September 26, 2010

The Echo Flight UFO Debate Continues


After the last four articles published here at RU covering the witness statements obtained from primary Echo Flight witnesses Walter Figel and Eric Carlson, an already fiery online “debate” grew even more heated.

Apparent supporters of Robert Salas and Robert Hastings began posting statements to our blog stating that RU researchers would never have a chance of catching up to Robert Hasting’s 30+ years of UFO experience – we shouldn’t even try, give it up, game over.

It took RU’s Stephen Broadbent no longer than a few minutes to determine that most of the apparent “supporters” were actually a single person (same IP) posting under various names. That raised a few eyebrows.

The lengths that some grown men go…

Setting aside the drama, one good thing that came out of those comments was another promise that Hastings would produce the mythical “audio tapes” that he’d been promising to publish for many months, which would apparently show that James Carlson and his father are liars. Having already waited for the tapes that were promised over five months ago, no one was holding their breath. So we were pleasantly surprised when we were told that Robert Hastings finally turned up the goods in an article titles “The Echo/Oscar Witch Hunt” at UFO Chronicles.

The Walter Figel Tapes

I’m not certain who the witches are and who exactly is doing the hunting, but one thing is for certain – Robert Hastings and Robert Salas sure don’t want anyone to know what Walter Figel is now saying. I read through Hasting’s recent article very carefully, and his only reference to recent events involved telling readers that James Carlson and Eric Carlson are lying about everything.

He failed to directly respond to Walt Figels more recent comments in 2010, and when James Carlson attempts to reference the comments on the forums that Robert Hastings frequents, James’ posts get deleted. There is certainly a cover-up going on, that’s for sure. Just not the sort of cover up Hastings and Salas would like you to believe.

However, after reading Hasting’s article, I admit to being a bit frustrated with Mr. Figel. Despite his recent comments clarifying the matter to James, it’s clear what he was saying to Hastings and Salas according to those recordings, at least as far back as 1996. After reading Hasting’s article, I decided to contact Walter Figel myself. I did so because Hastings keeps calling James a liar, so I needed something in my hands that would prove one way or another that Figel’s more recent comments about the Echo Flight case were real.

While Hastings failed to produce the promised audio tapes where he and/or Salas supposedly had post-2008 contact with Figel, with claims supposedly proving that James and Eric are now lying – there are still questions that need to be answered. Even though these older recordings don’t prove anything new (except that Hastings most likely does NOT have any more recent interactions with Figel proving anything he’s been claiming about James) – they do require clarification from Figel.

Walter Figel Responds

I wrote an email to Figel and cc’d Eric and James asking Figel, point blank, why he said what he said in those recordings. He responded to me, asking for the link. James responded to his request with the following email, providing Figel with the transcripts.

James wrote:

Robert Salas just published the following transcripts of a conversation he had with you in 1996. He never mentioned anything about your testimony until well after 2002.

Did you actually do this interview, and if so, why is it so different from what you have repeatedly told me, and from what my father has repeatedly claimed?

James ends his email with a comment that makes it very clear to me that he’s not only being as truthful as he can be, but he’s only interested in the truth, and clearing his family name – he has no interest in UFOs or “debunking” the nuclear missile stories found throughout Ufology. He is only interested in the case that his own father was a primary witness to. James continues:

I would very much appreciate some clarity here. I understand that you don’t want to get involved, but you are involved. You can’t get rid of that involvement, not after you’ve basically said that my Dad is a liar. I don’t care what a bunch of wack-jobs waiting for the next flying saucer pick-up have to say about me, because they’ve been doing that for years, but I will not just sit and let them do the same thing to my father.

If you are not willing to fix this — and that means making a cohesive statement of one thing or another, and calling Salas and Hastings and telling them, one way or the other, then please tell me, because this back and forth is ridiculous. These people are telling everybody that I never spoke to you — that I have made the whole thing up from the very beginning. If I am that dissociative, somebody should tell me

Walt finally responded at length to both James and I. He listed the major points that he believes are at issue here. Figel clearly states as of Sept 24th, 2010 – that not only does he believe UFO’s were not involved at Echo Flight, but Figel also reveals some shocking insight into some of Salas’ other claims regarding issues beyond the Echo Flight case. Here is what Figel had to say on the matter.

James,

First – your dad has not lied about anything nor do believe that he is even capable of lying about anything at all. He was, is, and always will be an honorable man. You should remember that always – I will.

Second – Bob Salas was never associated with any shutdown of any missiles at any time in any flight and you can take that to the bank. Just think about this for a split second. He is a person wrapped up in UFOs to the Nth degree. Yet he could not remember he was not at Echo. Then he thought he was at November – wrong again. Then he thought he was at Oscar – wrong again.

Third – There is no record about anything happening at November or Oscar except in people’s minds that are flawed beyond imagination. Salas has created events out of the thin air and can’t get the facts straight even then. My best friend to this day was the flight commander of the 10th SMS at the time. He and I have discussed this silly assertion in the past couple of years – he thinks it is all madeup nonsense for sure. I put both Salas and Hastings in touch with him and he has told them both that an incident at November or Oscar never happened. In addition he was subsequently stationed at Norton AFB where the engineers tested the possible problems. No little green men were responsible.

Fourth – I have always maintained that I do not nor have I ever believed that UFOs exist in any form at any place at any time. I have never seen one or reported that I have seen one. I have always maintained that they had nothing to do with the shutdown of Echo flight in Montana.

Fifth – The event at Malmstrom has a hand written log from me that was turned in just like all the other logs that I wrote over several years. I would think that if I wrote something like that in the log, there would be copies, it would have been classified at the beginning and then released along with the classified SAC messages and base reports. Nothing in that urgent SAC message even hints of UFOs at all and I think that it would if the official logs or telephone calls had referenced that fact.

Sixth – When it happened, neither your dad nor I were “visibly shaken” by the events. It was just another day with a unexpected event in our lives. It was rather underwhelming at the time. No one rushed out to see us, no one made us sign any papers, no one interrogated us for hours on end.

There is no Air Force “cover-up” it just did not happen the way Salas and has portrayed the course of events. I am sorry that you are all caught up in a pissing contest with these people, I really am. They are just not going to let go no matter what you say or do. He has made a 15 year career pandering about the country talking about things he has no knowledge about. I am not at all interested in taking them on – it’s not worth my effort – I have more important things to do with my life. I much rather just stay out of it.

Hopefully, we can move on. I did read about a briefing on the 27th here in DC. I am here in VA about 10 miles away. Interesting. Hopefully this helps you and confirms to you at least that your dad is a straight shooter and does not lie to anyone.

Sincerely,
Walt Figel

While I am still personally not satisfied with the lack of explanation for why he said what he said to Hastings and Salas back in 1996 and 2008 – there is plenty of room for speculation. Maybe the ground crew were joking (he did say he didn’t take them seriously) and Figel was reporting to Hastings and Salas what he thought they wanted to hear – that someone mentioned “UFOs” related to Echo flight.

Maybe he assumed they would report his statements without spinning it to support the reality of UFO’s – which he repeats he does not believe in. Or maybe Figel saw an opportunity to be an “authority” with someone writing a book on the issue, and a chance for a little bit of fame. Who knows at this point. But what is especially revealing is when you look at the points Walter made beyond the simple matter of the recording clips Hastings published.

Witness Walter Figel is Not Invited to the Press Conference

Figel’s following points are rather powerful, I must admit.

-> He confirms James father is an honorable man and has not lied about Echo Flight.
-> He writes: “Bob Salas was never associated with any shutdown of any missiles at any time in any flight and you can take that to the bank.”
-> Walt’s friend, the flight commander of the 10th SMS agrees that the UFO nonsense about Echo Flight is made up – and he apparently told Hastings and Salas that an incident at November or Oscar never happened, yet they’ve never reported that statement to the public.
-> Nothing in the released SAC message (from the declassified documents on the case) contained “even hints of UFOs at all.” Walt maintains that if he’d written anything about UFOs – it would have been reflected there, but it’s not.
-> Walt admits that Eric Carlson’s statement was true that no one made them sign anything, and no one raced out to interrogate them.

Walt’s final statement was probably the most powerful…because he makes such an excellent and revealing point, as he writes:

“I did read about a briefing on the 27th here in DC. I am here in VA about 10 miles away. Interesting.”

Upon seeing this comment, my eyes froze at that line. What an important point.

Yes, indeed, why would Hastings and Salas hold a press conference on the 27th in DC, and not invite Walt Figel, one of their primary and most important witnesses to one of the allegedly largest nuclear missile silo UFO shutdowns in the history of Ufology? Why would they not have retired Lt. Walt Figel standing in front of the cameras admitting that yes, indeed, a UFO was involved at Echo Flight?

At the time of the conference, he is located only 10 miles away, yet they didn’t invite him. I wonder why?



Filed under: UFOlogy,UFOs — Tags: , , , , , — RyanDube @ 2:56 pm




49 Comments

  1. avatar

    […] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Stephen Broadbent, rdube. rdube said: Echo Flight case continues – Hastings publishes audiotapes and witness Lt. Walter Figel responds. http://digs.by/cd4gJr […]

    Pingback by Tweets that mention The Echo Flight UFO Debate Continues « Reality Uncovered -- Topsy.com — September 26, 2010 @ 3:58 pm

  2. avatar

    When Ryan learns the difference between Hasting’s and Hastings’ I might respond to him, not that it will matter. The above posting contains so many factual errors, poor assumptions and obvious bias that it would undoubtedly be a waste of time. But we’ll see…

    Walt Figel, who I assumed was in Colorado, can of course attend the press conference. He might learn something. I have added him to the non-media guest list. I have already printed up copies of “Witch Hunt” and will be distributing them at the event as needed. So, if he does show up, and decides to change his story–for whatever reason–he will be up against his own tape recorded words. That would be interesting. I think the media would love *that* story.

    Figel would also be contradicting the written statements of Boeing engineer Robert Kaminski, who has said that he received reports from his liason person at Malmstrom about a UFO-involvement in the Echo incident. Figel alluded to that investigation in his first comments to Bob Salas in 1996, but apparently did not know that the Boeing rep was first told of airmen reporting UFOs when the missiles malfunctioned and that the Air Force was categorizing the incident as a “UFO event.” But Kaminski was later told that Figel and Carlson had screwed up, causing the missiles to fail, and been relieved of duty. The latter did not happen, as Figel can tell you, and the unfounded charge was, therefore, a cover story generated to keep the truth hidden.

    RU did some excellent work exposing the Richard Doty/Bob Collins hoax related to MJ-12 (which I first exposed in 1989) and so it’s rather sad that Ryan and Co. have now hitched their wagon to James Carlson’s nonsense. Figel can mince his words as he likes nowadays but his 1996 commentary to Salas revealed the basic facts. (As did Meiwald’s 1996 commentary to Salas about their involvement in the second UFO-related missile shutdown incident at Oscar–which by the way, James and Eric Carlson and Walt Figel said never happened. So, Walt, is Col. Meiwald lying?)

    Finally, I also have Figel on tape–from a March 2010 conversation–saying other things which are at variance with what he has written to James Carlson over time. Those taped excerpts will appear in an article at The UFO Chronicles in the near future. Walt gave me permission to disseminate those tapes as I saw fit and I will certainly do so.

    Comment by Robert — September 26, 2010 @ 4:05 pm

  3. avatar

    Hahahaha
    Let me take a long astronomical leap here..
    Because Truth even 10 minutes away does not sell ufo books…
    The best business decision to make is to let it stay parked, cross your fingers and hope a local cop puts a lock boot on the tires so it doesn’t go anywhere/

    Comment by Manny — September 26, 2010 @ 4:07 pm

  4. avatar

    I’m approving Robert’s comment even though I shouldn’t since Frank Warren has been censoring James’ comments on his blog.

    Robert, have you not read James’ book or actually read the transcripts that you posted and understood what Figel is actually saying? The first guy to “report” a UFO at 0930 at the latest was a maintenance team member who had to be woken up by the security team after the missiles went down and Figel called them and then he had to go underground to get to the SIN phone to tell Figel “We got a Channel 9 No-Go. It must be a UFO hovering over the site. I think I see one here.”

    Obviously this was a joke and the security team was in on it. Where was the UFO before he went underground and why didn’t the first security team report it?

    You and Salas are trying to fool people into thinking all this happened at the same time the missiles went down, not some significant time afterwards. Judging by some of the comments here and elsewhere it’s working…

    ETA: Meiwald “lying” is not the only option. Why couldn’t he remember the earlier incident at Echo Flight? Perhaps Salas fooled him into thinking the incident he remembers was at Oscar Flight?

    Comment by Access Denied — September 26, 2010 @ 4:57 pm

  5. avatar

    Ah yes, my apologies Robert. I’m so unaccustomed to writing about you, because so little of what you’ve done has been newsworthy, that I kept forgetting whether your last name ended in “s” or not. Regardless, I’m always pleased when the only thing a person can attack is grammar, because it means the substance of the article is sound.

    It would be excellent to see Figel at the conference and on record there. I would also like to thank you for posting under your own, actual name this time. Much appreciated. Good luck at the conference and I hope a few reporters actually show up!

    Comment by RyanDube — September 26, 2010 @ 5:26 pm

  6. avatar

    Mr Hastings, You may remember me from the Paracast forums many years ago, where i was a staunch defender of your research.
    I have to say that the data as presented by the RU team leads me to conclude that you have been cherry picking your information, with a view to supporting your bias in this matter.
    Its only my opinion, but in honesty this is not good research on your part.
    In addition the conduct of silencing the critics reeks of dishonesty.
    The evidence supporting your claim must be presented along with that which does not, shooting the messenger does not resolve the questions raised by the message.
    Im of the opinion the evidence presented by the RU team is valid, and calls into question most strongly the claims you make in your books and presentations

    Respect and Regards

    Mike

    Comment by Mike — September 26, 2010 @ 10:08 pm

  7. avatar

    Robert, I just love your reliance on Kaminsky to bits! You say, “But Kaminski was later told that Figel and Carlson had screwed up, causing the missiles to fail, and been relieved of duty. The latter did not happen, as Figel can tell you, and the unfounded charge was, therefore, a cover story generated to keep the truth hidden”, but you seem to have forgotten that the same team Kaminsky was associated with had determined as their very first conclusion that the capsule crew was not responsible in any way, shape, or form for the Echo Flight incident, and that they did so within the first week. So are you actually claiming that the cover-up of the Echo Flight incident started when the USAF circulated a story that Kaminsky’s team had already and very officially DISCOUNTED as true? Are you joking? Or is this just another lie by ommission?

    You also fail to mention other well-documented conclusions that Kaminsky’s team discovered, such as their insistence that the cause of the incident must have been a fault within the launch control facility, which they never looked at. It’s true that they concluded no cause for the incident could be determined at the launch facilities, but they went on to insist that their investigation established that the cause must have been at the launch control facility — an understandable conclusion to reach, since the LCF was, contrary to statements made by Salas in the past, connected to ALL of the missile LFs that failed. Why have you and Salas refused to discuss that part of their report? Is it because they show that Kaminsky’s memories in 1996-97 have a whole lot of verified holes in them? Or is it because these documents drafted in 1967-68 support completely the conclusion that UFOs had nothing at all to do with the Echo Flight incident? Or maybe it just shows that your 37 years of investigatory experience have done nothing to make you a thorough and competent UFO investigator … Hell, they don’t even make you a half-way decent UFO historian. What historian would willingly ignore 95% of the documented evidence available to him? Or would ignore the only actual witnesses that have come forward? Historians who are looking for the truth don’t act that way; they don’t conduct research that way; and they sure as Hell don’t propose that a series of events they made up out of thin air be accepted by the rest of the world as fact purely on the basis of whatever they came up with that way.

    You and Robert Salas have been very selective regarding the 80-pages of FOIA documentation that have thus far been made public; you look at what? maybe 4 to 6 pages? It seems to me that you go to great lengths to prevent people from understanding what the investigation actually determined, and I’m not speaking here of just your habit of deleting valid commentaries to your articles, or ignoring the valid questions that have been asked of you (and I hope the whole world is taking note of the fact that we are actually answering the criticisms of those who comment on what’s been published, instead of simply deleting the entries in the middle of the night and refusing to even recognize that such criticisms exist, as Robert Hastings, and Frank Warren, and Robert Salas have done at UFOCHRONICLES on numerous occasions). For instance, you’ve neglected to mention as well that Kaminsky’s field team was only really interested in testing for one thing: whether or not a blown transformer noted by the civil power authorities could have caused the electrical fault that brought down the entire flight of missiles. Previous testing completed at other USAF commands had already established beyond any doubt that the shielding of the comm cables in use was capable of carrying electromagnetic signals, voltage spikes or pulses, and they wanted to determine whether the blown transformer could have created a signal that would carry to the other launch facilities and shut them down in that way. They proved that it couldn’t, and they were unable to figure out how a signal could be generated at the launch facilities and shut down the others as well. But that is all they really looked at, and the investigation continued for another few months. Why have you and Salas refused to disclose that very important part of Kaminsky’s role in the investigation? You neglect entirely to discuss their conclusion that the fault had to have been in the launch control facility — which was later proved to be correct — and you neglect entirely to discuss the well-documented fact that the investigation was hardly completed when Kaminsky’s role in the investigation ended. Why is that? Are you trying to hide something? Like maybe your competence as an investigator?

    In addition, I just want to affirm that we have not failed to take note of your extreme pettiness regarding a simple typo of your name. Your insistence that “When Ryan learns the difference between Hasting’s and Hastings’ I might respond to him”, is just more of the arrogant postuiring I personally have come to expect from you. You refuse to discuss such matters of importance, because you can’t, not because Ryan misspelled your name by mistake. You’re just an arrogant and simple-minded old fool, and it’s well past time that somebody took a good look at your work. While I myself will never do so (because the thought of looking into your dishonest and slow-witted displays of ill-earned braggadocio literally makes me want to throw-up), I would recommend that a serious analysis of every case you’ve ever discussed be conducted by someone with the stomach for it; in my estimation, it would probably be well-worth the intrepid investigator’s time to do so, because there’s no telling how many lies, mad leaps to ridiculous conclusions, or complete contradictions would be discovered. My guess is a lot. You should seriously be ashamed of yourself. You’ve done a lot of damage to a field that a lot of people care very deeply about, and you’ve done it simply to advance your own interests before those of anybody else. In my opinion, you’re just another media whore with nothing interesting or honest to sell.

    Comment by James Carlson — September 26, 2010 @ 11:13 pm

  8. avatar

    You state in your article, Ryan, that “While I am still personally not satisfied with the lack of explanation for why he said what he said to Hastings and Salas back in 1996 and 2008 – there is plenty of room for speculation.” I think we should point out that the 2008 interview that Hastings has literally published all over the internet, does NOT say that a UFO was actually seen and reported. It seems very clear to me, and always has, that a UFO was merely mentioned in the context of what I immediately assumed was a “joke”. Figel has since made it very clear that “a joke” was all it ever was — not a very good one, but certainly not one that resulted in anything at all resembling an official contact. Had there been an official contact, EVERYBODY would have acted very differently from the way they DID act — which, due to the importance of the electrical incident, was extremely well-documented.

    We have to consider as well that the 1996 interview Salas allegedly held with Figel is a fake. He never mentioned Figel for some years afterward, and neither did Hastings. I would think that if he did have such an interview in 1996, which, remember, is before he wrote his article for MUFON, he would have discussed it elsewhere — but he didn’t. He didn’t even mention it for the Disclosure Project. In my opinion, if he had this interview conducted in 1996, and it was completely valid, as he now insists, he would have used it years ago, because it actually suggests that something may have occurred that was not previously discussed by anyone. That 1996 date is VERY suspicious.

    Frankly, I have no problem believing that he’s lying completely in regard to the 1996 interview, which is one reason he allowed Robert Hastings to publish it, refusing to do so for himself. This way, if the truth comes out, Hastings takes the primary brunt of the response, so any loss of credibility will naturally affect him first. It’s not like Salas hasn’t lied before; people need to understand that there’s at least the possibility that he just made up the whole interview to deflect questions regarding Figel at the press conference — much like he invented the whole Echo Flight UFO incident in 1995.

    Comment by James Carlson — September 26, 2010 @ 11:37 pm

  9. avatar

    IRT Robert Hastings’ load of nonsense above: did anybody else notice that he is once again saying “just wait until I put up the recent tapes I have of my discussions with Walt Figel — then you’ll see that everybody is lying except me”?

    Good God, Robert, you’ve been saying that for 6 months and the only thing you’ve posted is some doubtful crap from Figel supposedly recorded in 1996! It seems to me that the only updated evidence regarding ANYTHING you’ve asserted is coming from me, from Figel, and from RU! Don’t you have any pride? Or is it all just arrogance wrapped up in the already proven lies and exaggerations you’ll be shoving down people’s throats on September 27?

    For God’s sake, Robert, grow a spine! You’re making yourself completely irrelevant with every passing day. While it’s true that I believe it couldn’t happen to a nicer guy, even I’m getting a little embarrassed for your sake! But then I recognize that a moral and ethical life will ultimately foster its own reward, while you … well, like I said, you’re just embarrasing yourself.

    Comment by James Carlson — September 26, 2010 @ 11:57 pm

  10. avatar

    Reading this latest update from Walt Figel put me in a great mood all day. Ryan et. al. I hope there can be more tweeting on this recent update before the press conference — as Richard Dolan is now really pushing the extraterrestrial agenda unfortunately.

    Dolan has a brand new Nuke and Extraterrestrial article: http://www.afterdisclosure.com/2010/09/ufos-nukes.html About half of Dolan’s new article is devoted to Malstrom — which, unfortunately, puts Dolan in a vulnerable position:

    “On March 16, 1967, the best known, one of the best documented, and certainly one of the most extraordinary UFO-nuclear events took place at Malmstrom Air Force Base, in Montana.”

    Dolan recently blogged on realitysandwich.com and I commented that he should stop promoting the extraterrestrial invasion angle — despite the continued increase in Hollywood propaganda.

    Dolan ends his article “assuming that some” of the UFOs are “not us” — well why make this assumption? Somehow it has to be assumed which I find to be a strange insistence. I regularly read this on abovetopsecret as well — for example:

    “While some black triangular craft may indeed by ‘secret military aircraft,’ there is no way they can make a blanket statement that they all are. How could they possibly know?”

    O.K. I saw a big black triangle up close — not just the lights — but the whole craft flew right over our yard. I could have hit it with a rock. After further research and my experience I have no reason to think this was extraterrestrial and every reason to think it was a secret military craft. So if is a secret military craft then why should I also have to assume some of the craft are actually extraterrestrial? On the contrary — if the evidence points to military technology, along with disinformation promoting extraterrestrials, then I have more reason to dismiss any extraterrestrial craft.

    This type of logical reversal (lack of evidence means it must be real!) smacks of a religious cult mentality — what I call the “true believers.” Unfortunately, just as in religion, there are charlatans and scam artists out to make an easy buck and/or get a power trip by misinforming others — and there are military agents doing disinformation since extraterrestrials make a great cover story.

    At least Mark Pilkington is on coasttocoast tonight — talking about his Miragemen book that exposes just how elaborate the military disinformation is regarding the extraterrestrial lies. http://miragemen.wordpress.com/

    Comment by drew hempel — September 27, 2010 @ 6:33 am

  11. avatar

    […] […]

    Pingback by U.S. Nuclear Weapons Have Been Compromised by Unidentified Aerial Objects - Page 12 - Alien UFOs — September 27, 2010 @ 4:53 pm

  12. avatar

    Despite my last comment being disappeared — I emailed Richard Dolan about his new Nuke and UFOs article based on Hastings and Salas misrepresenting Figel and Carlson. So I told Dolan that it was a travesty and he needs to read James’ book and the new documents here.

    Comment by drew hempel — September 27, 2010 @ 8:33 pm

  13. avatar

    Below is the response I received from Richard Dolan regarding his brand new “Nukes and UFO” article published on his website and my reply:

    On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 5:09 PM, Richard Dolan wrote:

    There are several officially released USG documents clearly stating that there was UFO activity over Malmstrom on the day in question. This includes a Boeing report describing its inability to understand the cause of the missile shutdown.

    Richard Dolan

    Richard — Again those FOIA documents you refer to state nothing of the kind you claim — if you read James Carlson’s book — linked at http://realityuncovered.net — this is clearly detailed. Carlson reveals the very limited reading of the FOIA documents done by Hastings and Salas. There are absolutely NO CLAIMS of UFO activity in the FOIA documents. James Carlson goes extensively into the follow-up studies of what caused the shutdown at Malstrom — including the Boeing report, which again, is being misrepresented by Hastings and Salas.

    Sorry Richard but you’ve been had. Please read the research James has done — the Malstrom scenario is a scam and the primary witnesses are screaming that it’s a scam.

    Take care,

    drew

    Comment by drew hempel — September 27, 2010 @ 10:21 pm

  14. avatar

    Richard Dolan says he’s going to read James’ book and so I asked him to make a public response since Dolan is a high profile ufologist.

    Comment by drew hempel — September 27, 2010 @ 11:11 pm

  15. avatar

    Drew, I wouldn’t put too much stock into Mark Pilkington’s conclusion that Doty’s “disinformation” was sanctioned by the AFOSI. After all he was relieved from his duty assignment with the AFOSI after that. Anyway, kudos to you for holding Dolan accountable for his unconditional support of these charlatans.

    Check out the press conference from the perspective of a Washington Post (you know, the paper that broke the Watergate scandal among other things) columnist who was there…

    UFO visits to nuclear facilities? Hmmmm.
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/27/AR2010092705099.html

    “The press conference was open only to credentialed media and to congressional staff. I flipped through the legal pad on which we attendees were asked to write our names. One person from UFO Magazine. Two people from the Epoch Times. Someone from the Kyodo News of Japan. Representatives from Stars and Stripes, WTTG (Channel 5), the Daily Telegraph of London and The Washington Post (me).

    And a “John Bailey” from the House Armed Services Committee.

    Hmmm.”

    I wonder how many will get the punch line at the end?

    “I grabbed a cookie on the way out.”

    Congratulations to Hastings, Salas, Halt, Warren et. al. for delivering yet another major blow to the credibility of Ufology… I hope it was worth it for whoever paid for it.

    Comment by Access Denied — September 28, 2010 @ 2:20 am

  16. avatar

    Well, I appreciate what everybody is saying, but right now I’m just incredibly disgusted with the whole thing, so I’m probably going to be quiet for a little bit — maybe a day or two. People in general are either calling it a bad joke or the gospel truth, and there aren’t nearly enough people who are calling it a malicious lie — and that’s all it is, a lie that a couple of guys have told in order to make a buck, and they don’t even give a damn about repeating it in front of the whole world, because there aren’t that many people who think they should be held responsible for that lie. They dress themselves in respectability like expensive whores, and they have absolutely no fears that they will ever be held accountable for their blatantly fascist and unAmerican acts, and that’s pretty goddamn depressing in my opinion.

    Comment by James Carlson — September 28, 2010 @ 4:37 am

  17. avatar

    LMAO
    “I grabbed a cookie on the way out.”
    The most intelligent statement of the conference ..

    Ufology’s icons are foing down the tubes. check out all there alexa stas ..nosedives..they are in panic from Earthfiles tp these clowns are taking a nose dive and grasping at straws….Ufology will be just fine .as long as we continue to expose them and leave it on the record..people will believe what they want to believe..we can’t save em all..just save the truth..and put it where everyone can see it.

    LOL I’m still laughing..

    On a more sober note I hope those crumbsnatchers do share some of that trace evidence left behind from that cookie with us.. :)

    Comment by Manny — September 28, 2010 @ 5:04 am

  18. avatar

    James: Instead of watching the pathetic press conference I reread your amazing book. I agree with you that your book documents in detail — proves — that Salas is lying and Hastings is pushing the lie. Just the fact that the FOIA documents state there was no other missile incident besides Echo Flight by itself shows that Salas is lying. Then as you detail, Salas has kept changing his story, trying to line it up after being called on being blatantly wrong, etc. Meanwhile the only primary witnesses with documentation have insisted that Salas and Hastings are wrong and yet Salas and Hastings continues to misrepresent them.

    This is so blatantly corrupt on the part of Hastings and Salas that it truly is disgusting, especially considering how the alternative conspiracy scene eats it up.

    Comment by drew hempel — September 28, 2010 @ 8:06 am

  19. avatar

    Just to tell you all the great news:

    The Washington press conference was obviously so important that it got a mention in a column in the London “Daily Mail” . Hastings, Salas and Charles Halt all got a mention too. Surely this proves the conference was a truly momentous event.

    Comment by CDA — September 28, 2010 @ 11:19 am

  20. avatar

    While we’re on the subject, might I note that Col Halt’s affidavit about his Rendlesham sighting, which he made out specially for Hastings’ press conference in DC, is at considerable odds with the events as recorded at the time on his portable tape recorder. What’s more, his statement at the press event is not even consistent with what he said in the affidavit. It’s clear that Halt is now making stuff up as he goes along, and Hastings either hasn’t noticed or doesn’t care. Or both.
    For more detail on the above claims see here
    http://www.ianridpath.com/ufo/Halt_affidavit.htm

    Comment by Ian Ridpath — September 28, 2010 @ 12:58 pm

  21. avatar

    It doesnt matter Drew, if you are “die hard” “true Believer” “and accept the premise the “gubbamint is lying”, then a stack of FOIA reports is meaningless to these people (unless at an uncensored forum)..The gubbamint prob rigged that too.,so debating them is meaningless unless out in the open air of open forum or conference like this where where audiences aren’t cherry picked and witnesses aren’t rehearsed. Like for any Stage show..rest assured they have dress rehearsals.

    Exit..stage left

    Comment by manny — September 28, 2010 @ 1:21 pm

  22. avatar

    “Report of Enginerring Investigation of Echo Flight, Malmstrom Air Force Base, MT, on 16 Mar 67 by Engineering Investigation Team, 23 Mar 67″ and “Final Report of Engineering Investigation of Echo Flight Incident, Malmstrom Air Force Base, MT on 16 Mar 67 by the Engineering Investigation Team, date unknown;

    Has anyone read these reports?

    Comment by Joe Stefula — September 28, 2010 @ 11:30 pm

  23. avatar

    We still continue to receive numerous blog comments from the same person who is trying to pass himself off as different people in order to support Salas and Hastings. Thankfully, we have a very large trash can 😉

    On another note, we have been contacted by a reporter for a major UK newspaper who will be running a story in an upcoming edition. The truth will get out there, of that you can be sure.

    Comment by Stephen Broadbent — September 29, 2010 @ 7:33 pm

  24. avatar

    “Vol 1, 1 Apr Thru 30 Jun 1967, 341st Missile Wing, AHD 341st Combat Support Group, History” Page 38, “Rumors of Unidentified Flying Objects (UFO) around the area of Echo Flight during the time of fault were disproven. A Mobile Strike Team, which had checked all Noverber Flights’s LFs on the morning of 16 March 67, were questioned and stated that no unusual activity or sightings were oberved. The 801st radar squadron, Malnstrom AFB, gave a negative report on any radar or atmospheric interference problems related to Echo Flight.”

    Is this report correct?

    Comment by Joe Stefula — September 30, 2010 @ 3:49 am

  25. avatar

    IRT Comment by Joe Stefula — September 30, 2010 @ 3:49 am : Yes, that statement is correct. Also, contrary to statements by both Robert Hastings and Robert Salas, that statement is UNCLASSIFED, and has been since it was originally drafted.

    Comment by James Carlson — September 30, 2010 @ 4:41 am

  26. avatar

    Comment by Stephen Broadbent — September 29, 2010 @ 7:33 pm wrote :

    “On another note, we have been contacted by a reporter for a major UK newspaper who will be running a story in an upcoming edition. The truth will get out there, of that you can be sure.”

    Nice, very great, Stephen ! I hope it will give James Carlson “courage” ! Cause all of it is probably not evident imho, when you take the Human in the equation.

    One more time, dear mister James Carlson : TY so much for your efforts and so serious work. Keep it us informed on this ! James, as UR.net, You are (a) Guardian(s) of FREE WILL cause your investigations and book, or articles. It is in itself very rare to be mentionned, principaly in “ufology” (what’s that ?” ^^).

    Your e-book, James, is well followed and relayed by us, modestly, as UR forum too, in my humble country. One more time, your investigations is remarkable, something I said many times in my modest interventions in francophonie .

    Take it easy Mister James Carlson, and be proud or happy, your work and followed by UR files is very important.

    My very best regards (and sorry for my english),

    Gilles F.

    Comment by Gilles F. — September 30, 2010 @ 11:25 pm

  27. avatar

    I worked for Sylvania Electric Systems (Then changed to GTE Government Systems) for 25 years. I worked on the Minuteman program for Twenty years. Sylvania was responsible for building, testing and shipping the Minuteman Ground Electric Systems equipment to Malmstrom and Grand Forks AFBs. In 1966 and 1967I was responsible for tracking the testing, deliveries, movements, etc. for this equipment. I was involved on a near daily communicating by phone and at Sylvania with all major contractors in-house and on-site. During this time, I began to hear about UFO sightings taking place on these SAC bases and of course enquired about them with these on-site contractors. I heard that a flight of missiles had shut down at Malmstrom during one of the incidents. I was curious to find out more so I had the in-house representative for Boeing (Gene Whittington) call the Assistant Base Manager at Malmstrom to ask him about the shut-down. I was with him when he phoned. He had a very short conversation, hung up the phone and glared at me saying that he was told that it was a “hot potato” and that he was not ever to ask about it again. He was not too happy with me for asking him to make the phone call. My phone calls about UFOs dried up. One of my confidants told me that his phone must have been monitored as he was told by his boss not to share any UFO information with me. During this time, I scratched down elements of information from these calls on note pads for my own information. Some got mislaid over time and some went with my files to Barry Greenwood who may still have what was left in my Minuteman files.

    I then left that particular job and became involved with Program Planning and Development and developed a new Cost Schedule Performance program for all contracts. However, because of my prior experience with Minuteman, I was made the in-house representative for the Minuteman Program. During this time I met two Launch Control Officers. One visited Sylvania as part of an orientation. I was introduced to him by our contract administrator named Irwin Saltzman. Irwin joked that I was interested in UFOs. The LCF officer surprised us both by stating that his LCF had been affected by a UFO. It turned out to be the August 25, 1966 incident that Hynek wrote about in the Saturday Evening Post, December 1966.

    Still later, I became acquainted with another LCF officer that had joined Sylvania after his discharge. When the subject of UFOs came up one day during our conversation, he amazed me by stating that one time all of his flight of missiles went down. He nervously laughed when he continued that the personnel topside were sighting UFOs. I cannot remember his name and think that mostly likely he did not want his name to be used.

    In 1973, the Christian Science Monitor interviewed me about some local UFO sightings. When the reporter, Stephen Webbe found out that I worked on Minuteman, he asked me questions about the missile. I casually mentioned that there was a UFO/Minuteman connection. This led to my telling him about what I had heard about UFOs affecting the capability of the missiles. Most of the interview was about local sightings so I got a big surprise when I returned to work shortly after. I found that SAC(Captain Rick Fuller) had called to complain about a headline story in the Christian Science Monitor about Minuteman being affected by UFOs. Then, one of the persons working for me happened to be in the Industrial Relations manager’s office and heard him talking about me on the telephone. It turned out to be the UFO officer at the Pentagon – Colonel Colman.

    I was chewed out by the Department Manager and the Vice President and General Manager was also upset. I was told that there were very unhappy with me if I had used my position at Sylvania to obtain this information. The said that if this were so that the Air Force threatened to send an official letter of displeasure to my file. I immediately thought of Doctor Hynek’s article about the incident and said that UFOs affecting minuteman information was in the public domain. Hynek sent me some material and I brought it to the manager. No letter of displeasure was sent. If it had been sent, I could have lost my clearance which would have seriously affected by job.

    In the meantime, Stephen Webbe was told by the Air force that the missiles had gone down due to a local power failure!!! I told Stephen that this was absurd and impossible. The missiles had back-up generators and acid (later Lithium built by Sylvania) batteries to keep the missiles operational. I don’t think that the good colonel was happy when Stephen got back to him. But, the admission that a flight of missiles did go down was very interesting.

    I HOPE THAT THE ABOVE IS HELPFUL, I’VE GLANCED THROUGH OTHER OF MY BOOKS AND FIND BITS AND PIECES OF WHAT I HAD HEARD FROM PHONE CALLS FROM ON-SITE. IF I HAD KNOWN THAT LCF OFFICERS WERE GOING TO GO PUBLIC LATER ON, I WOULD HAVE BEEN MORE CAREFUL DOCUMENTING SUCH INFORMATION.

    Comment by Ray Fowler — September 30, 2010 @ 11:36 pm

  28. avatar

    Ray – thank you so much for providing your experience and insight. One question came up in my mind as I was reading your comment above, I hope you could offer some additional feedback. This comment:

    “and glared at me saying that he was told that it was a “hot potato” and that he was not ever to ask about it again.”

    While you’ve drawn the conclusion that the “hot potato” was the UFO issue – isn’t it equally plausible that the “hot potato” was the fact that there was a significant systems failure that could lead to the all missile silos going down and leaving our country vulnerable? I would think that such a systems failure would be something the U.S. would absolutely *not* want the Russians to know about at all costs – especially considering the political climate at the time.

    Additionally, I’ve read a lot of statements from people saying they heard there were UFO sightings. The Hastings/Salas press conference featured numerous witnesses that report hearing the rumors. Is there anyone out there that has ever come forward stating they were one of the guys that actually saw a UFO at Malmstrom?

    Thanks for any input you can offer.

    -Ryan

    Comment by RyanDube — October 1, 2010 @ 1:44 pm

  29. avatar

    James have fun with Richard Dolan’s response to me pointing out his glaring promotion of the Salas lies. Richard emailed me stating his response was now posted — http://www.afterdisclosure.com/2010/09/malmstrom-analysis.html I glanced at it — and, of course, Richard still has doo-doo stuck to his shoes. Richard told me that he had to conclude that Salas is not lying. haha.

    Comment by drew hempel — October 1, 2010 @ 7:31 pm

  30. avatar

    Also the latest podcast at http://www.psiopradio.com/ prominently promotes the fake UFO lie at Malstrom — and so I emailed psiop radio. Smiles Lewis responded and so I sent him the link to James book, to this site and to Dolan’s new article — explaining why this UFO story is a lie — and I cc’d to Dolan.

    Comment by drew hempel — October 1, 2010 @ 7:40 pm

  31. avatar

    Hi Richard — One point jumps out at me immediately but as I Cc’d you and posted at http://realityuncovered.net James will have a field day with your article. In James’ book on page 10 he quotes Salas stating that Salas began to question whether he was at Echo Flight. In your article you present this in a misleading way — not mentioning Salas’ first claim of the UFO incident being at Echo Flight below:

    There is one problem in the letter when Meiwald states that “I recall
    us being at the Oscar LCF.” During that time, however Salas was stating
    that he was “Probably [at] November Flight,” which according to Carlson
    he maintained for several more years. I don’t know why Salas would do
    this. Did he not read Meiwald’s statement carefully, or did he just
    think Meiwald was wrong?

    Earlier to dismiss Salas’ claim of being at Echo Flight, you make an “error of logical type” in your argument here:

    True, but then again, could Salas not have remembered that Echo was attached to the 10th Squadron?

    Your argument doesn’t make sense — was Salas supposed to make an error about his squadron along with also forgetting where he reports the incident occurred? That’s called an “error of logical type” but it could also be called a “bait and switch” tactic. Two wrongs don’t make a right.

    Again since you conveniently then not mention Echo Flight later on in your article when you try to mesh Meiwald’s story — this misrepresents Salas’ wildly changing story — which, of course, is based originally on Echo Flight — the only place where the documents actually record the missiles getting shut down.

    As James Carlson’s book clearly states the connection Salas claims to Echo flight is a supposed phone call by James’s dad. A connection made after the fact, again, of Salas stating it was first at Echo Flight, which again you left out when discussing Meiwald.

    Eric Carlson states clearly he didn’t make this phone call and there were no UFOs. Richard you can’t ignore this and you shouldn’t twist it around. Salas clearly knew the difference between Echo and other locations — but know you’re claiming that Salas might have just made a larger error about his own squadron instead of just not knowing where the incident occurred?

    So it’s blatantly in bad taste to twist this state of affairs around — Salas relied on the Echo flight missile shut down to build up his story which again has no documentation — and his story wildly contradicts itself. All the other supposed witnesses you rely on are just corroborating rumors.

    Take care,

    drew

    Comment by drew hempel — October 1, 2010 @ 8:43 pm

  32. avatar

    IRT Raymond Fowler’s comments above: I just want to handle this thing in a point-counterpoint style, because it’s much easier and much faster, and I’m kind of busy at the moment, not because I’m trying to be argumentative.

    RF: “I worked for Sylvania Electric Systems (Then changed to GTE Government Systems) for 25 years. I worked on the Minuteman program for Twenty years. Sylvania was responsible for building, testing and shipping the Minuteman Ground Electric Systems equipment to Malmstrom and Grand Forks AFBs. In 1966 and 1967 I was responsible for tracking the testing, deliveries, movements, etc. for this equipment. I was involved on a near daily communicating by phone and at Sylvania with all major contractors in-house and on-site.”

    JC: Sylvania had nothing at all to do with any of the Minuteman I installations at Malmstrom AFB, including Echo Flight. They had the contract to do the ground electrical grid for the one Minuteman II squadron on Malmstrom AFB — the 564th Missile Squadron that was on the other side of the state of Montana, so you didn’t have any need-to-know regarding ANYTHING at Echo Flight. Falling back on your prior experience with the Minuteman program won’t help you here, because neither you nor Sylvania had anything at all to do with it. No need-to-know, no access. That’s all. You may as well be saying you were alive in 1967 for all the good your position at Sylvania does you.

    RF: “During this time, I began to hear about UFO sightings taking place on these SAC bases and of course enquired about them with these on-site contractors. I heard that a flight of missiles had shut down at Malmstrom during one of the incidents.”

    JC: Not having any clearance to be given proper access to anything at all having to do with the Echo Flight Incident, I’m not at all surprised that all you heard were rumors. Oddly enough, the USAF has already confirmed that there were rumors regarding UFO interference at Echo Flight. They have also confirmed that those rumors were found to be groundless.

    RF: “I was curious to find out more so I had the in-house representative for Boeing (Gene Whittington) call the Assistant Base Manager at Malmstrom to ask him about the shut-down. I was with him when he phoned. He had a very short conversation, hung up the phone and glared at me saying that he was told that it was a “hot potato” and that he was not ever to ask about it again. He was not too happy with me for asking him to make the phone call.”

    JC: How did you expect him to react? You didn’t have any need-to-know, so it would have been illegal for him to give you any such information. If you worked for me, I’d be pissed off too. Does the fact that the USAF wanted to keep this matter a secret disturb you for some reason? Does the fact that they classified the matter and didn’t want to tell you all about it, mean that UFOs were involved? You have a history of betraying your oath and disclosing classified infomration to individuals that did not have any clearance whatsoever on at least two already documented occasions, so your insistence regarding such matters doesn’t exactly fill me with confidence that you know what you’re talking about. You should have been arrested, but instead you found someone with the proper clearance to make a phone call, expecting them to break their oath as well and tell you what secrets the USAF was keeping. So now you’re pissed off that he refused to tell you anything other than “it’s a secret, pal”? Get over it, already. The USAF has secrets, but that doesn’t mean a UFO was involved, and it doesn’t mean you should have been told what those secrets are just because you happen to know a guy with a high enough clearance for access.

    RF: “My phone calls about UFOs dried up.”

    JC: I’m not surprised.

    RF: “One of my confidants told me that his phone must have been monitored as he was told by his boss not to share any UFO information with me.”

    JC: Wow — maybe they already knew you were untrustworthy even then. After all, you did disclose classified information on at least two occasions that I’m aware of to people that had no Department of Defense clearance. Maybe they thought you were a risk, because you asked a guy with a higher clearance to make a phone call and then tell you what was said, since your own clearance was insufficient? Hell, with your history, why would that surprise you?

    RF: “During this time, I scratched down elements of information from these calls on note pads for my own information. Some got mislaid over time and some went with my files to Barry Greenwood who may still have what was left in my Minuteman files.”

    JC: You’ve got a lot of bad habits, pal, when it comes to classified materials. You actually wrote the information down for your own records? That’s classic illegal behavior — I’ll bet everybody knew you were a risk. Maybe that had something to do with people being told not to talk to you, hmmm? Did you think you were so careful that nobody would notice? You’re lucky you weren’t dismissed immediately and brought up on charges.

    RF: “I then left that particular job and became involved with Program Planning and Development and developed a new Cost Schedule Performance program for all contracts.”

    JC: But then again, maybe you were dismissed — or reassigned. So, they put you on contract accounts where you wouldn’t have access to all of those in-the-field classified matters, huh? I guess somebody figured you’d be safe there.

    RF: “However, because of my prior experience with Minuteman, I was made the in-house representative for the Minuteman Program. During this time I met two Launch Control Officers. One visited Sylvania as part of an orientation. I was introduced to him by our contract administrator named Irwin Saltzman. Irwin joked that I was interested in UFOs. The LCF officer surprised us both by stating that his LCF had been affected by a UFO. It turned out to be the August 25, 1966 incident that Hynek wrote about in the Saturday Evening Post, December 1966.”

    JC: Interersting, but irrelevant. I thought we were talking about Echo Flight and Oscar Flight? That’s all I’ve ever talked about, but I’m not surprised you might want to talk about other incidents — that’s the same failing that Robert Hastings has: if he has no answer to the questions you’ve asked, he bombards you with page after page after page of irrelevant crap that talks about every UFO sighting in the world except the only one I’m interested in, as if evidence for one of his UFO contact cases in 1975 or whenever somehow exonerates everybody who lied about what went on at Echo Flight. Get over it for God’s sake, and quit bringing up all of this garbage that doesn’t have anything at all to do with the discussion. Robert Salas stood up at that ridiculous press conference and told everybody there that my father and COL.(Ret.) Walt Figel have both confirmed his story of UFOs at Echo Flight, and he did so two days after both men reitierated in very strong terms that they have never confirmed UFOs anywhere at any time. Robert Salas is a liar, and nothing that you want to say about other UFO cases will ever exonerate him, so get over it!

    RF: “Still later, I became acquainted with another LCF officer that had joined Sylvania after his discharge. When the subject of UFOs came up one day during our conversation, he amazed me by stating that one time all of his flight of missiles went down. He nervously laughed when he continued that the personnel topside were sighting UFOs. I cannot remember his name and think that mostly likely he did not want his name to be used.”

    JC: I love it how all of you career UFO proponents always discuss these damn cases that are so convincing, except you never learned that one little piece of information that someone could use to confirm that anything you have to say has some factual basis. For chrissake, this is just like Dwayne Arnesson’s insistence that “I cannot quote the date, where it came from, where it was going to, but I do recall reading it and seeing it.” Do you have any idea how annoying that gets after hearing the same thing over and over and over again? It doesn’t do a whole lot of wonderful, eye-opening things for your credibility, I’ll tell you that much.

    RF: “In 1973, the Christian Science Monitor interviewed me about some local UFO sightings. When the reporter, Stephen Webbe found out that I worked on Minuteman, he asked me questions about the missile. I casually mentioned that there was a UFO/Minuteman connection. This led to my telling him about what I had heard about UFOs affecting the capability of the missiles. Most of the interview was about local sightings so I got a big surprise when I returned to work shortly after. I found that SAC(Captain Rick Fuller) had called to complain about a headline story in the Christian Science Monitor about Minuteman being affected by UFOs. Then, one of the persons working for me happened to be in the Industrial Relations manager’s office and heard him talking about me on the telephone. It turned out to be the UFO officer at the Pentagon – Colonel Colman.”

    JC: And that’s how you get caught breaking the law! Did it ever occur to you that the USAF might discuss this little matter with author of the piece, and want to know who told him that bit of classified information? Does it surprise you for some reason that they would do something like that when classified information is involved? You casually mentioned the UFO’/missile connection, but have you ever actually discussed any specifc cases? Because you weren’t saying squat about Echo Flight in the 1970s, so the only conclusion I can reach is that you’ve assumed a connection without any evidence to convince others that such a connection exists. Now we have proven that Robert Salas’ discussions of Echo Flight and Oscar Flight are lies — completely, and those are the best known cases there are, so if all you’re going to do is assume a connection without having any evidence to back it up, then you might as well go home, because as far as I’m concerned, you don’t have anything even remotely interesting to say.

    RF: “I was chewed out by the Department Manager and the Vice President and General Manager was also upset. I was told that there were very unhappy with me if I had used my position at Sylvania to obtain this information. The said that if this were so that the Air Force threatened to send an official letter of displeasure to my file. I immediately thought of Doctor Hynek’s article about the incident and said that UFOs affecting minuteman information was in the public domain. Hynek sent me some material and I brought it to the manager. No letter of displeasure was sent. If it had been sent, I could have lost my clearance which would have seriously affected by job.”

    It’s a good thing you had people looking out for you, ’cause you should have been busted. Of course, that probably didn’t occur to you, because you seem to think that just because Hyneck published something about it, that means it was in the public domain. Yeah, pal, you’re definitely a civilian. Where classified materials are concerned there’s no such thing as “public domain”. There’s only “classified” or “unclassified”. The only thing you’ve proven here is how much you shouldn’t have been trusted by anybody.

    RF: “In the meantime, Stephen Webbe was told by the Air force that the missiles had gone down due to a local power failure!!! I told Stephen that this was absurd and impossible. The missiles had back-up generators and acid (later Lithium built by Sylvania) batteries to keep the missiles operational. I don’t think that the good colonel was happy when Stephen got back to him. But, the admission that a flight of missiles did go down was very interesting.”

    JC: What event are you talking about here? It isn’t Echo Flight. But we’ll entertain your position here for just a moment. According to Bernard C. Nalty’s “USAF Ballistic Missile Programs 1967-1968″, drafted September 1969, and classified TOP SECRET NOFORN until it was declassified in 2004:

    Nalty: During the winter of 1965-1966, the operation of several Minuteman sites was disrupted after storms had severed commercial power lines and the diesel engines that were supposed to turn standby generators failed to start. The refurbishment or replacement of standby power system components began in 1966 with emergency modifications – principally to the mechanism for switching automatically to internal power – in Minuteman Wings I through V. The first series of alterations was scarcely under way when it was discovered that the new switching mechanism was overly sensitive to fluctuations in commercial current. The solution arrived at was to arrange a two-second delay between sensing a change in voltage and shutting off outside power. If the weather or some defect in the commercial system caused a minor variation in current, normal power was expected to return within that time; if the fluctuation persisted, the system would shift to standby power before any damage could be done.

    JC: But that’s not all — it was Grand Forks AFB that you mention above, yes?:

    Nalty: Interruptions of electrical power had been unusually frequent at the Minuteman II wing at Grand Forks, N.D. During the first six months of 1966 commercial power failed on 450 occasions, and 126 times, almost one in three, the standby system did not work. Although commercial power was usually restored within a quarter of an hour, the diesel-powered system was clearly in need of modifications to make it more dependable. Repairs undertaken included modifying circuit breakers, replacing diodes and relays in generator circuits and switching panels, and providing diesel fuel pressure gauges and shut off valves. When this job seemed likely to last through 1968, the Air Force directed the Ballistic Systems Division (BSD) [*Note: BSD was later absorbed by the newly created Space and Missile Systems Organization (SAMSO) a few short months later.] to schedule the work in conjunction with routine facility updates.

    Nalty: The repeated failure of the launch site generators also imposed a severe strain on the storage batteries – 32-volt for Minuteman I and 160-volt for Minuteman II – which were used as emergency sources of power. The revisions in plans and delays in overhauling the unreliable diesel system resulted in a continued reliance on emergency power to do what had been planned for the standby diesels and expected a heavy toll in expended batteries. The Air Force soon found it necessary to purchase more batteries in order to replenish a dwindling supply of spares. Recharging exhausted batteries was a normal procedure, though the task required caution. These emergency power sources – especially the heavier one used in Minuteman II – could explode if filled too full with fluid or allowed to overheat.

    JC: I’m not sure someone who insists that missiles can’t fail “due to a local power failure” when it was happening all the time for a couple of years should necessarily be trusted as some kind of an expert in regard to this matter. But the problems above aren’t the only problems the USAF had with the Minuteman force, not nby a long shot.

    Nalty: By the summer of 1966, the Air Force appeared to have solved an especially serious problem – the unreliability of the NS-17 guidance and control unit used in the LGM-30F missile. The solution adopted included modifying the design, careful handling of the device while in transit to the site, and cautious starting, especially in cold weather, to avoid a “thermal shock” believed to occur when coolant was added too rapidly to a unit being brought to operating temperature. But despite these actions, NS-17’s continued to fail at an alarming rate. By April 1967, for instance, there were 107 fewer units on hand for the Minuteman force than plans called for; the deficit was due to the unexpectedly large number under repair.

    JC: And when one of those NS-17s failed, the missile failed, shut down, turned off, whatever you want to call it; it went off due to a guidance and control fault, and that was happening all the time at all of the Wings.

    Nalty: Because of the importance of these units to the Minuteman II force, the Air Force asked for and OSD provided $13.7 million for modifications to begin in the summer of 1967. This sum, however, turned out to be a little more than a third of the amount needed. Meanwhile, AFSC and BSD investigators studied the performance record of the NS-17 to determine the circumstances under which units were failing and scrutinized both the design and the method of manufacture to identify probable cause of failure.

    Nalty: In the aftermath of the investigation came improved methods of production and numerous changes in the units themselves. Each group of modifications was identified by a color code, and SAC at one time found itself with yellow, blue, and red dot NS-17’s in stock. By June, 1967, however, the modifications had been standardized so that there were only two types of NS-17’s: the old and the new, with the latter having increased radiation shielding as well as other improvements. As a result of the corrective program, mean time between failure of guidance and control units increased from 1,400 hours in March 1967 to about 2,950 hours in July 1968. Some of the newer units, however, had operated in excess of 4,000 hours.

    JC: That’s a pretty damn significant change in the rate of failures, if you ask me. Granted, I’m a layman, and as Robert Hastings enjoys pointing out whenever he can, I’m no engineer, either. But I can read … funny how that’s all I had to do; y’know, just a read a few documents and summaries, and try my best to ignore it when Salas or Hastings toss in another change in the story they want folks to believe.

    RF: “I HOPE THAT THE ABOVE IS HELPFUL, I’VE GLANCED THROUGH OTHER OF MY BOOKS AND FIND BITS AND PIECES OF WHAT I HAD HEARD FROM PHONE CALLS FROM ON-SITE. IF I HAD KNOWN THAT LCF OFFICERS WERE GOING TO GO PUBLIC LATER ON, I WOULD HAVE BEEN MORE CAREFUL DOCUMENTING SUCH INFORMATION.”

    JC: Yeah — thanks …

    Comment by James Carlson — October 2, 2010 @ 12:42 am

  33. avatar

    Fowler ends with “IF I HAD KNOWN THAT LCF OFFICERS WERE GOING TO GO PUBLIC LATER ON, I WOULD HAVE BEEN MORE CAREFUL DOCUMENTING SUCH INFORMATION.”

    JC: You probably should have, but I doubt it would have mattered; there’s not a single LCF officer who went “public later on” in relation to UFOs who has any credibility at all. Not one. Unfortunately, most UFO proponent investigators or researchers — you know, folks like Robert Hastings — never bother to look at credibility in the first place. If they did, I wouldn’t have had to.

    Comment by James Carlson — October 2, 2010 @ 1:00 am

  34. avatar

    JC: Just for kicks, I took a look at another of Bernard C. Nalty’s ICBM histories : “USAF Ballistic Missile Programs 1964-1966″. It also contained some discussions that proved interesting.

    Nalty: But even as the old problems were solved, new ones arose, some of them defying qucik solution. Among the latter were deficiencies in the Minuteman emergency power system involving a diesel driven generator. When commercial power failed, the generator was supposed to take over the job automatically. Combat crews, however, had no means of monitoring the operating condition of the diesels that turned the generators and these motors frequently failed because they were out of oil. In July 1965 Headquarters USAF authorized AFSC to negotiate a contract to increase oil and fuel capacity and remedy other flaws.

    Nalty: Less than a week had passed before the weaknesses of the system were dramatically demonstrated. A temporary reduction in commercial current at a Wing IV silo triggered the emergency system, but the generator continued to operate after outside power had been restored. The resulting overload caused a short circuit that, if followed by a second electrical pulse, could conceivably have ignited the first stage. The guidance and control unit, however, would not have become activated, the second stage would not have ignited, and the missile would have crashed nearby. Experts believed there could not have been a nuclear explosion.

    Nalty: The need to improve the emergency system became even more obvious during a blizzard in February 1966. In one wing, 77 unmanned launch facilities lost commercial power; at 30 the diesels failed to start automatically, and at 12 they shut down. In this same organization, 13 of 15 launch control facilities lost outside power, but the combat crews were able to start the diesels manually. These problems led to an intensified effort to improve and standardize emergency power units.

    JC: I want to make one more coment, but it’s only peripherally associated. On the occasion of the press conference, a number of people indicated their belief that the UFO’s supposed motivation for allegedly interfering with nuclear weapons facilities in the U.S. was to focus world attention on the dangers of nuclear weaponry. The timing for that “message”, however, did tend to reduce the effectiveness of such a communication, since it was initiated AFTER an unprecedented nuclear weapons treaty had been agreed upon by both the U.S. and the Soviet Union, one element of which prohibited atmospheric nuclear tests.

    Comment by James Carlson — October 2, 2010 @ 7:02 am

  35. avatar

    Drew, thank you for following up on this with Dolan and helping to get the word out. I can’t believe what I just read…

    “Robert Salas — the primary witness — is telling the truth, and here’s why.”

    I must admit Dolan has done a fairly thorough job of studying all the arguments and evidence that James and Ryan have presented and highlighting the key points of contention… so well in fact that he comes to the well-reasoned conclusion that UFOs were most likely not involved at Echo Flight.

    “Hastings and Salas have argued that this was a UFO-related event. All I can say about that is, maybe it was. The evidence on the table currently is reasonable enough to say that there was not a UFO event there, despite one declassified document confirming that the missiles there did go off line.”

    Score at the end of the fist half: Carlson 1, Hastings 0, Salas 0

    So far so good but then something very interesting happens…

    “What is surprising, when I come down to it, is that I am more persuaded by the evidence supporting a UFO incursion over the Oscar Flight. No, there are no direct witnesses who have come forward and there are no government documents. But there are enough people willing to talk about their connection to it that I believe it probably happened as they have told it.”

    Score at the end of the second half: Carlson 1, Hastings 0, Salas 1

    I understand Dolan has a business to run here so I’m not at all surprised by that, and I know James won’t be either, but then he ends the article with this…

    “Having said that, it remains the responsibility of claimants to UFO encounters to provide the best case they possibly can. There are no excuses for sloppiness. The phenomenon is already difficult enough to study.”

    Final score in sudden death overtime: Carlson 1, Hastings -1, Salas 0

    I never thought I would say this but kudos to Dolan for correctly placing the burden of proof back where it belongs.

    That said, we all know no independently verifiable evidence will be forthcoming in this case from the likes of Hastings or Salas so game over man… next? Surely there is a more compelling case from the annals of Ufology for us to examine?

    Comment by Access Denied — October 2, 2010 @ 7:49 am

  36. avatar

    Greetings,

    As a french skeptic told me in french concerning UFO phenomenon, in French: “Gilles, you are so lucky to be a contemporan of a contemporan myth.”

    I think it is a case in our (prosaic file) concerning Malmstrom.

    I like Paul Kimball works and moovies, but in the mythology, Malmstrom is becoming or becomed like it:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4F08xJwA2qI&feature=player_embedded#!

    Notice Salas is totaly out and off the EVIDENCES.

    Malmstrom case, as Roswell, will be a interresting case in human sciences 😉

    Best Regards,

    Gilles F.

    Comment by Gilles F. — October 2, 2010 @ 9:22 pm

  37. avatar

    Gilles F. wrote: “Malmstrom case, as Roswell, will be a interresting case in human sciences”

    In Britain, Nick Pope is trying to push Rendlesham to the top of the list. It, too, is a myth in the making, again because of the military involvement.

    Congratulations to those who have taken the time to investigate Malmstrom thoroughly and the courage to speak out.

    All those UFO entrepreneurs who are campaigning for “disclosure” on this and other cases such as Rendlesham are walking a thin line. Real disclosure would reveal their own lies and cover-up. However, they would no doubt respond by characterizing themselves as victims of a government smear campaign designed to discredit whistleblowers. And of course the gullible would fall for it once again.

    This week’s disclosure of the unethical and disgraceful syphilis experiments in the 1940s on unwitting humans shows that real truth does out, eventually, no matter how awkward for the government. Meanwhile, those who think the govt. still has secrets about UFOs continue to wait… and wait…

    Ian

    Comment by Ian Ridpath — October 3, 2010 @ 12:54 am

  38. avatar

    Well, I think it’s a safe bet that, for the first time in awhile, I am quite literally stunned.

    Thank you Drew; you’ve managed to get the attention of people I have been trying to attract for a couple of years.

    I don’t quite know how I feel right now, but I feel better than I did a couple of days ago, by a signifcant factor.

    James

    Comment by James Carlson — October 3, 2010 @ 1:12 am

  39. avatar

    James — To me the evidence you present is very clear that Oscar Flight should not be considered a UFO sighting. Hearsay testimony is not allowed in a court of law; corroborating rumors, as is the case for the other witnesses, should not be given the light of day. Obviously when considering that Salas originally based his story on Echo Flight and then changed it with no documentation — the foundation of the story has been dismantled. So this kind of watered-down — oh there was a ufo at Oscar flight — is a ridiculous claim to make and really a symptom of denial.

    James since you’ve been attacked and censored, your research still continues to get misrepresented — look at the continued onslaught — http://anomalist.com boldly exclaims how Ray Fowler confirms that UFOs shut down Malstrom nukes. So I’ll email Rick at anomalist again but I doubt he’ll post your response. Such is how the religion of ufology is developed, thanks to the ETH bias of brainwashed ufologists.

    Comment by drew hempel — October 3, 2010 @ 2:59 am

  40. avatar

    Well I submitted it — but too bad your response is not posted as it’s own url link — since that is probably necessary for it to be posted on http://anomalist.com — they also posted this new FOIA request for UFO info from Malstrom — by UFO Magazine.

    http://ufoview.posterous.com/item-279-foia-request-re-ufo-intrusion-readin

    Comment by drew hempel — October 3, 2010 @ 3:05 am

  41. avatar

    I agree about Oscar — the clinching incident for me is the memo Lt.Col. Chase sent FTD insisting that there were no equipment failures at all for March 24-25; of course Salas insists he was lying, but that’s absurd considering FTD’s mission and importance. No equipment failures, no Oscar Flight event.

    Comment by James Carlson — October 3, 2010 @ 9:03 am

  42. avatar

    Hello Ian Ridpath,

    Yep, in Francophony, I suggest very often in my interventions in different Skeptic forums or others to read your superb web page about Rendlesham incident, as your “Halt’s testimony analysis”. Same concerning “Big Sur case” in Tim Printy website. I wanted to express my kudos to you to have such sources at disposal, concerning the myth of “UFOs and Nukes”. Congrat’s^^

    Best Regards,

    Gilles F.

    Comment by Gilles F. — October 3, 2010 @ 10:54 am

  43. avatar

    Gilles F. wrote: “Same concerning “Big Sur case” in Tim Printy website. I wanted to express my kudos to you to have such sources at disposal, concerning the myth of “UFOs and Nukes”. Congrat’s”
    Thank you for the kind words. And, yes, Tim P has put in a lot of time and effort on several cases. I particularly like his pages on Roswell and the Belgium UFOs (another military case), but everyone will have their own favorites.

    Note also my countryman David Clarke’s excellent work on the Cosford Incident, another military UFO sighting that Nick Pope still promotes as unsolved despite knowing the explanation
    http://www.uk-ufo.org/condign/secfilcosf1.htm

    If even these high-profile military cases don’t stand up to examination then no wonder the UFO proponents have to resort to misleading the public.

    Ian

    Comment by Ian Ridpath — October 3, 2010 @ 10:36 pm

  44. avatar

    to Ian Ridpath (and David Clarke?),

    Yep, I have modestly summerize shortly your analysis ( Clarke or Your One) in french, for example concerning the radiation measurements -sic” at Rendlesham, made by Halt’s team, legitimaly maybe, using a very well designated instrument -the AN/DPR27- (sic) as you well known, because you are the best contributor of such “cartesian” works.

    We have such a famous case in France with radioactivity – Trans-En-Provence – examined and very well explained mundaly or with prosaism by some contributors of our own french forum contributors, sceptic ovni, Eric Déguillaume, David Rossoni, Eric Maillot (arbitory order) in their Book “les ovnis de CNES”, as many best UFO french cases. I hope a translation will be available a day, cause this book merits a translation imho.

    I’m “well” aware of Tim Printy pages concerning Roswell, because I’m the humble ufoSkeptic’s writter of a recent book in French concerning Roswell case and 1947 titled “Roswell : Rencontre du Premier Mythe” (a title playing wordgames with Spielberg’s film “Close Encounters of the Third Kind” and the RR3 Hynek’s classification, and the word “myth”.

    Yep then again, Tim Printy site, as SUnlite, or your pages, as UR (and many others) are precious for the freewill concerning the UFOs (myth imho^^). TY so much again !

    Regards,

    Gilles F.

    Comment by Gilles F. — October 5, 2010 @ 5:41 pm

  45. avatar

    Well again the “alternative” Fortean dailygrail site is promoting the Hastings response as a false dichotomy of the CSI skeptic attack on Hastings, leaving out the real expose by James Carlson:

    http://ufomagazine.squarespace.com/ufo-magazine/2010/10/3/reactionary-skeptibunkies-move-reactionary-bowels-regards-uf.html

    I already got banned from dailygrail since I was exposing these false debates.

    Comment by drew hempel — October 6, 2010 @ 5:47 pm

  46. avatar

    Well my comment at ufomagazine wasn’t censored but now Jeremy from paratopia is steadfastly claiming that Eric Carlson and Walt Figel are not being lied about by Hastings and Salas. So I posted some quotes from here — hopefully they won’t get censored.

    Comment by drew hempel — October 6, 2010 @ 8:54 pm

  47. avatar

    Yep — just as I expected UFOmagazine censored actual quotes of Eric Carlson and Walt Figel, in response to Jeremy Vaeni of paratopia claiming none of the supposed witnesses at Malstrom are stating Hastings and Salas are lying.

    Then someone from UFOmagazine linked the Washington Post promo of the Hastings press conference. The level of psychological denial and cover-up among so-called “ufologists” is blatantly stunning.

    Comment by drew hempel — October 6, 2010 @ 9:31 pm

  48. avatar

    You’re not kidding Drew, turns out Dolan has now edited his “analysis” and among other things, changed one of the quotes I highlighted in a previous comment here. This…

    “Hastings and Salas have argued that this was a UFO-related event. All I can say about that is, maybe it was. The evidence on the table currently is reasonable enough to say that there was not a UFO event there, despite one declassified document confirming that the missiles there did go off line.”

    Has now changed to this…

    “Hastings and Salas have argued that this was a UFO-related event. All I can say about that is, I believe this is probably the case. However, without fully credited documentary evidence, one can still argue that this was not a UFO event, despite one declassified document confirming that the missiles there did go off line.”

    No surprise the cover up at the hands of Retail Ufology continues. Obviously honesty is not the best policy.

    The “funny” part is the only people these charlatans are fooling are their customers who are all too willing do their advertising for them for free. If a Washington Post reporter can see through the charade so easily, you can be sure anybody in a position of authority can too…

    Comment by Access Denied — October 7, 2010 @ 3:03 am

  49. avatar

    Yeah the “new” version of Dolan’s Malstrom Mythology is now promoted on a blog — let’s see if my comment gets censored again (awaiting “moderation”):

    http://dad2059.wordpress.com/2010/10/06/dolan-on-maelstrom/

    Unfortunately Dolan didn’t read James Carlson’s expose book very well — as it’s well documented there was no UFO event anywhere at Malstrom. There was only one complete missile shutdown at Malstrom — at Echo Flight — and Salas claimed he was at Echo Flight, which was not true. Salas and Hastings have continued to lie about Malstrom claiming Carlson and Figel are witnesses to UFOs when in fact Carlson and Figel have both stated emphatically there were no ufos at Malstrom.

    So not only was there no ufos at Oscar flight – there was not even a shutdown of the missiles at Oscar Flight. This, again, is documented very clearly in the FOIA documents, again as James Carlson details in his book.

    Unfortunately Dolan did a quick read of Carlson’s book and Dolan has an ETH bias.

    Comment by drew hempel — October 7, 2010 @ 5:37 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.



Reality Uncovered Social Networking
Visit us on Facebook! Follow us on Twitter! Reality Uncovered on You Tube




RU Custom Search

Help support the continued growth of Reality Uncovered