Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Roswell guard ordered to 'shoot to kill'


Recommended Posts

Tim-

Anthony Bragalia here. I do not generally respond in forums but in this case I must...

You do not tell readers two very vital things: 1) Cox was well aware of procedures and security measures relative to atomic bombs and the planes that delivered them. This is because he had Top Secret clearance and photographed them as part of the 309th Photo Unit at Roswell ! 2) I told you previously that I asked Cox if he thought this may have related to a nuclear event such as an errant weapon/broken arrow. He was adamant that this was not the case. This happened directly after the controversial crash. No one has ever said that the disc/balloon was really a nuke! And Cox heard nothing about an atomic weapon event of any kind occurring at that time. In all the dozens of Roswell vet interviews no one has ever alluded to such a thing either. And official records of course do not reflect that an emergency atomic weapon event ever happened at that time and place.

Two other things:

Mogul balloons, when recovered, were not treated in this way by military or involved scientists. CB Moore would roll over in his grave if he heard such things! Do even some very basic reading to learn more. The material of the Mogul balloon train was not classified- only its mission!

Also, if you read Witness to Roswell Second Edition, Bessie Brazel now states that she had confused the balloon retrievals with her Dad with the crash event North of Roswell. In fact she makes a full recantation and explains why in the book.

Best,

Anthony Bragalia

Hi Mr Bragalia

What do you mean "MOGUL balloons were not treated in this way? You accuse Tim of being inaccurate, then you vaguely make some half statement and leave it? In what way? Are you saying that they did not have recovery tags like the below on them?

QUESTIONNAIRE, REWARD AND WARNING TAGS ATTACHED TO PROJECT MOGUL BALLOONS

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------<^>

QUESTIONNAIRE

Please answer this and send to us so that we may pay you the

Reward.

1. On what date and at what hour was the balloon discovered?

2. Where was it discovered? (Approximate distance and direction

from nearest town on map?)

3. Was it observed descending? If so, at what time?

4. Did it float down slowly or fall rapidly?

5. How much kerosene was there in the tank?

C. S. Schneider

Research Division

New York University

University Heights

Bronx 53. New York

__________________________________________________________________

REWARD NOTICE

This is special weather equipment Sent aloft on research by New York Univetity.

It is important that the equipment be recovered. The finder L requested to protect

the equipment from damage or theft. and to telegraph collect to: Mr. C. 5. Schneider.

York University. 18lst St. & University Heights, Box 12. New York City.

L.S.A. Phone: LUdlow 3.6310. REFER TO FLIGHT #-__________

A dollar ($ ) reward and reasonable reimbursement for recovery expense will be

paid if the above instruction* are followed before September 1949.

KEEP AWAY FROM FIRE. THERE IS KEROSENE IN THE TANK.

___________________________________________________________________

****WARNING TAGS****

_______________________

DANGER!

FIRE!

CUT THESE WIRES

BEFORE HANDLING

_______________________

DANGER!

EMPTY THIS ON GROUND

BEFORE HANDLING

________________________

Only weeks after Roswell, the FBI drew up a one-page memorandum titled Instrument found on farm near Danforth, Illinois. The similarities are nothing short of astounding. Both “objects” were found on ranch-land, both were initially suspected of being flying saucer debris, and in the same way that the Air Force tried to lay the Roswell controversy to rest with its Mogul hypothesis, the material evidence in the Danforth case was also suspected by some within the military of originating with a Mogul balloon array. Considering this, can I ask if you have read Lost Shamans Intel Op's Hypothesis, I know you have spoken with LS in the past, but you seem to avoid this seemingly very sound option. Why is that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What are you going on about? "That which you 'bloded', (sic), and coloured for me," states that, 'in 1948 instant photography went on sale to the public for the first time'. In other words it wasn't available to the public in 1947. Whether it was available to the military or not I don't know. They didn't need instant photography anyway as they always had their own photographers and processing specialists and would have been able to turn out finished high quality pictures, (much better than tiny polariods), within an hour. :P

Congrats, you did get the bolded.

All I did was answer your query. You said you did not think we had Polaroids in 1947, I am sure we are now both agreed that we most certainly did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Congrats, you did get the bolded.

All I did was answer your query. You said you did not think we had Polaroids in 1947, I am sure we are now both agreed that we most certainly did.

Instant photography was 'NOT' available to the public until 1948!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Instant photography was 'NOT' available to the public until 1948!

The military is "NOT" the public. The cameras "DID" exist.

Crikey Moses, and I thought you got it. Sheesh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do hope Tim responds to Anthony and also that Anthony responds to Psyche. Throw LS into the mix and we could have an interesting debate develop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do hope Tim responds to Anthony and also that Anthony responds to Psyche. Throw LS into the mix and we could have an interesting debate develop.

I think Tim did respond to Anthony, post #154 mate. He pointed out that Tony, like most UFOlogists is supportive of an every changing story, when it is often claimed that was what the USAF did.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Tim did respond to Anthony, post #154 mate. He pointed out that Tony, like most UFOlogists is supportive of an every changing story, when it is often claimed that was what the USAF did.

how the hell did I miss that....I even went over the last few pages reading them twice...... :w00t::unsure2::cry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tony, that's the problem with cases such as Roswell and others, "Bessie Brazel now states..." The story always seems to change over time. The "witnesses" have been data mined to the point that facts and anecdotes become blurred and yet worse, merged into potential confabulation. Notice that these witnesses often quoted are secondary or tertiary sources.

Tim,

Whats wrong with the example you are useing? Both Mack Brazel and his daughter Bessie claimed they found weather balloons before! They are both primary sources. She only changed her story to say that she thinks she was remembering an earlier event when she found a weather balloon with her dad. Thats consistent with Mack's statements at the time that he'd found weather balloons before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The military is "NOT" the public. The cameras "DID" exist.

Crikey Moses, and I thought you got it. Sheesh.

Prove it!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tim,

Whats wrong with the example you are useing? Both Mack Brazel and his daughter Bessie claimed they found weather balloons before! They are both primary sources. She only changed her story to say that she thinks she was remembering an earlier event when she found a weather balloon with her dad. Thats consistent with Mack's statements at the time that he'd found weather balloons before.

L.S., nice to hear from you!

Your correct about Bessie Brazel being a primary source. Goes to show you that I've not paid much attention to the Roswell debate(s). I wanted to show Tony that his statement concerning Bessie Brazel "recanting" her earlier story was indicative of what I've seen (in passing) concerning the Roswell story...not unlike others that I'm well familiar with.

From a Wiki article:

Brazel, who discovered the debris which sparked the Roswell UFO incident, died in 1963, well before researchers started to interview witnesses to the incident. He was interviewed in 1947, however, and his accounts of debris appeared in the Roswell Daily Record on July 9, 1947. In the interview he said he found "bright wreckage made up of rubber strips, tinfoil, a rather tough paper and sticks".[7][8]Bessie, his daughter, helped recover the debris, which she described to be similar to aluminium and wax paper, and it has indescribable writings on it.[9] In 1995, her affidavit was published and included additional descriptions. She claimed the pieces looked like a weather balloon. The pieces of the debris has two parts: the front was foil-like, and the other was rubber-like, both of which were gray in color. The debris had sticks attached to them with white tape."

Most of the above actually came from Kevin Randle and a co-author. Tony referred me to "Witnesses to Roswell" concerning Bessie Brazel's recanting of her original statements which I unfortunately don't have on my book shelf. BTW, this shows Tony's tangential line of thinking since Bessie Brazel's statements/recantation has nothing to do with Cox's "shoot to kill" order. Rather than telling me "yes/no" that he had attempted to find out what else could have been stored in the hangar, if anything, he throws out Bessie Brazel. I'm disappointed with Tony in this regard since he is a key component on Kevin Randle's Roswell "Dream Team."

Best Regards,

Tim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Roswell was ET IMO. Read Jesse Marcel Jr.'s book.

You have to be joking. Have you not read anything else on Roswell but said book? Not seen how all these claims have been systematically been shredded?

Cheers,

Badeskov

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have to be joking. Have you not read anything else on Roswell but said book? Not seen how all these claims have been systematically been shredded?

Cheers,

Badeskov

Why don't you read Stanton Friedman's, 'Crash At Corona', and be enlightened, instead of the trash being churned out by noisy negativists and debunkers! :P

Edited by MrSerendipity
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Prove it!

I did! What is wrong with you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why don't you read Stanton Friedman's, 'Crash At Corona', and be enlightened, instead of the trash being churned out by noisy negativists and debunkers! :P

The man who made up the Aliens in 1979?

Easy to see where your bias comes from.

Have you guys ever considered reading the actual documents from the time frame instead of fictional novels that are speculating wildly? The actual documents are far more valuable than every novel written on the subject combined. That is how research works, you gather evidence, the only evidence that exists are said documents.

Or one can read fantasy musings, like you and Stu recommend. Personal validation comes at a cheap price huh? What's that say about your conviction?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Roswell was ET IMO. Read Jesse Marcel Jr.'s book.

Does it say why he and his father never agreed about the appearance of the "beams"? Jesse Jr did not go to the site, he was a little kid. You do know this don't you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did! What is wrong with you?

You DID NOT prove it. What the hell is wrong with YOU? Show me your proof again. :cry:

Edited by MrSerendipity
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why don't you read Stanton Friedman's, 'Crash At Corona', and be enlightened, instead of the trash being churned out by noisy negativists and debunkers! :P

I did and held up against the actual documents and events that it claims to describe, the deception is obvious. Try some critical source comparisons and you will easily see how Mr. Friedman abuses official documents to lead towards a certain conclusion.

Frankly, it is a piece of garbage.

Cheers,

Badeskov

Link to comment
Share on other sites

L.S., nice to hear from you!

Your correct about Bessie Brazel being a primary source. Goes to show you that I've not paid much attention to the Roswell debate(s). I wanted to show Tony that his statement concerning Bessie Brazel "recanting" her earlier story was indicative of what I've seen (in passing) concerning the Roswell story...not unlike others that I'm well familiar with.

From a Wiki article:

Most of the above actually came from Kevin Randle and a co-author. Tony referred me to "Witnesses to Roswell" concerning Bessie Brazel's recanting of her original statements which I unfortunately don't have on my book shelf. BTW, this shows Tony's tangential line of thinking since Bessie Brazel's statements/recantation has nothing to do with Cox's "shoot to kill" order. Rather than telling me "yes/no" that he had attempted to find out what else could have been stored in the hangar, if anything, he throws out Bessie Brazel. I'm disappointed with Tony in this regard since he is a key component on Kevin Randle's Roswell "Dream Team."

Best Regards,

Tim

Hi Tim

I think you pointed out a most prudent point, and indeed I have seen you support Mr Bragalia when many others dismissed him. LS does favourably support Mr Bragalia I have noticed in the past, and I must say, that support bewilders me as it seems rather obvious to me that LS is a far more competent and fair researcher by comparison. You gave Mr Bragalia the benefit of the doubt, so one can see that you too are a fair man, one cannot ask for more I believe. And it does indeed illustrate Mr Bragalias way of thinking - change the subject when backed into a corner. He never proved the recant, which as far as I am aware is somewhat ambiguous, and indeed appears to be bowing to pressure, from her Brother I would suspect. Her original statement would be a huge thorn in Jesse Jr's bok sales and speaking tour, Roswell seems to be his bread and butter and lets face it, in front of all these people how the heck can he say what he does with a straight face when his sister refutes his claim with one line, and actually went there, unlike Jesse, and was older than Jesse at the time. It is more than plainly obvious that te UFOlogists flock to Jesse Jr because he tells them what they want to hear. Roswell ET is his business, that is plain to see to anyone who cares to look.

Also, didn't Mr Bragalia get a fan boy to whine his way into the "dream team"?

LINK - Roswell Dream Team?

Kevin Randle’s blog indicates that he, Tom Carey, and Don Schmitt have formed a “dream team” – no ego in that! – to re-open an investigation into Roswell – a cold-case kind of thing Randle writes.

Mr. Randle is as obsessed with Roswell as we are with Socorro and a few other UFO incidents.

That said, let me tell you that Anthony Bragalia should have been invited to join the dream team. He is one researcher who has discovered some important Roswell minutiae over the past few years.

It really does sound like someone had a big cry over not being included and had someone whine his way in for him. The article also blathers on about Mr Bragalia's Nitinol claims, which when dissected here are shown to be outright nonsense. Personally, I find such as the above hard to respect.

Awesome to see you around. Please do not be a stranger my good man. I for one very much appreciate your contributions. :tu:

Cheers.

Edited by psyche101
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Per Psyche:

Hi Tim

I think you pointed out a most prudent point, and indeed I have seen you support Mr Bragalia when many others dismissed him. LS does favourably support Mr Bragalia I have noticed in the past, and I must say, that support bewilders me as it seems rather obvious to me that LS is a far more competent and fair researcher by comparison. You gave Mr Bragalia the benefit of the doubt, so one can see that you too are a fair man, one cannot ask for more I believe. And it does indeed illustrate Mr Bragalias way of thinking - change the subject when backed into a corner. He never proved the recant, which as far as I am aware is somewhat ambiguous, and indeed appears to be bowing to pressure, from her Brother I would suspect. Her original statement would be a huge thorn in Jesse Jr's bok sales and speaking tour, Roswell seems to be his bread and butter and lets face it, in front of all these people how the heck can he say what he does with a straight face when his sister refutes his claim with one line, and actually went there, unlike Jesse, and was older than Jesse at the time. It is more than plainly obvious that te UFOlogists flock to Jesse Jr because he tells them what they want to hear. Roswell ET is his business, that is plain to see to anyone who cares to look.

I had openly supported Tony's Socorro Hoax Theory on this and other sites...mainly due to Tony's willingness to look at other factors (causation?) in a supposed UFO claim. I'll support critical thinking regardless of the individual. What came about of his theory appears to be in lingo at this time...as far as I'm aware. Frank Slater had previously offered a hoax scenario for Socorro some time ago and Frank is a "nuts and bolt" UFO kind of guy...I do like some of Frank's work and wish that he would provide more articles on his site.

I'm aware that Tony was a late add on to Randle's team. Honestly, I prefer Tony over David Rudiack. Dr. Rudiack tends to carpet bomb the comments section on Randle's site which I do follow on a fairly regular basis. Interesting thing, Rich Reynolds (ufo iconoclasts) hosts the Bragalia Files site, yet Randle does not offer a link to Tony's...wouldn't read to much into that, but it's odd to me.

As I've stated in a previous post, Roswell never was a captivating interest to me urging me to dive into all of it's minutia and twists and turns. My intuition tells me that there was not a UFO crash and that's why the story died until Friedman stepped in and others followed thus contaminating any future investigation. Kevin Randle has researched this incident more than anyone that I'm aware of, yet now he has to put together a team to re-investigate? Roswell appears to be Ufology's version of a "self-licking ice cream cone."

Tim

Edited by Tim Hebert
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One can Lick until the Cow`s get tipped,But It will never change the Facts ! But then again ITs always fun to watch the fun and games !

E.T. is out there laughing as we type ! :tu:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even in the 1960s Polaroid photographs were still of very poor quality and I have seen many that were taken at that time. I doubt very much if any army anywhere in the world would have made use of them. As I stated before, armies had their own photographers and processing labs and, before the days of digital, were able to produce very high quality enlargements within a very short period of time.

You're right Mr. Serendipity, in the 60's I did two tours in Vietnam. My first tour was in the early 60's and I had a polariod camera and there was a little sponge thing in a tube with some kind of liquid in it. After you took a picture you had to sweep across the pic with that wet spongeAnd the pictures were vey small and not very good quality. I think I've still got a few of them.

Odie

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What the hell is your problem? You got your pantie liner on with the sticky side up?

What's my problem? I suppose where you are concerned it would be that I can read.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just always keep my handy Smart phone at my side for those Pesky E.T `s

post-68971-0-76877000-1367555203_thumb.j

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're right Mr. Serendipity, in the 60's I did two tours in Vietnam. My first tour was in the early 60's and I had a polariod camera and there was a little sponge thing in a tube with some kind of liquid in it. After you took a picture you had to sweep across the pic with that wet spongeAnd the pictures were vey small and not very good quality. I think I've still got a few of them.

Odie

Yeah ! And as soon as they found out that you could sniff the tubes dry and Fly like a Eagle they discontinued those tubes ! Real bummer for all our troops,But It did save a few thousand lifes !

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.