National Press Club Conference on UFO's

General UFO stories

Moderators: ryguy, chrLz, Zep Tepi

National Press Club Conference on UFO's

Postby ryguy » Sat Nov 10, 2007 4:25 pm

The significant part of this story is especially that, toward the bottom, a real effort is being put forth here to get the government to re-open investigation of the phenomenon.

Another item of significance - closely examine the names of the expert testimony here....and keep your eyes peeled for those names to surface later as part of fake, idiotic stories. That's disinfo, and that's what we need to strive to put a stop to.

And most importantly - read the DIA comment on the Tehran incident. Now that's disclosure.

http://www.prweb.com/releases/Unidentified_Flying/object_UFO_event/prweb567548.htm

Pilots to Tell Their UFO Stories for the First Time

(PRWEB) November 7, 2007 -- The American public is not alone when it comes to sighting what the US Air Force has labeled Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs). So too have former governors, high level military and government officials, highly trained airplane pilots and aviation experts. The phenomenon is real. It happens worldwide. No one is sure about its nature. Experts from seven countries will divulge what they have discovered about UFOs at a November 12 panel discussion moderated by former Arizona Governor Fife Symington (R) at the National Press Club (http://www.freedomofinfo.org).

Just one year ago, pilots, mechanics and managers from United Airlines witnessed a metallic disc-shaped object hovering over the United Airlines Terminal at Chicago’s O’Hare Airport. The clearly observed object shot straight up leaving a hole through the clouds. Despite the clear aviation safety issues involved, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) never investigated the incident and dismissed it as weather. This head-in-the-clouds refusal to investigate stands in sharp contrast to efforts by governments of other countries to understand these incidents.

“I believe that our government should take an active role in investigating this very real phenomenon,” said Symington, who was a witness to the famed ‘Phoenix Lights” incident seen by hundreds in Arizona while he was governor. “This panel consists of some of the most qualified people in the world with direct experience in dealing with this issue, and they will bring incredible, irrefutable evidence, some never presented before, that we simply cannot dismiss or ignore,” he said.

The group, using previously classified documents, will discuss many well-documented cases, including two investigated by the US government. The first involves a Peruvian Air Force pilot who fired many rounds at a UFO which was not affected. The second was an Iranian Air Force pilot’s attempt to fire at a UFO, but whose control panel became inoperable. “This case is a classic that meets all the necessary conditions for a legitimate study of the UFO phenomenon,” stated the US Defense Intelligence Agency document on the Tehran incident. Both pilots will come forward to speak about these events publicly for the first time.

Who:

Fife Symington, Former Arizona Governor, Moderator
Ray Bowyer, Captain, Aurigny Air Services, Channel Islands
Rodrigo Bravo, Captain and Pilot for the Aviation Army of Chile
General Wilfried De Brouwer, former Deputy Chief of Staff, Belgian Air Force (Ret.)
John Callahan, Chief of Accidents and Investigations for the FAA, 1980’s (Ret.)
Dr. Anthony Choy, founder, 2001, OIFAA, Peruvian Air Force
Jean-Claude Duboc, Captain, Air France (Ret.)
Charles I. Halt, Col. USAF (Ret.), Former Director, Inspections Directorate, DOD I.G.
General Parviz Jafari, Iranian Air Force (Ret.)
Jim Penniston, TSgt USAF (Ret.)
Dr. Claude Poher, Centre National d’Etudes Spatiales, founder, French GEPAN
Nick Pope, Ministry of Defence, UK, 1985-2006
Dr. Jean-Claude Ribes, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, France, 1963-98
Comandante Oscar Santa Maria, Peruvian Air Force (Ret.)

What:

Former Arizona Governor Fife Symington will moderate a distinguished panel of former high-ranking government, aviation, and military officials from seven countries to discuss close encounters with what the US Air Force describes as Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs). Representatives from France, England, Belgium, Chile, Peru, Iran and the US will call for the US Government to join in an international dialogue and re-open its investigation – which the Air Force shut down over 30 years ago – in cooperation with other governments currently dealing with this unusual and controversial phenomenon. While on active duty, the panelists have either witnessed a UFO incident or have conducted an official investigation into UFO cases relevant to aviation safety and national security.

When:
Monday, November 12, 2007
11:00 AM

Where:
National Press Club
Ballroom
Event open to credentialed media and Congressional staff only

Contact:
James Fox, documentary filmmaker; director of the acclaimed film “Out of the Blue”
415 519 9631 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting              415 519 9631      end_of_the_skype_highlighting

Leslie Kean, investigative journalist with the Coalition for Freedom of Information
415 250 9791

High-ranking military officials and government personnel from around the world discuss close encounters with UFOs on Thursday, Nov. 12. To learn more, visit http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/larry.king.live/ and http://www.freedomofinfo.org/ Is national security on the line? Or perhaps some reputations? Whatever your take, you'll be talking about this long after Larry says good night.

And for more information about the Nov. 12 national press conference, visit http://www.freedomofinfo.org.

###
---
"Only a fool of a scientist would dismiss the evidence and reports in front of him and substitute his own beliefs in their place." - Paul Kurtz

The RU Blog
Top Secret Writers
User avatar
ryguy
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 4920
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:49 am
Location: Another Dimension


Impact on Thursday's debate?

Postby MikeJamieson » Mon Nov 12, 2007 4:13 pm

It's my sincere hope that the CNN moderators don't ask anymore
silly and irrelevant questions re: UFOs this coming Thursday in
Las Vegas.

I think my candidate had it right: let's focus on the folks who actually
live here.

There is no real political issue with UFOs (outside of the general
issue of secrecy and lack of transparency).
MikeJamieson
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 564
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 4:53 pm
Location: Ukiah, CA

Postby ryguy » Tue Nov 13, 2007 4:00 pm

UFO Press Conference Hits Front Page National News

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071112/od_uk_nm/oukoe_uk_usa_ufos

Former pilots and officials call for new U.S. UFO probe

Mon Nov 12, 5:58 PM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democratic U.S. presidential hopeful Dennis Kucinich may have been ridiculed for saying he had seen a UFO, but for some former military pilots and other observers, unidentified flying objects are no laughing matter.

ADVERTISEMENT

An international panel of two dozen former pilots and government officials called on the U.S. government on Monday to reopen its generation-old UFO investigation as a matter of safety and security given continuing reports about flying discs, glowing spheres and other strange sightings.

"Especially after the attacks of 9/11, it is no longer satisfactory to ignore radar returns ... which cannot be associated with performances of existing aircraft and helicopters," they said in a statement released at a news conference.

The panellists from seven countries, including former senior military officers, said they had each seen a UFO or conducted an official investigation into UFO phenomena.

The subject of UFOs grabbed the spotlight in the U.S. presidential race last month when Kucinich, a member of Congress from Ohio, said during a televised debate with other Democratic candidates that he had seen one.

Former presidents Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter are both reported to have claimed UFO sightings.

Most turn out to be misidentified aircraft, satellites or meteors. A panellist who once worked for Britain's Ministry of Defense said 5 percent of incidents cannot be explained.

But the sightings are often dismissed by authorities without proper investigations, UFO activists say.

"It's a question of who you going to believe: your lying eyes or the government?" remarked John Callahan, a former Federal Aviation Administration investigator, who said the CIA in 1987 tried to hush up the sighting of a huge lighted ball four times the size of a jumbo jet in Alaska.

The panel, organized by a group dedicated to winning credibility for the study of UFOs, urged Washington to resume UFO investigations through the U.S. Air Force or NASA.

"It would certainly, I think, take a lot of angst out of this issue," said former Arizona Gov. Fife Symington, who said he was among hundreds who saw a delta-shaped craft with enormous lights silently traverse the sky near Phoenix in 1997.

The Air Force investigated 12,618 UFO reports from 1947 to 1969 in what was known as Project Blue Book. Investigators concluded that the incidents posed no threat and there was no evidence of space aliens or a super technology in operation.

"Since the termination of Project Blue Book, nothing has occurred that would support a resumption of UFO investigations," the Air Force said on its Web site.

(Reporting by David Morgan; Editing by Joanne Kenen, David Alexander, Stuart Grudgings)
---
"Only a fool of a scientist would dismiss the evidence and reports in front of him and substitute his own beliefs in their place." - Paul Kurtz

The RU Blog
Top Secret Writers
User avatar
ryguy
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 4920
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:49 am
Location: Another Dimension

Pretty damn disingenous, if you ask me

Postby MikeJamieson » Tue Nov 13, 2007 4:39 pm

They present a rationale of "national security" and "safety" in our
skies (traffic safety) as the basis for a new government investigation
into UFOs.

Are they f_______g serious!?!?!
MikeJamieson
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 564
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 4:53 pm
Location: Ukiah, CA

Re: Pretty damn disingenous, if you ask me

Postby You Can Call Me Ray » Tue Nov 13, 2007 4:48 pm

MikeJamieson wrote:They present a rationale of "national security" and "safety" in our
skies (traffic safety) as the basis for a new government investigation
into UFOs.

Are they f_______g serious!?!?!


Heh heh.... Knowing how Washington works, we may soon see new Federal Aviation Regulations that will make compulsory the installation of TSO'ed Traffic Collision Avoidance System (TCAS) on all UFOs! ;)

No one seems to worry about enforcement of laws these days, as long as they can take credit for passing one, that's all they care about come election day! :shock:

Ray
The Universe is an Integrated System. Operational, Functional, and Physical.
User avatar
You Can Call Me Ray
Uncovers Reality
Uncovers Reality
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 10:49 pm
Location: Huntington Beach, CA, USA

Re: Pretty damn disingenous, if you ask me

Postby murnut » Tue Nov 13, 2007 10:59 pm

MikeJamieson wrote:They present a rationale of "national security" and "safety" in our
skies (traffic safety) as the basis for a new government investigation
into UFOs.

Are they f_______g serious!?!?!


Just buzzwords that the press recognizes to promote a level of credibility.

At least it got some mainstream coverage that focused on serious, rather than laughable reporting.

The more the issue is treated seriously, the better.

In my opinion.
"The Conformers are hard to read. They are rocks."
User avatar
murnut
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 951
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 12:35 am

Postby caleban » Tue Nov 13, 2007 11:02 pm

"Another item of significance - closely examine the names of the expert testimony here....
and keep your eyes peeled for those names to surface later... "

Charles I. Halt, Col. USAF (Ret.), Former Director, Inspections Directorate, DOD I.G.
Jim Penniston, TSgt USAF (Ret.)


Or where they have surfaced in the past ? "Unsolved Mysteries", "Strange but True" (filmed in England),
the ABC/History Channel Peter Jennings special. (Before ABC pulled the segment on Rendlesham - Bentwaters .)
User avatar
caleban
In Search of Reality
In Search of Reality
 
Posts: 98
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 4:33 am
Location: NM

Postby ryguy » Tue Nov 13, 2007 11:31 pm

caleban wrote:Or where they have surfaced in the past ? "Unsolved Mysteries", "Strange but True" (filmed in England),
the ABC/History Channel Peter Jennings special. (Before ABC pulled the segment on Rendlesham - Bentwaters .)


Nice... Welcome to RU caleban.

-Ry
---
"Only a fool of a scientist would dismiss the evidence and reports in front of him and substitute his own beliefs in their place." - Paul Kurtz

The RU Blog
Top Secret Writers
User avatar
ryguy
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 4920
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:49 am
Location: Another Dimension

Postby caleban » Tue Nov 20, 2007 11:53 pm

Thank you very much.
User avatar
caleban
In Search of Reality
In Search of Reality
 
Posts: 98
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 4:33 am
Location: NM

Postby caleban » Sat Dec 08, 2007 3:25 am

When ABC/History channel pulled the Peter Jennings Special
segment on Rendlesham - Bentwaters, I believe the reason to
have been that they felt the segment deserved a full hour coverage,
but the interviews and such were already accomplished in the 2004-
2005 time frame. It is interesting to note that the history channel
is now advertising two show times upcomming for 26 December, as
the UK Roswell. The two names I mentioned above will most
likely turn up there. Watch for other names and see how they
may relate to the ONLY witness who was there on both nights.
User avatar
caleban
In Search of Reality
In Search of Reality
 
Posts: 98
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 4:33 am
Location: NM

Postby lost_shaman » Sat Dec 15, 2007 11:22 pm

MikeJamieson wrote:They present a rationale of "national security" and "safety" in our
skies (traffic safety) as the basis for a new government investigation
into UFOs.

Are they f_______g serious!?!?!


I think that "they" are serious. Is that really so 'far fetched' considering relatively recent developments?

Take Hessdalen Phenomena and the recent Scientific fervor that's been generated specifically amoung European Scientists for example. They are discussing a Luminous Atmospheric Phenomena (or UAP) that likely explains between 80 - 95% of all "Unknown" UFO reports/sightings.

According to the U.K.'s declassified (2006) MoD report, "UAP in the UK Air Defence Region" , UAP are in fact considered a safety threat to Military and Commercial Air Traffic. In the U.S. the NARCAP organisation has maintained a similar position for around a decade or more now.
User avatar
lost_shaman
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 409
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 8:56 am

Postby Access Denied » Sun Dec 16, 2007 12:20 am

lost_shaman wrote:I think that "they" are serious. Is that really so 'far fetched' considering relatively recent developments?

Hi LS, long time no see. :)

Recent developments? If you mean O’Hare, IMO there’s reason to believe it was a non-event… quite possibly a hoax.

[but that's a discussion for another thread entirely]

lost_shaman wrote:Take Hessdalen Phenomena and the recent Scientific fervor that's been generated specifically amoung European Scientists for example. They are discussing a Luminous Atmospheric Phenomena (or UAP) that likely explains between 80 - 95% of all "Unknown" UFO reports/sightings.

Recent Scientific fervor? Do tell!

lost_shaman wrote:According to the U.K.'s declassified (2006) MoD report, "UAP in the UK Air Defence Region" , UAP are in fact considered a safety threat to Military and Commercial Air Traffic.

My reading of that report (it's been a while) gave me the impression that the only real “threat” was military pilots attempting to chase UAP and becoming disoriented or running out of fuel. The solution? Brief the pilots not to chase UAP… it’s a fruitless endeavor. Evidence suggests that UAP represent a "massless" electrically charged phenomena (e.g. plasma) and have been known to “pass through” aircraft on occasion indicating there’s no collision danger. Not sure off the top of my head what the conclusion regarding any possible danger of electrical interference was though… not an issue with today’s avionics?

lost_shaman wrote:In the U.S. the NARCAP organisation has maintained a similar position for around a decade or more now.

Yes well it’s a good “cover” isn’t it? :)

[granted it's a more credible approach]
Men go and come but Earth abides.
User avatar
Access Denied
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:32 am
Location: [redacted]

Postby lost_shaman » Sun Dec 16, 2007 1:13 am

Access Denied wrote:Recent developments? If you mean O’Hare, IMO there’s reason to believe it was a non-event… quite possibly a hoax.

[but that's a discussion for another thread entirely]


I didn't 'mean' O'Hare. I was talking about the recent literature and Field investigations that I mentioned.

Access Denied wrote:Recent Scientific fervor? Do tell!


Well It's pretty self explanatory if you read the recent Papers published on this particular subject.



Access Denied wrote:My reading of that report (it's been a while) gave me the impression that the only real “threat” was military pilots attempting to chase UAP and becoming disoriented or running out of fuel.


Well IMO re-reading that report might not be a bad idea. The report discussed the fact that several nations reported loss of life due to evasive maneuvers or loss of avionics in close proximity to UAP. That is the threat the report discussed not running out of fuel or disorientation.


Access Denied wrote:The solution? Brief the pilots not to chase UAP… it’s a fruitless endeavor.


That was the solution. Turn tail to UAP and fly away.


Access Denied wrote: Evidence suggests that UAP represent a massless electrically charged phenomena (e.g. plasma) and have been known to “pass through” aircraft on occasion indicating there’s no collision danger.


First thing, the idea that a UAP can 'pass through' an Aircraft come from one witness testimony from the mid-seventies. That particular account was the catalyst for scientific acceptence of Ball lighting although I remain skeptical of that particular account. At any rate there is no real evidence that Ball lightning and UAP are one singular Phenomena with the ability to 'pass through' an Airframe.

Access Denied wrote: Not sure off the top of my head what the conclusion regarding any possible danger of electrical interference was though… not an issue with today’s avionics?


I'm sure NARCAP would disagree that electrical interference is not an issue.


Access Denied wrote:
Yes well it’s a good “cover” isn’t it? :)

[granted it's a more credible approach]


A 'good cover'?

'Cover' for what ?

Also if it's a 'credible approach', then what is not 'credible' about it as you've implied?
User avatar
lost_shaman
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 409
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 8:56 am

Postby caryn » Sun Dec 16, 2007 1:54 am

lost_shaman wrote: I'm sure NARCAP would disagree that electrical interference is not an issue.


Absolutely….they sure would! There has been an incredible amount of work, time and effort put in to presenting the data, highlighting the potential perils, to the international aviation communities.
Last edited by caryn on Sun Dec 16, 2007 2:09 am, edited 1 time in total.
caryn
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 357
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 6:40 pm
Location: London

Postby Access Denied » Sun Dec 16, 2007 2:03 am

lost_shaman wrote:The report discussed the fact that several nations reported loss of life due to evasive maneuvers or loss of avionics in close proximity to UAP.

NOT in the UK. From the MoD report Executive Summary…

Attempts by other nations to intercept the unexplained objects, which can clearly change position than aircraft, have reportedly already caused fatalities. However, there is no indication that deliberate "UAP chasing" has caused this in the UKADR [p. 10]

And…

Although it cannot be completely ruled out, there is no firm evidence that aircraft or crews are exposed to a direct threat (e.g. collision risk) from a UAP, unless violent maneuvers are undertaken to avoid or chase them. As a virtually inertia-less charged gaseous mass, the UAP will always be able to maneuver (much more rapidly than any aircraft) into a position demanded by the influence of the balance of electrical charges pertaining at the time. [p. 8]

The MoD shouldn't be considered an authoritive source for validating incidents reported to have occurred in other countries as it appears you’ve done here.

lost_shaman wrote:'Cover' for what ?

In my opinion, in the eyes of the "mainstream" it’s no doubt perceived as a thinly veiled disguise for the belief by some that Aliens are in our midst.

YMMV…
Last edited by Access Denied on Sun Dec 16, 2007 2:17 am, edited 3 times in total.
Men go and come but Earth abides.
User avatar
Access Denied
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:32 am
Location: [redacted]

Next

Google

Return to UFOs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 17 guests

cron