Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Col. Charles Halt claims US UFO coverup


  • Please log in to reply
198 replies to this topic

#16    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

  • Member
  • 10,009 posts
  • Joined:19 Aug 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London UK

  • It is later than you think.

Posted 26 September 2012 - 06:58 PM

View Postbmk1245, on 26 September 2012 - 06:28 PM, said:

Funny, believers find OK when "researcher/cover-up exposer" is in possession of radar data he's not revealing, in the same time complaining about "cover-up"... So, "believer camp", bring radar printouts Mr. Callahan was waving years ago in front of audience... Anyone?

What?????????

Posted Image


#17    Sweetpumper

Sweetpumper

    Heatseeker

  • Member
  • 10,629 posts
  • Joined:19 Dec 2003
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Avengers Tower

Posted 26 September 2012 - 06:59 PM

View Postzoser, on 26 September 2012 - 06:58 PM, said:

What?????????

I think he hits the liquor hard before coming in here.

"At it's most basic level, science is supposed to represent the investigation of the unexplained, not the explanation of the uninvestigated." - Hunt for the Skinwalker

"The ultimate irony of the Disclosure movement is that it deeply distrusts officialdom, while simultaneously looking to officialdom for the truth." - Robbie Graham Silver Screen Saucers

#18    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

  • Member
  • 10,009 posts
  • Joined:19 Aug 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London UK

  • It is later than you think.

Posted 26 September 2012 - 07:02 PM

View Postbmk1245, on 26 September 2012 - 06:46 PM, said:

As usual, dog ate my homework lame excuse. Its time to come up with something new, for example, fairies stole it, or dragon burned it...

Did the USAF personnel lie, or were they having a mass hallucination that day?  In charge of a nuclear weapons base that could have sealed the fate of the world.  Think what your saying Mr B.  

So were they drunk?  The whole team?  There was a lot of them?  Were they fooled by the lighthouse as some ignorant fools have suggested?  

What about the recordings, the sketches, the testimonies, and the fact that none of them have changed a single detail of the story 30 years on.

It's a tall order Mr B to deny this one.

Edited by zoser, 26 September 2012 - 07:03 PM.

Posted Image


#19    bmk1245

bmk1245

    puny village idiot

  • Member
  • 4,047 posts
  • Joined:16 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vilnius, Lithuania

Posted 26 September 2012 - 07:09 PM

View PostTheMacGuffin, on 26 September 2012 - 06:30 PM, said:

The CIA has copies of all of it.  LOL

In 1987, the FAA announced that the Alaska UFO was a "split radar return" that was actually the aircraft itself.  My, my, they do seem to have a lot of radar malfunctions whenever UFOs are reported, don't they?  It's a wonder that anything can ever fly at all.

https://docs.google....dNf4whFLKfxRrxw


Of course,we should also mention that the FAA changed its story when they were informed by the military that the whole incident was "secret" and could not be discussed with anyone.



"At FAA headquarters they briefed Vice Admiral Donald D. Engen, who watched the whole video of over half an hour, and asked them not to talk to anybody until they were given the OK, and to prepare an encompassing presentation of the data for a group of government officials the next day.The meeting was attended by representatives of the FBI, CIA and President Reagan’s Scientific Study Team, among others.


Upon completion of the presentation, all present were told that the incident was secret and that their meeting "never took place". According to Callahan, the officials considered the data to represent the first instance of recorded radar data on a UFO, and they took possession of all the presented data.John Callahan however managed to retain the original video, the pilot's report and the FAA's first report in his office. The forgotten target print-outs of the computer data were also rediscovered, from which all targets can be reproduced that were in the sky at the time."

http://www.google.co...1PQl87xUZiuDBFw
Can we see it?! Ah, of course, rediscovered, and then taken by CIA, in other words, again, dog ate my homework :w00t:

Arguing with fool is like playing chess with pigeon: he will scatter pieces, peck King's crown, crap on bishop, and fly away bragging how he won the game... (heard once, author unknown).
Zhoom! What was that? That was your life, Mate! Oh, that was quick. Do I get another? Sorry, Mate. That's your lot. Basil Fawlty (John Cleese).

#20    bmk1245

bmk1245

    puny village idiot

  • Member
  • 4,047 posts
  • Joined:16 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vilnius, Lithuania

Posted 26 September 2012 - 07:11 PM

View PostSweetpumper, on 26 September 2012 - 06:59 PM, said:

I think he hits the liquor hard before coming in here.
Wrong, nice try though...

Arguing with fool is like playing chess with pigeon: he will scatter pieces, peck King's crown, crap on bishop, and fly away bragging how he won the game... (heard once, author unknown).
Zhoom! What was that? That was your life, Mate! Oh, that was quick. Do I get another? Sorry, Mate. That's your lot. Basil Fawlty (John Cleese).

#21    booNyzarC

booNyzarC

    Forum Divinity

  • Closed
  • 13,536 posts
  • Joined:18 Aug 2010
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 26 September 2012 - 07:11 PM

View Postzoser, on 26 September 2012 - 07:02 PM, said:

Did the USAF personnel lie, or were they having a mass hallucination that day?  In charge of a nuclear weapons base that could have sealed the fate of the world.  Think what your saying Mr B.  

So were they drunk?  The whole team?  There was a lot of them?  Were they fooled by the lighthouse as some ignorant fools have suggested?  

What about the recordings, the sketches, the testimonies, and the fact that none of them have changed a single detail of the story 30 years on.

It's a tall order Mr B to deny this one.

Not difficult to figure out what happened in Rendlesham actually.  Have you ever actually taken a look at this link which has been provided for you several times now?

If you take the time to review the information there, you'll discover all kinds of interesting things.  For example, the stories have changed in the last 30 years...  several times.


#22    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

  • Member
  • 10,009 posts
  • Joined:19 Aug 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London UK

  • It is later than you think.

Posted 26 September 2012 - 07:12 PM

View Postbmk1245, on 26 September 2012 - 07:11 PM, said:

Wrong, nice try though...


Posted Image

Edited by zoser, 26 September 2012 - 07:12 PM.

Posted Image


#23    TheMacGuffin

TheMacGuffin

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,159 posts
  • Joined:30 Jun 2012

Posted 26 September 2012 - 07:12 PM

View Postbmk1245, on 26 September 2012 - 07:09 PM, said:

Can we see it?! Ah, of course, rediscovered, and then taken by CIA, in other words, again, dog ate my homework :w00t:


Here's something else that got "omitted" from the public record, but came out in a discussion on ATS.  When the UFO stopped following the JAL plane, it was then tracked behind a United Airlines plane.

I wonder why they forgot to mention that at the time?


http://www.google.co...Vt5gkVxzkzGJgmg


#24    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

  • Member
  • 10,009 posts
  • Joined:19 Aug 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London UK

  • It is later than you think.

Posted 26 September 2012 - 07:16 PM

View PostbooNyzarC, on 26 September 2012 - 07:11 PM, said:

Not difficult to figure out what happened in Rendlesham actually.  Have you ever actually taken a look at this link which has been provided for you several times now?

If you take the time to review the information there, you'll discover all kinds of interesting things.  For example, the stories have changed in the last 30 years...  several times.

Minuscule details that skeptics like to use as spades to bury the case maybe.  Well known tactics.  The essence of the case is as true as it ever was, because if those men had lied and been caught out they would have been court martialled and imprisoned.  Nobody is prepared to take a risk like that.  For what? A UFO hoax.

Come on Boon it's plain ridiculous.

Edited by zoser, 26 September 2012 - 07:17 PM.

Posted Image


#25    badeskov

badeskov

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 11,288 posts
  • Joined:27 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please - Mark Twain

Posted 26 September 2012 - 07:18 PM

View Postzoser, on 26 September 2012 - 07:16 PM, said:

Minuscule details that skeptics like to use as spades to bury the case maybe.  Well known tactics.  The essence of the case is as true as it ever was, because if those men had lied and been caught out they would have been court martialled and imprisoned.  Nobody is prepared to take a risk like that.  For what? A UFO hoax.

Come on Boon it's plain ridiculous.

May I ask what you think is the essence of the case? Parts that haven't changed over the years etc.?

Cheers,
Badeskov

"Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention to arrive safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming: Wow!! What a ride!". Said to to Dean Karnazes by a running buddy.

#26    bmk1245

bmk1245

    puny village idiot

  • Member
  • 4,047 posts
  • Joined:16 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vilnius, Lithuania

Posted 26 September 2012 - 07:18 PM

View Postzoser, on 26 September 2012 - 07:02 PM, said:

Did the USAF personnel lie, or were they having a mass hallucination that day?  In charge of a nuclear weapons base that could have sealed the fate of the world.  Think what your saying Mr B.  

So were they drunk?  The whole team?  There was a lot of them?  Were they fooled by the lighthouse as some ignorant fools have suggested?  

What about the recordings, the sketches, the testimonies, and the fact that none of them have changed a single detail of the story 30 years on.

It's a tall order Mr B to deny this one.
Oh, boy... And I thought you know all of the best cases... In case you missed - its all about JAL1628... So, maybe you can you ask Mr. Callahan to show radar printouts (hes in possession), huh? BTW, how does FE's drawing of weather radar return correlates with spherical (with a rim) body? Can you show how circle would be mapped on polar coordinates?

Arguing with fool is like playing chess with pigeon: he will scatter pieces, peck King's crown, crap on bishop, and fly away bragging how he won the game... (heard once, author unknown).
Zhoom! What was that? That was your life, Mate! Oh, that was quick. Do I get another? Sorry, Mate. That's your lot. Basil Fawlty (John Cleese).

#27    bmk1245

bmk1245

    puny village idiot

  • Member
  • 4,047 posts
  • Joined:16 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vilnius, Lithuania

Posted 26 September 2012 - 07:21 PM

View PostTheMacGuffin, on 26 September 2012 - 07:12 PM, said:

Here's something else that got "omitted" from the public record, but came out in a discussion on ATS.  When the UFO stopped following the JAL plane, it was then tracked behind a United Airlines plane.

I wonder why they forgot to mention that at the time?


http://www.google.co...Vt5gkVxzkzGJgmg
Once again: show printouts.

Arguing with fool is like playing chess with pigeon: he will scatter pieces, peck King's crown, crap on bishop, and fly away bragging how he won the game... (heard once, author unknown).
Zhoom! What was that? That was your life, Mate! Oh, that was quick. Do I get another? Sorry, Mate. That's your lot. Basil Fawlty (John Cleese).

#28    booNyzarC

booNyzarC

    Forum Divinity

  • Closed
  • 13,536 posts
  • Joined:18 Aug 2010
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 26 September 2012 - 07:21 PM

View Postzoser, on 26 September 2012 - 07:16 PM, said:

Minuscule details that skeptics like to use as spades to bury the case maybe.  Well known tactics.  The essence of the case is as true as it ever was, because if those men had lied and been caught out they would have been court martialled and imprisoned.  Nobody is prepared to take a risk like that.  For what? A UFO hoax.

With one exception, I don't think any of them are lying.


View Postzoser, on 26 September 2012 - 07:16 PM, said:

Come on Boon it's plain ridiculous.

On this point, I agree... but probably not for the same reasons.


#29    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

  • Member
  • 10,009 posts
  • Joined:19 Aug 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London UK

  • It is later than you think.

Posted 26 September 2012 - 07:23 PM

View Postbadeskov, on 26 September 2012 - 07:18 PM, said:

May I ask what you think is the essence of the case? Parts that haven't changed over the years etc.?

Cheers,
Badeskov

I've examined this case so many times I could tell it to you in my sleep.  Unknown craft shooting high intensity beams, seen on successive nights,  flashing lights in the forest, one night a small triangular craft is stationary and is examined at close quarters by a member of the team, illuminated objects leave the military base and fly over a farmhouse, object shoots beam at weapons hangar, craft leaves impressions on the ground, ............................it's all there.

Posted Image


#30    bmk1245

bmk1245

    puny village idiot

  • Member
  • 4,047 posts
  • Joined:16 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vilnius, Lithuania

Posted 26 September 2012 - 07:25 PM

View Postzoser, on 26 September 2012 - 07:16 PM, said:

Minuscule details that skeptics like to use as spades to bury the case maybe.  Well known tactics.  The essence of the case is as true as it ever was, because if those men had lied and been caught out they would have been court martialled and imprisoned.  Nobody is prepared to take a risk like that.  For what? A UFO hoax.

Come on Boon it's plain ridiculous.
:w00t:  Say, WHAT?!!!
Typical believer with wide opened mind...

Arguing with fool is like playing chess with pigeon: he will scatter pieces, peck King's crown, crap on bishop, and fly away bragging how he won the game... (heard once, author unknown).
Zhoom! What was that? That was your life, Mate! Oh, that was quick. Do I get another? Sorry, Mate. That's your lot. Basil Fawlty (John Cleese).




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users