Fred Meiwald

[James Carlson]

I recently received a Facebook update [Thursday at 2:18pm] on Fred Meiwald's page stating: "HI EVERYONE! This is Bonnie - Freds wife of 48 years. Fred went to heaven Aug 8th. 2012".

Robin Finn added: "Dear Friends of Fred: Fred passed away Thurs 8/8. His memorial service will be 8/23 at 11:20am in Boulder City NV. For info just message me. I'm his sister-in-law Fred Meiwald was a good man RIP — with Fred Meiwald."

His last words on the subject of Oscar Flight were honest ones; he remembered nothing about a UFO, and insisted that the only missile failures he could confirm amounted to only four missiles at best, not an entire flight. Any attempts to change these points now that he can no longer protest will be instantly recognized for the con job it would represent.

He's now at peace; see http://www.facebook.com/fred.meiwald.

James

[Tim Hebert]

James, thanks for passing this on. Regardless of the UFO aspect, Fred Meiwald should be remembered for his service to his country first and foremost.

Have you seen anything from Hastings concerning Meiwald's passing? Hastings posted here a few weeks ago and made no mentioning which gives me the impression that he may have not been aware himself.

Tim H

[James Carlson]

Regardless of the UFO aspect, Fred Meiwald should be remembered for his service to his country first and foremost.

I agree 100%. I mentioned the UFO aspect for only one reason: Both Robert Salas and Robert Hastings viciously attacked Col. Lewis D. Chase, Dr. Roy Craig, and Mr. Robert Low for their supposed "cover up" of the Echo-November-Oscar Flight incidents, doing so only after they had died. This is unconscionable conduct, given that Salas, at least, has been very much aware of the claims these men were responsible for since 1996. All three were alive at that time, and would have willingly discussed this case with anybody. Dr. Craig's testimony, in fact, had already been publically aired in his book of memoirs, published by him in 1995. And yet, the point-of-view espoused by these men, the claims they made, and the importance these claims had in regard to the events at Echo-November-Oscar Flight were completely ignored by Hastings and Salas until after they had died. And at that point, all three men were viciously pilloried, their honesty called into question, and their reputations dragged like shattered plowshares through the mud of these pathetic UFO claims. We also shouldn't forget that Bob Kaminsky's claims regarding his involvement with a small, almost forgettable portion of the Echo Flight incident investigation were falsely associated with allegedly confirmatory testimony that was also never introduced until after his own death. More than once they've relied on the death of a witness to substantiate testimony they can't address during his lifetime; it's depressing and aggressively obscene every single time they pull this crap.

Whenever we're dealing with the disgraceful strategies adopted by Roberts Hastings and Salas, it sometimes becomes necessary to establish more proactive assertions merely to set the record straight. Ideally, this needs to be undertaken before such common and insulting tactics can be employed so easily by those possessed of such mercenary contempt for both honor and truth.

Have you seen anything from Hastings concerning Meiwald's passing? Hastings posted here a few weeks ago and made no mentioning which gives me the impression that he may have not been aware himself.

Tim H

Last night, when I posted this thread, I found no mention of his passing anywhere by anybody (excepting, of course, his family's comments on Facebook). It made me feel a little sad, given how many people were aware of his service, and I felt that something other than the short comments I sent his family needed to be done to recognize his presence and service. Needless to say, I'm also absolutely certain that the claims he established needed to be stressed before the two Bobs' familiar reliance on the tactics of hoax takes over. I watched what they did to the reputations of Chase, Craig, and Low (shamefully disgusting, so I'm sure I mentioned it to you at one time or another -- I know I've discussed it here on R.U. in a few places). I have no desire to watch that garbage happen again -- not without first making those claims very clear beforehand.

[Tim Hebert]

James, I've written a short post on my blog directing linking to your post here. I also was able to pull up Fred Meiwald's obituary and provided a link to it. Based on his obituary, he had a long and distinguish AF career. It would also appear that he had a fruitful retirement...we should all be so fortunate!

I did a quick check on-line, other than the Las Vegas newspaper obit and Meiwald's dance club, not a peep from those who had attempted to prop up his words for Salas and Hastings' benefit. I would hope that either Hastings and/or Salas would have posted something somewhere at least acknowledging Meiwald's passing. As you posted above, it certainly appears, as of now, that you are correct that Meiwald only served a purpose, a means to an end. Perhaps Hastings and Salas will prove me wrong (I do hope so) otherwise my statement to Hastings about using those AF officers for only personal gain rings so true.

Tim H.

[Robert Hastings]

James Carlson wrote: [Meiwald's] last words on the subject of Oscar Flight were honest ones; he remembered nothing about a UFO, and insisted that the only missile failures he could confirm amounted to only four missiles at best, not an entire flight.

Well, James, if you have a verifiable written communication with Meiwald after May 6, 2011, when I interviewed him on tape, let's see it. During that conversation, Meiwald said that Salas has reported the Oscar Flight incident "very accurately" and went on to describe sending out a Security Alert Team to one of the silos in response to an alarm there. This was after 6-8 missiles went down (Salas remembered all 10 going off-alert).

According to Meiwald, the SAT saw a UFO hovering over the silo and fled back to the Launch Control Facility. Fred also said that an OSI agent debriefed him and Salas and required them to sign national security non-disclosure statements, just as Salas has said. One may hear the tape of this conversation at my website in the "Echo Flight Incident Not Unique" article.

Actually, Fred first admitted all of this in 1996, during a conversation with Salas. The tape of that conversation is accessible in my "Witch Hunt" article.

Yeah, yeah, I doctored the tapes, right James? Pay for the analysis and we will see whether they are unaltered or not. I challenged you to pay for that type of analysis after you claimed that I doctored the tapes of my conversations with Col. Figel, regarding a UFO presence during the Echo Flight shutdown. I've noticed that you have so far failed to step up and pay for that.

What are you afraid of James?

Your bizarre lies will always fool the RU folks but anyone else can listen to the tapes to learn the facts.

[James Carlson]

How about your own interview with him? Will that suffice?

RH: Okay. Now, when Bob, I think moments [after] he woke you up, or you got up and sat down at the commander’s console—he of course had received a call from the Flight Security Controller, saying that there was a bright red, oval-shaped object hovering over the security fence gate—my understanding is that is what he told you as soon as you were at your console, that he had received this call and, uh, that of course coincided with the missiles beginning to malfunction. Do you recall him telling you that?

FM: I really don’t remember that portion of it, relative to the bright object. I remember an unusual condition [but] as far as the details, uh, I can’t elaborate on that.

And what about this little part?

RH: Okay. He of course has also said that you two were, uh, when you were back at Malmstrom, you were debriefed by OSI and required to sign non-disclosure statements. Do you remember that?

FM: I remember being directed to do that. But that was no problem. I’ve been one of these people, when told to forget something, I forget it—eventually [inaudible].

RH: Right, well, is that a polite way of saying that you really don’t want to discuss this, even though you know more than you’re saying?

FM: No, I’m saying I don’t remember.

And it would be just too unappreciative if we were to forget your own assessment as well, wouldn't it?

Meiwald then elaborated and said that he couldn’t support everything Salas has said about the incident because he had been resting/sleeping when the first missile or two dropped offline -— which occurred moments after Salas received a report from the Oscar Flight Security Controller about a UFO hovering over the Launch Control Facility’s front gate.

Although Salas had quickly told Meiwald about that telephone conversation, Meiwald says that he can’t remember it.

You're not very good at this, are you pal? Or are you the kind of guy who enjoys being publically spanked every once in awhile?

Meiwald has been consistent and clear: he didn't remember anything about a UFO in regard to a missiles failure incident, he was never on duty to witness a full flight failure of missiles, he never linked the failure of the 4-missiles that he does remember with a UFO, he had no memory of an injured non-com be evacuated by helicopter during this alleged UFO incident that he told you he didn't remember, he knew nothing at all about the entire security crew facing down a UFO with weapons locked and loaded, he was clear that he didn't even believe in UFOs, he told Salas outright that what he remembers is very different from the story Salas wanted to sell, and apologized for his inability to confirm these matters for Salas, stating that he was sorry he couldn't be more help, suggesting way back in 1996 that he didn't have anything useful to assert, which Salas seems to have agreed with at one time, since he insisted for another three years that he and Meiwald were at November Flight to witness this chimera of a UFO even though he was in possession of a letter from Meiwald that very clearly states that they both served at Oscar Flight.

You know, Robert, you really do have a bad habit of seeming to be completely brain dead on occasion. You might want to see a doctor about that ... After all, it might be a tumor.

[James Carlson]

As for your freaking tapes, it was Figel who insisted you were lying about his claims. Given that he was the subject who allegedly made those statements, I'd have to say that he very nicely proved your dishonesty and fraudulent intent, and he did it without having to pay a cent.

And I'm still waiting for the March 2010 tapes you say you have in which Figel supposedly establishes outright that my father is a liar, that my claims are false, and that he believes a UFO was involved at Echo Flight. Given that you were prepared at one time to produce taped recordings with Figel from March 2010 that would exonerate your case a bit -- recordings that Figel has repeatedly assured us do not even exist -- I'd have to insist that your intent from the very beginning was to produce taped recordings that support your claims, but don't otherwise have any substantive reality outside of your own imagination. I don't have to pay for any analysis to prove you're a liar and a fraud, Robert. You've very nicely done that all by yourself.

Your biggest problem is that you let your little UFO hoax out of the bag without once planning a viable exit strategy. Pay for an analysis to prove you're a liar? Hell, Robert, all I had to do was ask the people who supposedly confirmed your trash. It was much easier, and it was damn cheap at the price!

Here's a counter offer: you prove that your recordings are valid before asking someone to prove they're fake. You do that and maybe I won't have to laugh so hard.

Maybe ...

[Tim Hebert]

Contradictions and more contradictions, that's what has always plagued the Oscar story. Has Robert, and Salas, ever stopped to look at their own data and compare notes?

How reliable was Fred Meiwlad's statements back in 2011? Was he ill no more than a year ago and thus under physical, if not mental duress? Meiwald virtually stumbled through the interview.

The 1996 letter to Salas pretty much makes it clear that Meiwald "remembered things differently." Prior interviews show that he was totally unaware of Salas' claims about a top side sighting. Supposedly, both talked to the same FSC, yet never connected the dots.

Total waste of time arguing with Robert. With all of this said, not one word did Robert mention of Fred Meiwald's passing in his post...pretty callous.

[Robert Hastings]

First, Tim, I have already communicated with others regarding Fred's passing and am indeed saddened by it. I am not required to post what you think I should post here. Why don't you go back to basics and correct the Echo/Oscar post at your website in which you incorrectly claim that Salas never mentioned Oscar Flight until he had talked to me.

Actually, as one may hear in the taped conversation that Salas had with Meiwald in 1996, it was Fred who told Bob that the pair had been at Oscar when their missiles went down. Once again, the tape may be accessed in my "The Echo/Oscar Witch Hunt" article at my website, http://www.ufohastings.com. In short, Bob knew the facts two years before I even met him in 1998.

Now, James, let me start by mentioning that you did not (and can not) produce a verifiable written communication from Fred dated after May 6, 2011--the date of my taped phone conversation with him--and, therefore, can not accurately claim, as you, did that Fred's "last words" support your version events.

On the contrary, Fred mentioned to me that Bob summarized the events at Oscar "very accurately". I note that you chose not to mention that part of the conversation I had with Meiwald and taped. Fred also said that OSI debriefed him and Bob, something you have said was not possible, in countless posts. And of course, Fred says that a "bright object at low altitude" was sighted by the SAT team, as it hovered over the silo they were dispatched. Therefore, a UFO was indeed reported during the course of the incident.

Fred also confirms all of this in a follow-up letter to Bob, also accessible in my "Witch Hunt" article. How come you didn't mention that?

I note also that, after claiming that my taped conversations with Walt Figel were doctored by me, you still refuse to put the money where your mouth is and pay for the analysis that would prove or disproved your claims. I ask again: What are you afraid of James?

You guys can twist what Meiwald said but the facts remain:

1) Fred says Bob's summary of the incident is "very accurately" presented.

2) Fred understandably says that he cannot report what occurred until he was woken up by Bob but supports what Bob told the OSI agent about that part of the incident.

3) Fred confirms a UFO was present in the Oscar Flight footprint during the incident.

Bottom line, public awareness of the situation is proceeding nicely, thank you. Your chronic lies about the situation will not change that. From time to time, I briefly peruse this blog and once took note of another RU dude's comment that you are "excitable". Well, that's one way to put it. At least the Navy no longer has to deal with your manic, reality-detached, compromised-frontal lobe fantasies.

BTW, I just spent a week in Montana, perusing various sheriffs departments' blotters and interviewing the witnesses who filed the UFO sighting reports I found in them. Things are hopping up there again. I will be writing an article about my findings soon.

[Tim Hebert]

First, Tim, I have already communicated with others regarding Fred's passing and am indeed saddened by it. I am not required to post what you think I should post here. Why don't you go back to basics and correct the Echo/Oscar post at your website in which you incorrectly claim that Salas never mentioned Oscar Flight until he had talked to me.

Glad to know that you took notice, but since you took liberties to post Meiwald's interview on various on-line sites, I would have thought that you would have publicly said something, and no one said that you should have posted here, only that I had raised the question here. Now you've provided the answer...

Back to the basics? I'll check my blog post, but I don't recall making the assertion that Salas never mentioned Oscar until he had talked to you, though if I did I'll correct it. I know that I had stated that after you had interviewed Jamison that you had contacted Salas being that Jamison's recollection supported the Oscar claims. BTW, I thought you don't waste your time reading my blog?

Yes, I had written that Fred Meiwald had corrected Salas' discombobulated sense of location.

Unfortunately, for you, there still is too many disconnects attributed to either Echo and/or Oscar stories, but I'll not waste your's and my time arguing the points.

BTW, I just spent a week in Montana, perusing various sheriffs departments' blotters and interviewing the witnesses who filed the UFO sighting reports I found in them. Things are hopping up there again. I will be writing an article about my findings soon.

Good for you! I only hope that your Montana scavenger hunt produces better tangible results than your past efforts at FE Warren...

..At least the Navy no longer has to deal with your manic, reality-detached, compromised-frontal lobe fantasies.

.
Axis II traits, Robert...they're hard to mask.

[Robert Hastings]

Re: James' claim that I never produced the tape of my 2010 conversation with Figel, it has been up since June 2011 at:

http://www.ufohastings.com/articles/the ... m-incident

The same article contains large portions of the 2008 and 2009 conversations as well. (Do we really want to hear about Figel's trip to Russia and other countries? It's not germain so I edited out that stuff.)

In short, all three conversations have been online for some time now. One would think that if they were fraudulent or selectively edited to unfairly skew the relevant information in them, James or perhaps someone like Tim would pay to prove that. Whatta coup: Hastings fakes his tapes! Of course, James has a lot to lose by the confirmation that the tapes are legitimate and unaltered, so this analysis will never take place.

One of the few edits in the 2010 tape is where Figel says that he was right when he earlier told me that James has some issues, in response to my telling him that James' father told me, in October 2008, that James has "problems" and also told an associate, the same month, he was concerned that James would "have a nervous breakdown." I left intact other such references where Walt says James' claims are "off-base" and that "he has an ax to grind". The edited quote is much harsher, as I recall. It's been a couple of years since I listened to the tape.

I have been nagging James to produce even a single email written by Walt, dated after I posted the tapes, in which Figel says they are bogus or that I misrepresented him in any manner. Don't hold yer breath folks.

[Tim Hebert]

One of the few edits in the 2010 tape is where Figel says that he was right when he earlier told me that James has some issues, in response to my telling him that James' father told me, in October 2008, that James has "problems" and also told an associate, the same month, he was concerned that James would "have a nervous breakdown." I left intact other such references where Walt says James' claims are "off-base" and that "he has an ax to grind". The edited quote is much harsher, as I recall. It's been a couple of years since I listened to the tape.

Then technically you edited some of the tapes. Perhaps you could send James a transcript of the above via RU PM and he could cross check with Walter Figel?

In the end, this is a red herring as it has nothing to do with your claims, or the information that James (and I) have proposed as a rebuttal...your willfully poisoning the debate by distracting away from our valid arguments using the techniques of trashing your opponent. Please reference my above post referring Axis II traits. (Your methodology is a double edged sword)

...James or perhaps someone like Tim would pay to prove that...

A poor attempt at deflecting towards me. I've been consistent here and on other sites (my blog included) that it's not necessary to prove whether your tapes have been altered. Whether edited or not, the content is still consistent with my interpretation of what Figel or Fred Meiwald said or was attempting to say. Your's and Salas" methodology as interviewers tend to be less desirable as I saw numerous attempts at leading both interviewees to come up with the pre-planed desired answers...it was blatantly obvious.

Going back to your last post, I believe that after doing a quick review of my blog postings that you may be correct as far as giving the readers the impression that your contacting of Salas made him change his location to Oscar. I'll correct that portion of the entry later this evening and will post here once its completed. BTW should you see something like this in the future, post a comment on my blog site...if I'm wrong then I'll correct it. We may totally disagree with our respective view points but I want to be honest with my assessments.

[James Carlson]

Robert Hastings, you are stunningly inaccurate, as usual, and you continue to work backwards from a dumbass conclusion in order to discover new facts that never actually occurred, all the while ignoring the very basics of your thesis.

Let's examine the symptoms of your various neuroses, shall we?

You've introduced no new evidence to support your pathetic and irresponsible claims, and EVERYBODY who understands the details highlighting this issue finds your defensive tactics -- i.e., lies and the neglect of already proven facts -- worthy of nothing but a deep, personal disgust that you keep trying to make the same stupid points over and over and over again. And at this point, it isn't even an insult to call you stupid. You reach a point where it's just the best description of your most typical mental features. There are a few things about this case that you just don't seem to understand, and since I really enjoy pointing them out to you (and to everybody else who wants to examine in more detail your particular brand of dishonest insanity), I believe I'll do just that.

You lost this argument on the very same day that I first contacted and spoke to Col. Walt Figel in early 2010. You had been insisting that I contact him, at which point he would allegedly inform me that my father was a liar, and that a UFO had indeed taken out the missiles at Echo Flight on March 16, 1967. Amazing, isn't it, that instead of confirming your wasted attempts to rewrite history, he stated very clearly that you and Salas were liars, that there was no UFO, and that your claims were completely wrong, the details of which he repeatedly made clear to you, while you simply ignored him. You've had nothing intelligent to say since then. On the other hand, a great many people have come forward to insist that your clams are ridiculously unsound.

You do understand what a fraud is, don't you? I assume you know what a fraud does when his lies have been so publically asserted and proven as yours have. He tends to attempt the protection of his worthless reputation with even more fraudulent and aggressive claims that are instantly recognizable as another sad collection of more pathetic and arrogant attempts to stop the avalanche of his now crippled and ruined reputation from scattering like dust and gravel every honest claim he ever made. That's what you do, Robert. It's the most well-documented aspect of your character. You tell more lies. Again. And again. And again. You found it easy and instantaneously applicable to the stink-blossoms in your past and the rose you saw in your future. And you took to lying like a fish to water, didn't you?

In fact, your efforts to protect your wildly aggressive reputation in this field since Figel made your callous disregard for the truth so public and so plain represents little more than the same poor reliance on deviant lies and insignificant strategies that a child caught masturbating with his mother's panties might employ, trying to insist to the world that he was merely cleaning them with his poorly aimed sweat and spittle. Basically, you have continued to lie, apparently willing to try anything except the truth to avoid the charges, and in doing so, you simply made it much easier to believe that the original charges are true. You bounced from one lie to another with all the repulsive grace of a retarded cat trying to catch a fly already stuck in a pool of syrup, and the world just laughed at your attempts, recording them for use when you would once again assert your base dishonesty that's continually mocked by your singular reliance on the tactics of hoax.

Let me respond to some of the nonsense you've scattered on the pages above. I'll do this in stages, because you still can't seem to make a point -- a common fault of yours. It's much easier to simply respond to errors by correcting them, although I admit, that I have to do this a lot with you because you still can't seem to make a point that actually makes sense at the same time. At some point, old men just need to stop talking, and I think you passed that stage a long, long time ago.

Now, James, let me start by mentioning that you did not (and can not) produce a verifiable written communication from Fred dated after May 6, 2011--the date of my taped phone conversation with him--and, therefore, can not accurately claim, as you, did that Fred's "last words" support your version events.

The only thing I have ever had to do to prove you a liar was to quote from your own articles. I never claimed to have interviewed Fred Meiwald except once, a long time ago. I've always been very clear about that. He told me he didn't even believe in UFOs, and I published the letter he wrote. Everything else I have ever used comes from your own published transcripts, and I've been very clear about it, because I think it's funny as Hell that your own words prove the emptiness and the dishonest character of your claims. I also think that it is this remarkable proof of your so easily resolved inability to think your way through this wasteland of opinion and point and counterpoint that makes your inebriated attempts to prove some sort of deviant maliciousness to my point of view that you apparently believe I've been addressing this issue on the basis of recent communications from Fred Meiwald. Your suspicions prove completely the extent of your deep, deep confusion with human reality. The only thing I need to prove your complete misunderstanding of these issues is your own "taped phone conversation" with Fred Meiwald. I'm perfectly willing to grant that your interview with Meiwald are his last words on the subject -- that's exactly what I've been stating since you published that interview. I also think you're either too stupid, too dishonest, or too lost in your own hubris to properly analyze what Meiwald said so very clearly in his interview with you. The fact that you haven't even made that connection is just adorable! How did you ever create such a clueless and irresponsible mind? And why did you decide to keep it instead of flushing it down the crapper like some aborted experiment in human cloning gone the way of the do-do? That's the only worthwhile story you've got to tell -- it's the only thing of interest you've ever had.

On the contrary, Fred mentioned to me that Bob summarized the events at Oscar "very accurately". I note that you chose not to mention that part of the conversation I had with Meiwald and taped. Fred also said that OSI debriefed him and Bob, something you have said was not possible, in countless posts. And of course, Fred says that a "bright object at low altitude" was sighted by the SAT team, as it hovered over the silo they were dispatched. Therefore, a UFO was indeed reported during the course of the incident.

I'm sure he did -- minus all the parts about the UFO, which you have repeatedly affirmed. You, Robert, not me. And in what rotund part of your imagination did you ever find those "countless posts" about OSI that I supposedly authored? You've once again managed to rely on nothing but your own spoiled little fictions for evidence regarding my claims. If I had anything to say about OSI, believe me, I'd say it. But I don't. OSI isn't even relevant to the claims I've made. What is relevant is Fred Meiwald once again telling you that he couldn't remember the incident you claim that he has repeatedly confirmed. How can you be so incredibly ignorant of this? Are you going through some weird mental meltdown or something? Please tell me I'm at least partly responsible, because I love it that you've publically proven your complete instability. You've become a graceless failure and I'm really having a lot of fun watching it escalate. Thank you, Robert.

As for your confusion regarding the "bright object at low altitude" sighted by the SAT team, you seem to have missed any mention of the maintenance personnel that would indicate a missile failure had actually occurred. In other words, you've once again proven your complete inability to interpret this incident -- a failure that is rooted in your ignorance of the military procedures you keep trying (and failing) to properly describe. Nowhere in any of the transcripts you've made available has Fred Meiwald ever linked that one little description of the UFO that he discussed in his letter to Salas with any missile failures. You have repeatedly tried to make that case, but you have also repeatedly failed. He describes a minor security incident that he had nothing at all to do with, just as he described in his 1996 letter to Salas. He didn't speak with the SAT team personally, as my father and Figel did with the teams dispatched at Echo Flight precisely for that reason. He even states as much in his letter that you apparently lack the abilities to understand. It is this point of view that proves the fact that there were no missile failures linked to this UFO sighting -- the only UFO sighting Meiwald has ever discussed with anybody. It was a tale that he heard second-hand from security personnel that had obviously acted without any input or direction from the capsule crew -- a factor that could not have occurred during a missile failures incident. During a missile failures incident, HE would have been directing the SAT team, NOT security. The fact that you still don't understand the most basic directives and actions that would be undertaken over the course of such an incident is typical of your sloppy analysis, your outspoken failure to understand the most pertinent aspects of the event you are attempting to chronicle, and your complete and utter inability to ask the subjects of your interviews appropriate questions to determine the facts of a case you claim you want to understand is typical of your apparent need to invent these UFOs that do not exist without the tortured language of your twisted write-ups.

You couldn't get Meiwald to confirm Salas' UFO fictions at all. The closest thing you could get to a confirmation of Salas' claims from Meiwald is the following exchange:

RH: Okay. But you will at least confirm that there were reports from the Security Alert Team [at Oscar] of a UFO at the LF they were out at, is that correct?

FM: Yes!

And now you want the world to recognize this as a UFO tale during a missile failures incident? It won't happen, because you never got it. Your entire write-up describes a UFO sighting that he got second-hand from security, and the fact that only now, after Meiwald has died, have you decided to defend your interview, one that I assessed in great detail over a year ago [please note: http://www.realityuncovered.net/blog/20 ... c-editing/] just fills me with complete contempt for you and your methods. Not once did you ever attempt to clear up the many problems with your interview while he was alive, and now you've got the desire to defend the load of crap you published? Try to learn a few facts that have some relevance. Today you're just a pathetic clown who has no real ability to prove a point without lying about it first. You can't even figure out my claims, so how the Hell do you expect to convince anybody that you actually understand them?

The only UFO incident you ever got from Meiwald had nothing at all to do with missiles failing, and he wasn't even involved in the issues that came about as a result of it. You have no evidence; you have no confirmation, and you have refused to properly examine the data you did get. Why do you think nobody believes you? Because you have failed. Your biggest problem in life is the fact that you can't make your claims believable without lying, and you're just a terrible liar! You're basically a loser who really wants people to listen to him, but has absolutely nothing intelligent to say.

Fred also confirms all of this in a follow-up letter to Bob, also accessible in my "Witch Hunt" article. How come you didn't mention that?

Because there's nothing in any of it that you haven't said before. You repeat yourself too much. None of it's worth commenting on more than once.

I note also that, after claiming that my taped conversations with Walt Figel were doctored by me, you still refuse to put the money where your mouth is and pay for the analysis that would prove or disproved your claims. I ask again: What are you afraid of James?

Why the Hell would I spend money to prove a case that's already been proven? Your claims are worthless and you've continued to lie about them repeatedly. As soon as Figel confirmed that point, nothing else was necessary. You lost the argument as soon as your only witness outed you and your methods as the wasted expressions of a man who can't even lie with grace. And everything you've done since that day has only added to your list of dishonest misappropriations of unskilled, impotent reasoning trying very hard to look like common sense, but managing to only resemble the common part. Maybe if you came up with something other than "why won't you pay for something I've already given you for free?" Try proving your case instead of talking about how good it is for a change. You can start by explaining why we're supposed to believe the myopic meanderings of an old man who keeps changing the basic elements of his story every time some aspect of it has been shot down by someone with a whole lot more sense than God ever gave him -- or you! You know, if you succeed, at least then people would be able to say, "yeah, he's a stupid one, but at least he's not a liar."

You guys can twist what Meiwald said but the facts remain:

1) Fred says Bob's summary of the incident is "very accurately" presented.

We'll never know that, because you've failed to present a case that isn't also filled with Meiwald's insistent and repeated claims that "I really don’t remember that portion of it, relative to the bright object", a point that you yourself summed up nicely when you pointed out that "Meiwald says that he can’t remember it." Given the fact that you've repeatedly talked to these alleged witnesses you keep digging up but have proven yourself completely incapable of getting them to state very simply the case you want them to make, I'd have to advise people not to hold their breath in anticipation of your redemption. The case that you've tried to make is so full of holes, easily proven lies, and errors in fact that any possible combination of instinct, naivete, and stupidity alone can't possibly explain why somebody might actually believe the claims you've made. This leaves us with no choice except to consider the possibility that your arguments may be having a negative effect on human evolution.

2) Fred understandably says that he cannot report what occurred until he was woken up by Bob but supports what Bob told the OSI agent about that part of the incident.

A couple of thoughts come to mind:

1. Meiwald has refused to confirm any of the “follow-up activities” so often discussed by Robert Salas, including his claim that he and Meiwald personally briefed the Wing Commander, George W. Eldgridge, as well as a member of the Air Force Office of Special Investigations (AFOSI) on the incident. Whereas Salas has claimed that “All of us at the site, two LCC crew members and topside security guards, were thoroughly questioned by our commanders and Air Force investigators about the incident”, and that “Our squadron commander was visibly shaken by this incident when he questioned me”, Col. Meiwald’s 1996 letter dismisses any such concern for the event evidenced by official inquiry, stating, “I do not recall any follow-up activities by any Wing personnel.”

2. In your interview with Meiwald, he casually repeats this assessment:

FM: I remember being directed to do that. But that was no problem. I’ve been one of these people, when told to forget something, I forget it—eventually [inaudible].

RH: Right, well, is that a polite way of saying that you really don’t want to discuss this, even though you know more than you’re saying?

FM: No, I’m saying I don’t remember.

It would be nice if we knew what he was communicating during one of the many bracketed points in your interview, such as the one above that you never actually discussed, merely labeling it as "[inaudible]", a tactic that tends to serve as well as any other censorship you've applied to his responses, but we don't and you failed to cover it sufficiently, leaving us with just more doubts in your honest appraisal of his claims. The point remains, however, that you've once again failed to establish an issue that you are now attempting to make post mortem. In addition, your failure to get any confirmation for the claims you've addressed is just as notable in the case of Fred Meiwald's testimony as it was to the testimony you tried desperately to present for Walt Figel. And once again -- just as it was in the example of Walt Figel -- you failed to secure not only some form of affidavit, but any clear statement whatsoever that addresses your wildly inaccurate claims. This makes your insistence that you have done so the primary symptom of an obvious mental aberration that belies any of the facts that Meiwald did address in his interview with you.

3) Fred confirms a UFO was present in the Oscar Flight footprint during the incident.

Then why did he keep insisting "I really don’t remember that portion of it, relative to the bright object"? Does this represent another one of your arguments that affirms only partial elements of truth surrounded by an otherwise unexplained collection of errors and lies? Why would Meiwald insist that he doesn't believe in UFOs if he was present at the incident Salas has described?

Meiwald also presents the following account:

Okay, essentially, I was resting — whether or not I was sound sleep I don’t recall — but I know Bob got me up because we had unusual indications on the console, plus we’d had a security violation and, uh, the response team that [inaudible] had gone out to investigate at one of the LFs. They reported unusual activity over there and — by that time I was up — and saw console indications. […I] also directed that the strike team return to the LCF while maintaining radio contact on the way back. As they came back we did lose radio contact for a short period of time, however, the flight [security] leader — the person who was in charge at the time — recognized the team as it was approaching the LCF and opened the gate so that his troops could get in.

This is very clearly NOT a missile failures incident, an aspect of his claims that he that he NEVER discussed with you anywhere in your interview. He doesn't talk about missile failures at all! How can you completely miss the fact he mentions only "unusual indications" and a security violation? Where exactly does he mention an entire flight of missiles being tossed into No-Go?

He also insists that the flight leader was in charge during this UFO sighting. In a missile failures incident, HE would be in charge, so once again you're making claims on the basis of your own ignorance of military protocol. And once again, you've failed to elicit a response from Meiwald in the context of missile failures, a characteristic also common to Meiwald's 1996 letter. The only incident he discusses in his interview with you supports exactly what his 1996 letter says. You seem to be completely ignorant of the fact that in a security alert, he and Salas would not be giving the orders, the Command Post would be, which is why Meiwald’s 1996 letter discusses the check-off list for the Command Post and not the check-off list for the capsule crew. The capsule crew is not involved with common security alerts, primarily because they are so common. They would, however, be directing all supporting acts during a missile failures incident, exactly as the capsule crew responded to the missile failures at Echo Flight. All you've proven is your inability to address Meiwald's claims in the context demanded of these issues.

Re: James' claim that I never produced the tape of my 2010 conversation with Figel, it has been up since June 2011.

You are lying, Robert. Again. Nothing that you've written was recorded in March 2010. The point, however, is a wasted one. The argument asserts that NONE of your interviews with Walt Figel contain the points you are once again trying to ignore -- points that you insisted were established by Figel.

Let's look at the claims you've repeatedly made while keeping in mind the list of points that you insisted you were going to establish.

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 UFOCHRONICLES 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

These are old claims. On Tuesday, August 31, 2010, 1:48 PM, you wrote:

Fortunately, both Bob Salas and I have Col. Figel on audio tape, and he confirms talking on the capsule phone with his guards and a missile maintenance team member at Echo Flight, all of whom reported seeing a "large, round" object hovering over one of Echo's Launch Facilities (silos) moments after the missiles began malfunctioning. Salas spoke with Figel in 1996 and earlier this year. I spoke with him in 2008 and earlier this year.

The conversations on the cassette tapes are currently being transferred to CDs and, once that's finished, and some transcribing is completed, both written word and links to the audio will be posted at the UFO Chronicles website. Cutting to the chase, on tape Figel contradicts 99% of James Carlson's online claims about what the colonel did or did not say.

The point here is not the date. It's your lies. Your assertions are completely untrue, as Figel confirmed on Thursday, September 2, 2010, writing:

Salas's mistake about the time and place should say something. Think about it, if you are that passionate about the subject, you would not forget any detail about such an incident and he was dead wrong. He was never there and never involved. Dick Evans was the flight commander at Kilo (Oscar's parent site) and he has no recollection about any incident at Oscar ever.

Is this the type of commentary that "contradicts 99% of James Carlson's online claims about what the colonel did or did not say"? Figel's testimony is a wholesale rejection of both Salas' and your claims.

On September 19, 2010, Robert, you wrote:

Former Minuteman missile launch officer Eric Carlson is claiming no UFO involvement in the missile shutdown at which he was present, at Echo Flight, outside of Malmstrom AFB on March 16, 1967, and further claims the UFO-related shutdown at Oscar Flight, on March 24, 2967, that Bob Salas reports on never happened at all.

Fortunately, Salas and I have the goods that support our version of events. I am working on an article with links to audio tapes of my and Salas' phone calls to Eric's missile commander, Walt Figel, who contradicts *everything* both Carlsons are saying. James Carlson just flat-out lies about all of Figel's input, even though he had the evidence presented to him by me in 2008. I have the tapes, James has empty claims.

These are just more of your easily determined lies, as Figel had already confirmed in the above assessment of September 2, 2010, 17 days before. He had, in fact, been rejecting those UFO fables steadily since March 2010 -- the same month that you continued to prevaricate on:

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 UFOCHRONICLES in the near future. Walt gave me permission to disseminate those tapes as I saw fit and I will certainly do so.

That was two years ago, Robert. Since then, you've presented nothing from March 2010 that refutes Figel's claims encompassing your all too numerous falsehoods.

Also on September 19, 2010, you wrote:

Then, in 2008, I interviewed, on tape, Eric's deputy missile commander at Echo, now-retired Col. Walt Figel, who told me that he did indeed get a report of a UFO hovering over an Echo missile, just as the entire flight went down. He said Eric overheard the call, was debriefed with him, was told never to discuss it, etc. so, basically, Figel completely contradicts Eric.

So, Eric is either very forgetful these days or he is keeping his silence. Anyway, because Bob and I are not backing down and because I have posted online the verbatim transcript of my conversation with Figel, in late 2008, James has been slandering and libeling me, Bob, and Jim Klotz for well over a year now. He has increased his activities online in anticipation of our press conference.

Once my new article and linked tapes are posted, people will be able to hear Figel tell me that a UFO was indeed reported hovering over one of his missiles, and also hear Salas' missile commander at Oscar, Fred Meiwald, say that Bob is telling the truth about the other incident at Oscar Flight.

Figel's March 2010 claims had already refuted these points, but for months you had been claiming that none of those statements were accurate, and that I had lied about Figel's testimony. Is any of this getting through to you, Robert? On September 26, 2010, Figel wrote:

Your dad has not lied about anything nor do I 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.

Is this what you were referring to when you stated that "basically, Figel completely contradicts Eric"?

It should be noted, once again, that to date you have failed completely to produce any of those March 2010 recordings that you had been promising to publish since March 2010. Your claims that you have done so is just another lie, one that Figel has repeatedly confirmed. We know this for a fact, because Figel insists that he never made any of the points you insist he had made in March 2010. You were merely lying once again, because that's what you always do when you're backed up against any of the many claims that refute your story and prove your lies.

I find it hilarious that you have been making these threats since March 2010, initiating this strategy in personal emails to the owners of Reality Uncovered in order to persuade them not to publish the information I had secured and written about. A simple phone call and an email to Col. Figel was all it took to convince everybody party to those communications that you were indeed (and once again) lying about all of the contrary assertions Figel had supposedly made to you. And the fact that you had already promised to produce transcriptions and the actual recordings of that March 2010 conversation with Figel during which he supposedly made all those claims contrary to what we had already published -- claims that we already knew he did NOT make, being the completely false chimera of logistical corn flakes quivering within the sordid and fraudulent mind of you alone -- convinced me that you were completely capable of doing exactly what you promised to do. Being so well acquainted by that time with your obsessive-compulsive need to lie about absolutely everything you have no immediate response to, the simple fact that you couldn't possibly produce such recordings without faking them wasn't even an issue. Col. Figel wrote to us and summarized everything that he told both Salas and you, and that email -- one among many -- has been available for anyone to read since the day following your initial threat to publish the contents of that conversation.

I have been nagging James to produce even a single email written by Walt, dated after I posted the tapes, in which Figel says they are bogus or that I misrepresented him in any manner. Don't hold yer breath folks.

They've been available for the entire world to read since March 2010, and at many times since than when he very willingly clarified your dishonest nature.

The following are a few of the highlights that you are still trying to ignore:

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.

This was written on Sept 24th, 2010. What part of this do you not understand? The entire assessment that Figel has provided is his response to your ridiculous claims. How exactly is this NOT a complete and wholesale refutation of the little fictions you've published so liberally? How does this NOT prove that you have misrepresented his testimony? What you and Salas have written is a complete lie that Figel has repeatedly repudiated.

You knowingly lied about what Figel told you regarding Echo Flight. You’ve repeatedly claimed that he confirms your UFO myth, and that he insists my father has been lying about the event for years. You’ve claimed over and over and over again that my own assertions are lies and bluff, and that you can prove this easily, and yet, you’ve produced NOTHING. You have repeatedly published that I never even interviewed Walt Figel, and that all of the claims I've established are untrue, and that Figel's statements to you prove that I never spoke to him.

Here are a couple more of Figel's insistent claims:

I am not a fan of Salas, Hastings, or the whole UFO crowd.

I have never seen one and flatly don’t believe they exist at all.

I just want you to be clear of my position on UFOs.

They make good science fiction – nothing more.

I have read both of their books.

There are many inaccurate statements and events in the books.

I have told them both that.

For instance, Oscar flight NEVER had any problems and Salas was NEVER involved in any of them at all just for starters.

I think that they are just enjoying the notoriety of the situation.

Are these the claims that somehow support your pathetic and ill-conceived conclusions? Are these the insistent assessments that prove my deceit?

Every aspect of the claims you have made have been repeatedly denied by Walt Figel. You are a liar and a fraud, and none of your claims have been apprised as the honest expressions of a man who has shown a willingness to discover the truth. The fact that your only actual response to the issues I've raised consists of little more than wasted attacks on my credibility and cheap aspersions that have no relevance to the issues at all proves only your reliance on rhetoric that has no real bearing on the case you have tried and failed to establish. You are incapable of defending your point-of-view with any form of relevant argument, and have proven the truth of this repeatedly.

These are the points your discussions have made very clear:

1. At every necessary point in which Meiwald refers to his first person affirmation of command authority over those unnamed individuals who allegedly reported a UFO, you have been forced to manipulate his statements to establish that fact.

2. You have failed miserably to obtain a simple confirmation of Salas’ Oscar Flight claims. To some, this was not unexpected, since you did exactly the same thing in connection with Col. Walt Figel’s testimony. This is, in fact, your modus operandi, one adopted in a transparent effort to force this story into a little box with a flying saucer inside.

3. You have failed utterly to establish a case for Col. Meiwald’s confirmation of a UFO interfering with and causing the failure of 10 nuclear missiles at Malmstrom AFB on March 24, 1967, exactly as you failed to accomplish the same with Col. Walt Figel’s testimony regarding the incident at Echo Flight.

Why? What is the direct cause of your failure to establish the simple confirmation that you continue to insist Meiwald’s testimony represents? How was it so difficult to simply ask the man “did 10 missiles fail at Oscar Flight at the same time that a UFO was reported?” What you have offered the world in place of this very simple affirmation is 100% irresponsible bluster and the pathetic and dishonest reconditioning of your own witness’ testimony. On the surface, regardless of Meiwald’s claims – or your own – that Salas’ description of this event is mostly accurate, this interview with Meiwald has proven to be merely a confirmation of “unusual indications on the console, plus we’d had a security violation.” The following questions still need to be answered by you and/or Robert Salas:

1. Why hasn’t Col. Meiwald confirmed or at least mentioned the failure of the entire flight of ten missiles failing at Oscar Flight?

2. Why hasn’t Col. Meiwald expressed any actual knowledge regarding the UFO in question, knowledge he would have been forced to assume had he been describing a missile failures incident?

3. Why does Col. Meiwald state outright that “I really don’t remember that portion of it, relative to the bright object. I remember an unusual condition”?

4. Why has Col. Meiwald affirmed that “Although Salas had quickly told Meiwald about that telephone conversation, Meiwald says that he can’t remember it”?

5. How does any of this confirm Robert Salas’ claims?

Even when asked about the innocuous business of OSI, Meiwald was eventually forced to correct another of your silly assumptions: “No, I’m saying I don’t remember.”

In regard to the Echo Flight claims, Robert Salas has liberally used Meiwald’s assertions as a “confirmation” of everything he and you have attempted to associate them with, including an alleged UFO that nobody ever saw, reported, or investigated. Meiwald merely stated with some authority, “Whatever happened over at Echo, I have no idea.” EVERYTHING he has testified to proves your deceit, your lies, and your refusal to accept the claims of your own witnesses on the basis of merit.

You lack the ability to conduct an interview that makes clear your subject's assertions. This is one of your biggest failures. Let me point out a few of the things that you should have discussed with Meiwald, but did not -- points that he discussed very openly in his 1996 letter to Salas.

Nowhere does Meiwald allude to any missile failures whatsoever. The entire letter is basically a discussion of the only UFO sighting he has any direct memory of, and there is no reason anywhere to assume that it also represents his personal description of a missile failures incident involving even one missile, let alone the entire flight of 10 missiles under his command. The mere sighting of a UFO is not the only element necessary to establish Robert Salas’ claims. The single most important facet of his assertions is the failure of 10 missiles under Col. Meiwald’s command, and nowhere has this ever been established. There is no documented evidence available to suggest such claims, and Meiwald has never confirmed such an event, regardless of what you and Salas continue to insist. You are playing a sad little game with the facts, and you insist that it was all confirmed by Meiwald, and yet nothing you've written makes that point clear -- it's all twisting of the truth to reach a twisted conclusion you can't support with any actual statements. And I don't think it's too much of an imposition to ask why you have failed to get a clear statement from anybody. Why is it that at every point in your last interview with Meiwald where you say "UFO", he says "I don't remember"? Why didn't he mention to anything at all about the failue of the Oscar Flight missiles? The fact that you expect people to believe you on the basis of this huge nothing is just hysterical.

In his 1996 letter, confirmed later in his interview with you, Meiwald indicates that the command authority over the security personnel who allegedly saw a UFO was not invested with the capsule crew, but with the Command Post, exactly as one would expect in regard to a relatively common security alert of the type that ordinarily occurred a few times weekly. This is why command authority over such matters was removed from the concerns of the capsule crew. During a missile failures incident, however, command authority was always and very necessarily in the hands of the flight commander and deputy commander. In his 1996 letter, Meiwald notes that “Topside security notified us the mobile team had reported observing the ‘UFO’ while responding (obviously at your direction) to a situation at an outlying LF”. His assumption that Salas had directed the response is insufficient to establish such authority, because had it been the case, the outgoing security team would have reported directly to the capsule crew, exactly as was done during the missile failures at Echo Flight on March 16, 1967. In this case, they were obviously responding directly to topside security. He insists as well that the outgoing team had “little or no direction from higher authority (Command Post or Alternate Command Post),” hardly the response one would expect from the actual authority within the command capsule. He’s plainly describing a situation absent of the capsule crew’s authority, not authority invested within himself or Salas.

On a side note, it should also be mentioned that Meiwald’s 1996 reference to the “Command Post checklist” in lieu of the capsule crew’s own checklist also suggests that command authority resided with the Command Post as discussed above. This 1996 letter is an insistent affirmation that during the UFO sighting discussed, command authority was NOT invested with the commander and the deputy commander of Oscar Flight.

Meiwald also denies a number of major points raised by Salas. For instance, Meiwald has refused to confirm that an injured airman resulted from this event, and had to be evacuated by way of an emergency helicopter, as Salas has so often stated. He won’t even confirm that a minor injury resulted from the event: “I do not recall personnel injury of any type but the two individuals were sent back to the support base early. I heard second-hand that one was released from security team duties.” This is nowhere near the confirmation for an event during which the Command Post was emptied of all personnel, well armed and facing down a UFO floating right at the entranceway to the LCF, which Salas has insisted upon so often.

Meiwald has refused to confirm any of the “follow-up activities” so often discussed by Robert Salas, including his claim that he and Meiwald personally briefed the Wing Commander, George W. Eldgridge, as well as a member of the Air Force Office of Special Investigations (AFOSI) on the incident. Whereas Salas has claimed that “All of us at the site, two LCC crew members and topside security guards, were thoroughly questioned by our commanders and Air Force investigators about the incident”, and that “Our squadron commander was visibly shaken by this incident when he questioned me”, Col. Meiwald’s 1996 letter dismisses any such concern for the event evidenced by official inquiry, stating, “I do not recall any follow-up activities by any Wing personnel.” And I note that in his last interview with you, he pretty much says the same thing or once again relies on "I don't remember." What kind of con game are you idiots trying to get the rest of the world to swallow anyway? And why in the world, after all of your numerous lies and fictions, do you believe you have the credibility to make such points believable?

Meiwald’s discussion of the UFO incident in his 1996 letter suggests a much later date for the event than March 1967. His 1996 letter affirms that the “Command Post checklist, as I recall, just said to report any such incidents to civilian offices.” In March 1967, however, this wasn’t true, a factor suggesting that perhaps his memories of the event should not be dated in March 1967, but sometime after the USAF abandoned official inquiry of every UFO report submitted, thereby transferring such responsibility “to civilian offices.” In March 1967, active regulations dictated that any UFO sightings were to be reported to the command UFO officer, Lt. Col. Lewis Chase. As a result of these regulations, no checklists in use anywhere at Malmstrom AFB during that period instructed personnel to report “such incidents to civilian offices.” Given that Meiwald “left crew duty for the Command Post in early Nov 67,” as his letter states, it isn’t surprising that he would not only be familiar with the Command Post checklist, but might also associate that checklist with a directive to report such matters to civilian offices, which would be exactly the case if his duties were served at the Command Post when the USAF shut down Project Blue Book in 1969. In fact, all of the particulars described in his letter could easily be accounted for if the sighting he describes occurred during a Command Post shift that he did not personally stand during this later period when Col. Meiwald was no longer serving as part of a two-man capsule crew. More importantly still, if the UFO incident Meiwald describes in his 1996 letter occurred after he “left crew duty”, as his referral to “civilian offices” plainly indicates, than this incident cannot be associated with anything that Salas or you have repeatedly claimed.

Meiwald’s attitude throughout his 1996 letter indicates that there is indeed nothing in it that Salas would find helpful, a conclusion that Salas’ responses also support. Meiwald seems almost apologetic in his 1996 letter to Salas, as if sorry he couldn’t provide more assistance to his one-time deputy commander: “This probably does not assist your efforts in any way, but I applaud your continued interest in a fascinating area of interest.” It’s likely that Robert Salas himself placed little emphasis on the information Col. Meiwald offered him, since one of the first points the O-Flight commander mentioned was that “The info you provided is very interesting but I have slightly different memories — which could easily be incorrect as they say, ‘The memory is the second thing to go.’ My records indicate that we were formed as a crew in Sep 66 in ‘N’ status. I don’t have the date of upgrade to ‘R’. Our home site was Oscar. I left crew duty for the Command Post in early Nov 67.” Robert Salas himself, however, insisted for another three years that the incident he has discussed took place at November Flight, NOT Oscar Flight, which would have placed him in an entirely different squadron, and chain of command. While it would be nice to dismiss this entirely, since Meiwald has stated that “I have slightly different memories — which could easily be incorrect”, we should note as well that in regard to these claims, he specifically references “My records”, not his memories. At a later point in the letter, he affirms again that “Related to the incident itself, I recall us being at the Oscar LCF.” It would take another three years of research and the self-effacing recovery of lost memories for Salas to finally agree. Throughout this three year period of time, however, he nonetheless insisted that Col. Meiwald had indeed confirmed all of the particulars of the story he told, including the date and location, somewhat significant details that he would continue to change over the following years.

One can only wonder whether Col. Meiwald ever anticipated that he would eventually represent not only Salas’ sole confirmation for the account of a UFO causing the failure of 10 missiles at Oscar Flight, but would also represent his sole confirmation for the account of the entire flight of missiles at Echo Flight failing for the same reason. According to Robert Salas’ claims between 1996 and 2004, it was Col. Meiwald alone who was able to confirm the date of March 16, 1967 for the failure of 10 missiles under his command, a confirmation that was based entirely on the contents of a single telephone call he received on that date informing him of the failure of Echo Flight’s missiles when a UFO made its sudden appearance at that flight, an assertion contrary to the claims made by both the commander and the deputy commander of Echo Flight.

In an email communication Robert Salas sent to Raymond Fowler on August 14, 1996, Salas refers to some of the issues raised by Col. Meiwald in the letter he would draft and mail six weeks later, making the following observations:

I was lucky enough to locate the man who was my MCC on the day of the incidents. I spoke with him by phone, briefly. He certainly recalled the incident in the sequence I outlined with one exception. He believes we ‘lost’ four LFs instead of all. But our memories coincide on every other point. I didn’t ask him what flight we were controlling, but it was probably November flight. He also added that he remembers receiving a call from one of the LFs where we had a roving security patrol that saw a UFO at very close range. He said these men were so traumatized by the experience that they never returned to security duty. I am sending him the unit history report and he agreed to write back to me after trying to remember more details.

So, we now have made contact with all the members of the two crews who had missiles lose readiness status concurrent with close sightings of UFOs. And we all have verified that basic story. We are hoping that one or more of the security guards from either of our sites will contact us as a result of the Grt. Falls Tribune article.

The following points should be made here: (1) it seems apparent that Col. Meiwald not only failed to “remember more details”, but seems instead to have forgotten some, such as the entire “incident in the sequence I outlined” with only one exception, as well as the fact that “these men were so traumatized by the experience that they never returned to security duty”; and (2) if “we now have made contact with all the members of the two crews who had missiles lose readiness status concurrent with close sightings of UFOs” and “we all have verified that basic story”, then why have both the commander and the deputy commander of Echo Flight insisted for some years that Robert Salas is lying about this little detail, among numerous others?

Tell me, Robert, why didn't you ask Meiwald why this UFO sighting that supposedly took place during a missile failures incident was originally described by Salas as "a call from one of the LFs where we had a roving security patrol that saw a UFO at very close range"? Is a "roving security patrol" the source one would expect to hear a UFO report from during a missile failures incident? And why would Salas report that Meiwald "remembers receiving a call from one of the LFs" when Meiwald reported very clearly that he didn't receive such a call from anybody at any of the LFs? Did your research just fail you in that regard, or did you neglect to discuss any of this with Salas before your interview with Meiwald? And after you did become aware of it, why have you refused to take it into account? Are you trying to hide aspects of this case from your avid readers? Or are you once again just lying by omission? It seems to me like you and Salas have been lying about a lot of things and refusing to take account of a whole lot more, but that's just me. You want to lynch people in print because you lack the ability to convince them with words. People like you always try to control the claims of the recently dead, because they own a credibility that you lack the wits to earn for yourself.

I had you pegged a long time ago, Robert. You're a liar who makes claims that can't possibly be supported by the facts, and when the facts are pointed out to you, you ignore them and attack the messenger. You are a mess of contradictions and lies, and you -- like Robert Salas -- have lost all credibility because of it. You're just a stooge for a tool, and it's so obvious that you won't even defend yourself anymore until a source you've so repeatedly misused has died and can no longer defend himself or refute your nonsense. You have done EXACTLY what I told everyone you would do, and it's so pathetic and irresponsible that I'm sure your reputation will suffer because of it , and it will be a well-deserved immolation of you and your claims. Not that it matters. Neither you nor Salas has ever depended on anything that Meiwald had to say.

Salas’ discussion regarding the number of missiles he was willing to expound upon was apparently a fixed feature of his story having very little if anything to do with Col. Meiwald’s memories of the event. In an earlier email written to Raymond Fowler, this one dated August 12, 1996, Salas makes the following claims:

Thru various means, I have had some pretty good luck locating and speaking with some of my old Air Force buddies who were with me at Malmstrom during the time of this incident. A major revelation came out of those conversations.

I found out that I was not in Echo flight on the day of the incident, I was at some other flight; possibly November flight. I spoke with the DMCC (deputy) of Echo and he confirmed that all his missiles shut down that night and that UFOs had been sighted (one at close range) by his maintenance team and his security team. I am also sticking with my story that all of my missiles also shutdown that day and that my security guards at the LCF reported seeing UFOs and, in particular one hovering just outside the front gate. One of my guards was also injured during this incident – not necessarily by the UFO – I don’t recall the details except that I remember that he was helicoptered out to the base. This was a revelation to me because when we first started the FOIA activity, I could not recall the flight designator and when USAF released the E-Flt incident to us, we assumed that is where I was. I did and do have a vivid recollection of my commander speaking to another flight that day and then saying to me that “… the same thing had happened at their flight.” However, I had been under the impression up until now that what he had meant was that it happened to them at some other time period. I now believe it was the same day because of the rapid response of the maintenance crews to our site. I believe they had already been dispatched to Echo before our shutdown."

So, what I believe we now have is an incident where two complete flights of missiles went NO-GO concurrent with close sightings of UFOs by many Air Force personnel.

It appears that Robert Salas was pretty confident that all of the missiles failed while he was at November Flight, and that it happened on the same date as the Echo Flight Incident – March 16, 1967. It’s equally apparent that even after discussing the matter with Col. Meiwald, and well after having received that 1996 letter in which Meiwald supposedly confirmed all of the associated details of that case, Robert Salas neglected to change any of the details he nonetheless insisted that Col. Meiwald had confirmed.

1. He claimed that Col. Meiwald confirmed the phone call establishing the date of March 16, 1967. Your interview with Meiwald during which he insists that he knows nothing in regard to what happened at Echo Flight proves the lie inherent to this claim. And the fact that he finally changed it over ten years later in line with the solution you proposed to resolve all of the problems that were so obviously a part of this entire fable does not exonerate him. It just betrays a willingness to change the story whenever actual facts get in the way of its credibility.

2. He claimed that Col. Meiwald confirmed the location of the incident at November Flight, a claim that he later adjusted somewhat, insisting three years later that Col. Meiwald had also confirmed the event location of the incident at Oscar Flight. The letter alone, that he received in 1996, establishes the lie inherent to Salas' account, and once again, the fact that he finally changed it three years later does not exonerate him. It just betrays a willingness to change the story whenever actual facts get in the way of its credibility. The fact that he was in possession of those facts for three years and ignored them is merely more evidence that he's been lying about this story from the very beginning. From the very beginning, he's tried to link the Echo Flight incident with this nonsense story, because Echo Flight is the ONLY incident throughout the entire decade during which an entire flight of missiles failed. Without any form of official documentation, neither you nor Salas has anything at all that might resemble an actual event, and since the only other flight of missiles mentioned in the USAF's documentation is November Flight, Meiwald's claims that they were both at Oscar Flight had to be ignored in order to establish early on the case that Salas and CUFON (i.e., James Klotz) wanted to make. The point remains, however, that all of these characteristics of Salas' pathetic little story have been repeatedly denied by Col. Meiwald, even in his 1996 letter.

3. He claimed that Meiwald had confirmed the fact that an entire flight of missiles under his command had failed. Granted, this point-of-view evolved a bit, starting at only four missiles failing and working up to the entire flight of missiles failing ten years later, but it's significant nonetheless, because your claims have been used to assert another full flight failure of missiles that Col. Meiwald has NEVER confirmed. Once you entered into the Oscar Flight mythos with its date changed to March 24, 1967, the number of missiles failing once again jumped magically to the entire flight of ten missiles, and you've been running with that ball ever since. Do you have any actual evidence to support such claims? Hell, no! Given your failure to publish any commentaries by Meiwald discussing any actual failure of missiles, it's another safe bet that you've been unable to satisfy yet another aspect of the story Salas has been attempting the sell since 1995.

In light of the above, it suggests that Robert Salas -- and much later, you -- had no real use for anything that Meiwald was willing to confirm, and that means Robert Salas was lying. All you've been doing since you first entered this sordid little world of lies and warped testimony is trying to make Salas' claims seem more "real" and more "confirmed" when they have NEVER been real or confirmed. Do you really think you can paint a smile on Salas' face and rescue this retarded story by changing the date? That arrogance alone merely suggests that you're a brainless twit who refuses to account for anything at all that proves the lie inherent to this nonsense -- and that means you are also a liar. You think you can control the message by getting everybody together to write out new versions of their stories, make a few changes that everybody can now agree on and the whole world will just smile and suck it up, patting you on the back and congratulating you for retrieving the "real" UFO from the shattered fictions proposed by others?

My, what a shameful load of hubris YOU represent!

It's too bad that you don't understand history very well. If you did, you might have noticed that it doesn't get rewritten by people who have such a poor knowledge of the basic facts that they can't explain what happened without neglecting most of the evidence. And you very obviously don't even have a clue what evidence needs to be accounted for. You don't even ask the right questions to figure out what actually happened, because you started from a dumbass conclusion and are now working backwards to figure out how best to support it.

If you want to use Meiwald as a confirmation for this garbage you have to do more than lie about it. You have to explain why he kept telling you "I don't remember." You have to explain why his account is so far off from the claims Salas has repeatedly made. All you've ever done is neglect anything relevant to the claims you've thus far been unable to establish without first wrapping them up in a bandage of your own intolerable ignorance and your apparently sacred desire to compound that ignorance with completely fictional accounts unworthy of retention.

All in all, you've confirmed very nicely that everything Salas has been trying to establish since 1995 is based on a complete and utter lie that you've shown yourself to be a very willing apologist for. Congratulations for all of that -- you're now a worthless stooge.

[rore]

Yeah, yeah, I doctored the tapes, right James?

That little 'taped interview' on Your Site with Col. Walter Figel (USAF Ret.) sure seemed to be 'edited' a bit Bob...
~
ANY one can Plainly Hear the abrupt audio 'drop-outs' aka 'tape cuts'...
plus
Figel Laughs pretty damn hard at YOUR FIRST Mention of UFOs wouldn't YOU Say...?

WHY do you NOT Present the evidence supplied in the 2004 declassified Top Secret Report which points TO The Probable Cause of Echo Flight's NO GO Status...hmmm

Neither Walter Figel nor Eric Carlson support your claims
&
Col. Figel, BY NO Stretch of anyone's imagination, confirms the presence of UFOs during the Echo Flight Incident.

I AM a Journalist BOB; I find IT Repugnant that ANY Reputable Journalist would besmirch the Names of Honorable People, such as Walt Figel & Eric Carlson, for a lousy US Dollar... ~rore

[James Carlson]

Well, I wouldn't expect a response or anything from Hastings; your comments, however, are nonetheless most welcome. I always find it enjoyable when others find it necessary to call a pig a pig, especially when it's from someone who admits to once having found the claims of the two Bobs to be well-argued, reasonable, and confirmed as factual, as you've stated at Alien-UFOs. I've been enjoying your comments there for a good bit of time (most recently at http://www.alien-ufos.com/ufo-alien-dis ... rs-16.html), and felt very comfortable letting your arguments on behalf of USAF veterans stand on their own. I just wanted to let you know that I didn't decide to come in and comment on the forum discussion taking place over there because of anything you had to say -- you were doing an admirable job of it, and I didn't think any other comments were necessary.

I did, however, note that other members may have gotten the wrong message from a past discussion that I had joined, and that it may have given them cause to think I had weakened my opinion of what Hastings and Salas have done. I definitely felt the need to correct that impression, and that's the only reason I injected some of my own thoughts into the discussion. For the record, you were handling opposing arguments admirably, and you've done so for a good long time now since I first encountered your comments in 2010. Given the many times I've had to deal with not just the doubts of others, but their suspicions and their overly emotional reliance on tones of violence to voice their aversion to the skeptical viewpoints they've so often engaged without real cause, I know exactly what it's like to be attacked by people you just wish would shut-up and examine the evidence you're trying to present (a desire that I've found to be only rarely satisfied). I also know that sometimes when a new voice comes in and adds a few details, it's difficult not to at least think that they're doing so because they find your arguments lacking in some quality or other aspect. You should know, therefore, that I'm very confident in your abilities and your arguments. Sometimes, unfortunately, a personal voice is necessary for other reasons, and that weird mix-up of discussions from 2010 with current issues, added to the reason I voiced above, represent the only motivation I had. You're doing a Hell of a job by yourself (with the adjoining commentary of a few others), and I've felt most thankful for it.