RE: TheMcGuffin's hostile UFO cases

[Paxus]

Jerome Clark, Brad Steiger, and even Donald Keyhoe argued that at least some UFOs were hostile, and they sometimes even claimed that there was almost no evidence outside of wishful thinking that they were benevolent. I wouldn't go that far myself, although I can't deny that there is some evidence of hostility such as the case of Freddy Valentich and similar attacks on aircraft.

"The following is from the book "UFOs: What on Earth is Happening" published in 1976 by Bantam Books, authored by John Weldon with Zola Levitt, and is used by permission of each. The book is now out of print, which may be why Dr. Greer is unaware of these reports. Whether he is aware of them, or chooses to ignore them, remains yet to be seen.

"Major Don E. Keyhoe and others have listed many incidents where UFOs have deliberately attacked aircraft and been responsible for several deaths and injuries.

"In one amazing case in 1953, a F-89 interceptor was scrambled at Kinross AFB to investigate a UFO. The UFO followed the jet over Lake Superior. Then the ground radar control watched amazed as the UFO merged with the F-89 on the radar scope! The jet interceptor and the UFO were locked together. The combined blip then moved off the scope, but no trace was ever found of the two pilots, the jet, or the UFO.

Another incident involved an Air Force C-118 transport plane which was hit by some object in the air. The plane crashed, killing the pilot and the three man crew. Prior to the crash, witnesses had seen two UFOs following the aircraft and other people had noted UFOs in the area. Some of the reports were confirmed by Fred Emard, Chief of Police at Orting, Washington.

"In another case, Col. Lee Merkel crashed and was killed just after reporting a UFO. Other cases have undoubtedly been kept secret.

"The foremost Russian authority on UFOs, Dr. Felix Zigel of the Moscow Institute of Aviation, has stated that UFOs may have 'frightened, harassed, and possibly even killed Russian cosmonauts on their missions.' (1)

"According to some reports, UFOs have simply destroyed planes pursuing them. Books such as Brad Steiger's Flying Saucers Are Hostile and Harold Wilkins Flying Saucers On The Attack prove at least some of the UFOs are evil. Steiger mentions an entire African village that was destroyed by a UFO Beam.

"Jerome Clark, a leading American UFO researcher, in his article Why UFOs are Hostile mentions the possibility of 'hundreds, possibly thousands' of people being murdered around the world by UFOs. Referring to Steiger's book, he says UFOs or their occupants have been responsible for aggravated assault, burnings by direct ray focus, radiation sickness, murders, abductions, pursuits of cars, assaults on homes, paralysis, cremations, disrupting power sources, etc. Clark says there is also 'no objective evidence' apart from contactee cases, that UFOs are friendly or from other planets. Several other respected researchers as well have noted UFO hostility.

"There are also dangerous physical effects resulting from close association with UFO beings or craft. These include blackouts, blindness, sexual assault, psychological disturbances, painful skin infections, chronic headaches, convulsive seizures and even cancer. (4)

"In the case of those who claim personal contact with extra-terrestrials (contactees), they have reported being programmed, deceived and made to look like fools. They have experienced the loss of jobs and experienced family disruptions. Reportedly, there are frequent cases of insanity, particularly paranoid schizophrenia, found among contactees and at times they are commanded to murder others... There is a very large number of sudden or mysterious deaths, suicides and nervous breakdowns among UFO investigators."

"The UFO occupants themselves seem to be habitual liars. They often contradict each other and espouse obviously false beliefs, if we are to believe those who claim contact with them. These include : Saturn's civilizations exist in subtropical paradises; Venus has forests, streams, healthy wheat fields, suburban areas, etc; the Sun and Mercury are not hot; Pluto is not cold. They have said that man will never be permitted to set foot upon the Moon..."

http://www.alienresistance.org/disclosureproject_ufoharm.htm

I hope you don't mind (TheMcGuffin) - We rarely talk about these kind of cases and it seems to me that this is some of the best kind of evidence... Many of these cases would even fit squarly in ye 'ol quilious-Paxus criterion and like I said - I doubt they are all lying or mistaken.

Some of them are pretty wild aren't they.

The Russian cosmonauts! Woah!

I actually do recall reading about the UFO attacking individuals and even the African village one.... Not so sure about that... Anyone know if it was debunked or validated? I mean was the village destroyed by something? Do we at least know that?

I'd love to hear the skeptics takes on these types of cases (especially the military ones.

Edited September 12, 2011 by Paxus

[Space Commander Travis]

Supposing that at least some of these (dangerous physical effects resulting from close association with UFO beings or craft. These include blackouts, blindness, sexual assault, psychological disturbances, painful skin infections, chronic headaches, convulsive seizures and even cancer), [if not necessarily perhaps sexual Aassault] might be true, why must any of these things be hostile, in the meaning of deliberately being done to cause harm? Might not many of these simply be side-effects of getting too close? Equally and similarly, if a plane happened to be lost at the same time as a UFO was in the Vicinity, need that necessarily have been deliberately hostile intent?

But I think that the fact that the source seems to be a rather dramatic newsstand paperback is all you need to know really.

i like this "In the case of those who claim personal contact with extra-terrestrials (contactees), they have reported being programmed, deceived and made to look like fools".

[Paxus]

Supposing that at least some of these (dangerous physical effects resulting from close association with UFO beings or craft. These include blackouts, blindness, sexual assault, psychological disturbances, painful skin infections, chronic headaches, convulsive seizures and even cancer), [if not necessarily perhaps sexual Aassault] might be true, why must any of these things be hostile, in the meaning of deliberately being done to cause harm? Might not many of these simply be side-effects of getting too close? Equally and similarly, if a plane happened to be lost at the same time as a UFO was in the Vicinity, need that necessarily have been deliberately hostile intent?

But I think that the fact that the source seems to be a rather dramatic newsstand paperback is all you need to know really.

i like this "In the case of those who claim personal contact with extra-terrestrials (contactees), they have reported being programmed, deceived and made to look like fools".

Hola 747400

Well a lot of cases were reported as examples where it was most likely a side-effect... an accidental 'exposure' as it were...

Yet, some of the military ones are clearly aggressive.

Also, if that book 'Guff mentioned is to be believed, attacks on individuals aren't accidents either.

A lot of military cases like the ones TheMcGuffin is posting did NOT come from any newsstand paperback.

I've heard all these types of cases direct from the mouths of military personal that claim to have been involved.

A lot of those military cases would be scoring 8/10 in our criterion for very credible cases of the ETH!

Edited September 12, 2011 by Paxus

[Paxus]

....and then we could speculate, just for the fun of it; If there are ET visiting and if there are hostiles, why are they hostile and why don't they do more? Why not take resources or 'move in'? Why be so covert? Is there, as some say, 'good guys' involved aswell who prevent the 'baddies' from doing too much?

I forget who wrote something like 'they act like they own the place'.... Perhaps they do? Perhaps they were visiting long before we even came down from the trees.....

[Space Commander Travis]

....and then we could speculate, just for the fun of it; If there are ET visiting and if there are hostiles, why are they hostile and why don't they do more? Why not take resources or 'move in'? Why be so covert? Is there, as some say, 'good guys' involved aswell who prevent the 'baddies' from doing too much?

I forget who wrote something like 'they act like they own the place'.... Perhaps they do? Perhaps they were visiting long before we even came down from the trees.....

Why fiddle about with dangerous physical effects resulting from close association with UFO beings or craft, including blackouts, blindness, sexual assault, psychological disturbances, painful skin infections, chronic headaches, convulsive seizures and even cancer, when you could just blast anyone you wanted to with your phaser? That's why it doesn't seem to me as if, if there was anything to these cases, there was any deliberate campaign of hostile intent, that it was either an accidental side-effect of the technology, or they just happened to be in the wrong palce at the wrong time.

[mcrom901]

Some of them are pretty wild aren't they.

you mean the tales?

"The UFO occupants themselves seem to be habitual liars. They often contradict each other and espouse obviously false beliefs, if we are to believe those who claim contact with them. These include : Saturn's civilizations exist in subtropical paradises; Venus has forests, streams, healthy wheat fields, suburban areas, etc; the Sun and Mercury are not hot; Pluto is not cold. They have said that man will never be permitted to set foot upon the Moon..."

[mcrom901]

i like this "In the case of those who claim personal contact with extra-terrestrials (contactees), they have reported being programmed, deceived and made to look like fools".

that's the working of the devil, hallelujah

Edited September 12, 2011 by mcrom901

[Paxus]

Why fiddle about with dangerous physical effects resulting from close association with UFO beings or craft, including blackouts, blindness, sexual assault, psychological disturbances, painful skin infections, chronic headaches, convulsive seizures and even cancer, when you could just blast anyone you wanted to with your phaser? That's why it doesn't seem to me as if, if there was anything to these cases, there was any deliberate campaign of hostile intent, that it was either an accidental side-effect of the technology, or they just happened to be in the wrong palce at the wrong time.

I dunno - there are so many possibilities and if it's aliens we're talking about, we wouldn't even know what their motivations are.

It's been suggested that some cases are actually humans doing experiments on people deliberately made to appear as if aliens were involved.

*whistles X-Files theme*

If all that stuff is going on, I'd say it would be a little from column A and a little from column B.....

Even where actions by aliens were said to be obviously and deliberately hostile (say a craft shoots down a military aircraft) - you still need to know why, as in, who STARTED it. Perhaps humans did and aliens were merely shooting back....

Edited September 12, 2011 by Paxus

[Paxus]

you mean the tales?

"The UFO occupants themselves seem to be habitual liars. They often contradict each other and espouse obviously false beliefs, if we are to believe those who claim contact with them. These include : Saturn's civilizations exist in subtropical paradises; Venus has forests, streams, healthy wheat fields, suburban areas, etc; the Sun and Mercury are not hot; Pluto is not cold. They have said that man will never be permitted to set foot upon the Moon..."

<SNIP>

*LMAO* perfect quote for that guy!

*LOL* He was even wearing one of those ancient artifacts that they said was obviously an aircrft as a broach/jewellry thingy!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA "Proof! That's so Earthly" HAHAHAHAHAHA

And yes, some of those tales sound like they come right out of a sci fi movie!

Edited September 12, 2011 by Paxus

[mcrom901]

*LMAO* perfect quote for that guy!

*LOL* He was even wearing one of those ancient artifacts that they said was obviously an aircrft as a broach/jewellry thingy!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA "Proof! That's so Earthly" HAHAHAHAHAHA

And yes, some of those tales sound like they come right out of a sci fi movie!

cheers mate... glad that was perceived lightly... mcg seems to somehow take offense with some of my responses... but anyhooz, there are various cases whereby physical damage happens, like the one where you guys were arguing, psyche was mentioning about court cases n stuff... i suppose each individual case rests upon its own merit... but with such openings... "The following is from the book "UFOs: What on Earth is Happening" published in 1976 by Bantam Books, authored by John Weldon with Zola Levitt" reminds me of a certain zola...

eta...

Probably the best-known books promoting the demonic theory of UFOs are John Weldon & Zola Levitt’s UFOs: What on Earth is Happening?

http://www.forteantimes.com/features/articles/95/flying_saucers_from_hell.html

Edited September 12, 2011 by mcrom901

[TheMcGuffin]

Hola 747400

Well a lot of cases were reported as examples where it was most likely a side-effect... an accidental 'exposure' as it were...

Yet, some of the military ones are clearly aggressive.

Also, if that book 'Guff mentioned is to be believed, attacks on individuals aren't accidents either.

A lot of military cases like the ones TheMcGuffin is posting did NOT come from any newsstand paperback.

I've heard all these types of cases direct from the mouths of military personal that claim to have been involved.

A lot of those military cases would be scoring 8/10 in our criterion for very credible cases of the ETH!

Thanks for starting this thread, Paxus.

I know foe certain that President Harry Truman ordered the military to shoot them down in 1947 and 1952. That's been well-documented, along with military attempts to fire on UFOs.

This case at Kirtland Air Force Base in 1952 in which a pilot fired on a UFO was first mentioned by Edward Ruppelt. I dug around and found out that the commander of the 34th Air Defense Division at the time was William A. Matheny, who later proposed Project Pounce, which used special squadrons of the most advanced jet interceptors to chase UFOs.

I can speak with certainty about this since I checked it all out myself many years ago.

Then we have the low-key investigation conducted by New Mexico state representative Andrew Kissner, who represented the district around White Sands missile range. There were many UFO sightings around there as well as interference with missile tests, and very credible information that the military was firing on UFOs. Kissner thought that they managed to shoot down at least two of them, with the first on May 29, 1947.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7954021180901243687

I talked about all this on the other threads, but it does indicate that there was a high level of hostility between the US military and at least some of the UFOs. I won't even argue whether the UFOs were "real" since the military stated flatly that they were indeed real, physical objects, not simply hoaxes, illusions or misidentified conventional things.

They were evasive and tried to run when fired on, although it is also clear that they were capable of retaliating.

I think I can prove this much from the documents and historical records that exist, and from evidence up to the present that the US military does chase these UFOs around from time to time. Anyone who continues to deny that there are UFOs and that none of this is going on is simply refusing to look at the record and considered the evidence. Well, there's nothing I can do about that. I can only present the evidence that we have and hope that at least some people are willing to look at it.

[mcrom901]

although it is also clear that they were capable of retaliating.

in what sense?

I think I can prove this much from the documents and historical records that exist,

please, would appreciate that...

[TheMcGuffin]

My theory would be that, for whatever reason, the US military classified some of these UFOs as real and also hostile going back to at least 1947. (Although I think the investigations started well before that, going back to the Second World War or even earlier in some countries). I think the military decided there was a pattern of airspace intrusions here, especially over sensitive nuclear and missile installations in New Mexico. and later over Washington DC itself. So it's not unnatural that they started firing on these things. If they managed to knock some of them down and examine the bodies and wreckage, then so much the better from the military point of view. I argued in the other thread that scientists at the Research and Development Board in Washington did examine the bodies and wreckage.

None of these seems impossible or implausible to me, given the bits and pieces we know about actual UFO history, including repeated UFO intrusions over missile sites that continued into the 1960s and 1970s. We know that Air Force jets chased them more than once in these situations, and it would not surprise me at all if they were fired on from both the air and the ground.

As the who started the hostilities, the US government stated that the UFOs did, while only the UFO people know what they think about all this.

[mcrom901]

As the who started the hostilities, the US government stated that the UFOs did,

link please

[TheMcGuffin]

link please

Mcrom, your many humorous posts don't bother me much, well, at least no more than those of DONTEATUS, but it's a little late in the day to start acting like you take the subject of UFOs and these thread discussions seriously.

I have posted many links on various threads that never even seem to get noticed by the more "serious" posters.

Edited September 12, 2011 by TheMcGuffin

[mcrom901]

Mcrom, your many humorous posts don't bother me much, well, at least no more than those of DONTEATUS, but it's a little late in the day to start acting like you take the subject of UFOs and these thread discussions seriously.

I have posted many links on various threads that never even seem to get noticed by the more "serious" posters.

translation: i don't have any official sources to back my earlier comment...

"As the who started the hostilities, the US government stated that the UFOs did,"

[TheMcGuffin]

William Matheny presented his plan for Project Pounce to Air Defense Command Headquarters, and it was even mentioned in the Robertson Committee records. At the time, there was a shortage of aircraft in the US because of the Korean War so it's not clear if or when it was actually implemented. I say it was, after the Korean War.

http://www.nicap.org/photobio.htm

"Edward Ruppelt's papers,and supplemented by details in his book, state that 34th Air Division Commander Col. (William) Matheny (misspelled by Ruppelt as "Methaney" or "Methany") put forward a plan in mid-1952 to use specially equipped F-94C's to take gun camera films of intercepted UFO's, which came to be called Project Pounce. Many agencies were putting forth instrumented UFO detection and tracking plans in 1952, and ATIC attempted to combine them into one plan based in NM. New Mexico was the home of Project Twinkle operated in 1950-1, and several other UFO observation posts or networks, so there was already some experience and interest, as well as plenty of UFO sightings there."

http://www.nicap.org/nmexico/newmexicosightings.htm

There were a large number of very well-documented UFO sightings around White Sands and Los Alamos during this entire period from 1947-53, and we now know that these were being fired on from both the ground and their air. Matheny was in charge of Air Defense Command in this area so naturally he developed a plan to chase UFOs.

http://www.nicap.org/nmexico/newmexicosightings.htm

Edited September 12, 2011 by TheMcGuffin

[mcrom901]

William Matheny presented his plan for Project Pounce to Air Defense Command Headquarters, and it was even mentioned in the Robertson Committee records. At the time, there was a shortage of aircraft in the US because of the Korean War so it's not clear if or when it was actually implemented. I say it was, after the Korean War.

http://www.nicap.org/photobio.htm

but no one knew about this battery...

Second Lieutenant Ackerman's first assignment was to an anti-aircraft battery in the Coast Artillery at Port MacArthur, San Pedro, Calif. It is interesting to note that it was the only such battery in existence at that time.

http://www.nicap.org/bios/ackerman.htm

[TheMcGuffin]

Several people came forward in later years and made all kinds of outlandish claims about Project Pounce, like "Colonel" Steve Wilson--who was no more a colonel than I am an admiral.

http://www.phils.com.au/col.wilson.htm

I would not be confused by these later stories, since the only Project Pounce I know of that has any basis in historical fact was the one proposed by William Matheny to Air Defense Command.

I would also ignore any references to "Project Aquarius" since all of that is heavily tainted by the deliberate disinformation of Sergeant Richard Doty. These days, though, "Project Serpo" seems to be his latest hobby, but one of the big problem with the UFO field has always been phonies like these muddying the waters. In Doty's case, however, he was being ordered to do this.

Edited September 12, 2011 by TheMcGuffin

[TheMcGuffin]

When F-86 interceptors were vectored in over and above UFO targets by ground control radar in the 1950s, it was sometimes described as the "pounce position":

.

"Documents circa 1953 reveal stories of F-86 interceptors being vectored toward UFOs, some of which escaped pursuit by exiting vertically, presumably into outer-space. These jet planes had been maneuvered into what was being referred to as "pounce" position. Ground Control Intercept (GCI)had specifically used the term "Pounce Position" when describing, at least one, of the accounts the of F-86 interceptions.

An Internet search conducted on the phrases "air combat + Pounce" took me to several papers dealing with military air combat. Pounce seems to be a fairly common term. It refers to the act of pouncing on a ground target, as in a railroad yard, or bridge, as well it also was used when referring to the act of the pilot getting his plane over, and above an air target. Once they were above the target, and hopefully unseen by the enemy aircraft as well, they would "pounce" upon them in surprise.

The air target grammar usage fits the UFO encounters of 1953, as the interceptors were getting over, and above the UFO targets. As you can see from this web site, others have a slightly different tale to tell, as regards to Project: Pounce."

http://bobkoford.blogspot.com/2008/11/project-pounce.html

[TheMcGuffin]

I also advise people to ignore the "revelations" of people like "Doctor" Michael Wolf when it comes to Project Pounce, since he was no more a doctor than I'm the king of Spain. Once again, this is just an example of people picking up the code name of a real military operation then inventing all kinds of myths and legends around it--science fiction.

http://www.all-natural.com/mikewolf.html

It's highly irritating to me that all this fraud and disinformation started circulating in the 1980s and 1990s, and it probably wasn't coincidental, either, since researchers were also uncovering a lot of genuine information at that time. As usual, a big smokescreen was also being thrown up over the entire UFO field, to divert people up blind alleys and make the whole subject look ridiculous.

[booNyzarC]

It's a good thing that there is someone who can tell us what the real Project Pounce was, and which stories are disinformation.

[Paxus]

please stop called what you clearly mean ET craft UFOS!

[formulating my replies now]

[Paxus]

Thanks for starting this thread, Paxus.

I/we should be thanking you!

I know for certain that President Harry Truman ordered the military to shoot them down in 1947 and 1952. That's been well-documented, along with military attempts to fire on UFOs.

If that is fact, why are we still debating the ETH?!

I can speak with certainty about this since I checked it all out myself many years ago.

You certainly sound sure!

<snips>

I think I can prove this much from the documents and historical records that exist, and from evidence up to the present that the US military does chase these UFOs around from time to time. Anyone who continues to deny that there are UFOs and that none of this is going on is simply refusing to look at the record and considered the evidence. Well, there's nothing I can do about that. I can only present the evidence that we have and hope that at least some people are willing to look at it.

If you can dig them up I'm sure that would count as at least partial disclosure - would in my eyes

Mcrom, your many humorous posts don't bother me much, well, at least no more than those of DONTEATUS, but it's a little late in the day to start acting like you take the subject of UFOs and these thread discussions seriously.

I have posted many links on various threads that never even seem to get noticed by the more "serious" posters.

May I suggest you soldier on, like skyeagle would and just re-post and re-post...

Seriously, if you can show, clearly that a US president has said UFO are known to be ET craft and that they are to be fired on aswell as other military documents or quotes, I'll accept that.

[more to come]

Edited September 12, 2011 by Paxus

[quillius]

May I suggest you soldier on, like skyeagle would and just re-post and re-post...

Seriously, if you can show, clearly that a US president has said UFO are known to be ET craft and that they are to be fired on aswell as other military documents or quotes, I'll accept that.

[more to come]

I will second that, even if they seem to be missed..I assure you they are not...in fact not missed by either side. If they lack rebuttal or comment then thats a good thing is it not?

oh and Paxus, just seen your locked thread (lol) as soon as I read it I thought no way, Pax would have posted it first thing upon his return with the excitement of a kid ina sweetshop....that initself gave you away my friend ...