch of Chicken Littles and Cassandras... but really, folks, something that looks and acts like future tech is around us. I suspect it's important.

But, maybe we 'UFO gnostics' should drop it... heh... maybe we're in a double blind experiment and when we, the lab rats, figure out that we're in an experiment, it invalidates it and we're then fed to some intern's snake... heh.

originally posted by: ZetaRediculian
a reply to: Aquariusdude

Misidentifying enemy aircraft is not the same as witnessing aerial phenomenon that cannot be explained.Military pilots know very well what normal aircraft are capable of..

First you need to go read the link I provided. A misidentification is a misidentification. Its really not much of a stretch that seeing a light in the sky might be misidentified by pilots that are on amphetamines with a lack of sleep. 95% of sightings turn out to be identified so that must mean that things get misidentified pretty often. I don't know of any stats that show pilots being immune to misidentifying things.

These pilots didn't just see lights in the sky...They tried to shoot them down and they outmaneuvered them...Just blame it on amphetamines or lack of sleep.Ok buddy whatever you say.

originally posted by: ZetaRediculian
a reply to: Aquariusdude

Misidentifying enemy aircraft is not the same as witnessing aerial phenomenon that cannot be explained.Military pilots know very well what normal aircraft are capable of..

First you need to go read the link I provided. A misidentification is a misidentification. Its really not much of a stretch that seeing a light in the sky might be misidentified by pilots that are on amphetamines with a lack of sleep. 95% of sightings turn out to be identified so that must mean that things get misidentified pretty often. I don't know of any stats that show pilots being immune to misidentifying things.

Take note that these objects could not be shot down or outmaneuvered...

That means these things have the same thing in common with things that aren't really there.

Objects that outmaneuver there aircraft really aren't there? Wow this isn't going anywhere.I am done talking to you.