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 -

Debunking the Disclosure Project


drew hempel

Recommended Posts

Maybe it's just me, but I've got to be honest with you, I get this impression a lot when it comes to things like UFO reports. It's just a vague uneasiness, frankly, but with UFO reports, it does seem like there are people out there keeping an eye open for incidents that go back a few years that they can spin into a UFO contact story. Take for example this incident at Malmstrom AFB. When Robert Salas first wrote up his little story for publication, he said that he worked at November Flight LLC -- you'll note that isn't anywhere near Echo Flight where my Dad worked, and where the missile systems were shut down due to that 10 volt pulse we've already mentioned. There were rumors of UFO activity for that period at November Flight, and that's probably why Salas wanted people to think he had worked there, not realizing that someone might actually remember that he never worked at November Flight. Salas worked at Oscar Flight -- and you'll note that nothing ever happened at Oscar-Flight whatsoever.

To me, it sounds like he wanted to push a UFO agenda in concert with America's nuclear missile capabilities of the time. He wrote up his report saying he was there -- "I saw it all" type of thing -- until somebody checked and figured out he was never at November Flight, he was at Oscar Flight. I can't possibly believe that he doesn't remember what missile launch system he worked at, so I conclude that he purposefully lied about in order to make his story sound more like eyewitness testimony, which it isn't. He was at Oscar Flight, and there is testimony to support that fact.

Now at Echo Flight, where the missiles went offline and where my father had the watch that night as Crew Commander, there were no UFO reports. Salas wants us to believe that the Deputy Crew Commander spoke with security, and security told him there was a UFO. We know that's a lie, because the Deputy Crew Commander never mentioned anything like that to my Dad, the Crew Commander, which he would have since he was required to, and also because everybody on the surface was interviewed the next day due to the missiles going offline, and all of them said the same thing: that nothing strange had happened.

There were "rumors," mentioned in the command history, of UFO sightings at November Flight, but these were discounted because the mobile security teams, upon being interviewed, were positive nothing odd had happened there either. Now Salas comes around 25 years later, thinking nobody will remember him from the original crews, and writes up some story saying "hey, guys, those UFO's at November Flight were real -- I saw them when I worked there that night the missiles went offline ay Echo Flight!" Someone who reads this comes back and says, "you weren't there -- you never worked November Flight -- you were at Oscar Flight. And nothing ever happened at Oscar Flight."

Well Salas looks like a liar now, so he needs to get some verification. Around this time, some guys came nosing around to interview my Dad regarding that night, and he tells them that nothing had happened, no UFOs, and the missiles going offline were fully investigated -- no big deal, right? Then Salas contacts Don Crawford, the Captain who relieved my father the next day -- well AFTER anything that may have happened. Well, he spices the account up a bit by saying my Dad and the Deputy Crew Commander were "still visibly shaken," and that the missiles were inoperable for the entire following day (not surprising, given that an investigation was still in progress, but he makes it sound like the UFOs knocked our missiles out for the full day; they didn't -- we kept them off for an investigation; there's little doubt that they could have been brought back up without incident after a system reboot).

Now Salas has nothing, because he was caught in a lie. He was actually at Oscar Flight -- 20 miles away from Echo Flight, so the missiles going offline can't be attested to, and nowhere near November Flight, so he can't even attest to the UFO rumors there. And keep in mind that those rumors were immediately discounted by eyewitnesses who said nothing happened there either. So what does Salas do to try and maintain his UFO agenda and rescue the shredded remnants of his credibility? He gets inventive:

[This following is directly quoted - it should come up in color blue]

Outside, above the subterranean LCC capsule, it was a typical clear, cold Montana night sky; there were a few inches of snow on the ground. Where we were, there were no city lights to detract from the spectacular array of stars, and it was not uncommon to see shooting stars. Montana isn’t called “Big Sky Country” for no reason, and Airmen on duty topside probably spent some of their time outside looking up at the stars. It was one of those airmen who first saw what at first appeared to be a star begin to zig-zag across the sky. Then he saw another light do the same thing, and this time it was larger and closer. He asked his Flight Security Controller, (FSC, the Non-Commissioned Officer (NCO) in charge of Launch Control Center site security), to come and take a look. They both stood there watching the lights streak directly above them, stop, change directions at high speed and return overhead. The NCO ran into the building and phoned me at my station in the underground capsule. He reported to me that they had been seeing lights making strange maneuvers over the facility, and that they weren't aircraft. I replied: "Great. You just keep watching them and let me know if they get any closer."

I did not take this report seriously and directed him to report back if anything more significant happened. At the time, I believed this first call to be a joke. Still, that sort of behavior was definitely out of character for air security policemen whose communications with us were usually very professional.

A few minutes later, the security NCO called again. This time he was clearly frightened and was shouting his words:

"Sir, there's one hovering outside the front gate!"

"One what?"

"A UFO! It's just sitting there. We're all just looking at it. What do you want us to do?"

"What? What does it look like?"

"I can't really describe it. It's glowing red. What are we supposed to do?"

"Make sure the site is secure and I'll phone the Command Post."

"Sir, I have to go now, one of the guys just got injured."

Before I could ask about the injury, he was off the line. I immediately went over to my commander, Lt. Fred Meiwald, who was on a scheduled sleep period . I woke him and began to brief him about the phone calls and what was going on topside. In the middle of this conversation, we both heard the first alarm klaxon resound through the confined space of the capsule, and both immediately looked over at the panel of annunciator lights at the Commander's station. A 'No-Go' light and two red security lights were lit indicating problems at one of our missile sites. Fred jumped up to query the system to determine the cause of the problem. Before he could do so, another alarm went off at another site, then another and another simultaneously. Within the next few seconds, we had lost six to eight missiles to a 'No-Go' (inoperable) condition.

After reporting this incident to the Command Post, I phoned my security guard. He said that the man who had approached the UFO had not been injured seriously but was being evacuated by helicopter to the base. Once topside, I spoke directly with the security guard about the UFOs. He added that the UFO had a red glow and appeared to be saucer shaped. He repeated that it had been immediately outside the front gate, hovering silently.

We sent a security patrol to check our LFs after the shutdown, and they reported sighting another UFO during that patrol. They also lost radio contact with our site immediately after reporting the UFO.

When we were relieved by our scheduled replacement crew later that morning. The missiles had still not been brought on line by on-site maintenance teams.

Again, UFOs had been sighted by security personnel at or about the time Minuteman Strategic missiles shutdown.

The only problem is there are no log entries, investigation reports, medical records, secuirty logs, watch command logs, eyewitness reports, or even newspaper articles to support ANYTHING in the above statement. There aren't any witness names that can be checked, or investigation records. There are lots of records available to reference the Echo Flight missiles going down, and there are even records to attest to UFO rumors at November Flight, where Salas first claimed to work, but absolutely NOTHING supporting events of any type at Oscar Flight, where he actually worked. Nothing...

What Salas had was a bunch of lies, and Don Crawford, since he couldn't get my Dad to sign on with this ridiculous load of crap. You'd think Don Crawford wouldn't add much, since he wasn't even on duty when everything supposedly happened. He got background; Don Crawford says that [and this should be in blue, too]:

It was during this same period, according to Col. Don Crawford (USAF ret.), that a two person SAT, assigned to Echo Flight, was performing a routine check of the missile launch facilities a few miles north of Lewistown, Montana. As they approached one of the launch facilities, an astonishing sight caused the driver to slam on his brakes. Stunned in amazement, they watched as, about 300 feet ahead, a very large glowing object hovered silently directly over the launch facility. One of them picked up his VHF hand microphone and called then Captain Don Crawford who was the DMCCC on duty that evening

“Sir, you wouldn’t believe what I’m looking at,” he said.

He described what they were seeing. Crawford didn’t believe him at first but the young airman insisted he was telling the truth, his voice revealing his emotional state. Eventually Crawford took him seriously enough to call the Command Post to report it. The officer on duty at the Command Post refused to accept the report and simply stated, “We no longer record those kinds of reports,” indicating he didn’t want to hear about the UFO. Crawford unsure of what to tell his shaken security guard, decided to give the guard his permission to fire his weapon at the object if it seemed hostile.

“Thanks, sir, but I really don’t think it would do any good,”

A few seconds later the object silently flew away.

There were sightings in the area before and after the missile shutdown incidents by military personnel and civilians.

No dates, no names, no verification -- NOTHING. But it's this ridiculous bit of testimony that puts UFOs at Echo Flight -- nothing else.

And that's why I say that "It’s almost as if someone in an area of classified authority and legal trust was looking about for an incident of some sort that was reported with which to link an outlandish tale of UFO interference with national defense interests." That's what Robert Salas and Don Crawford did. They took a past incident that was at one time highly classified, and linked it to an asinine UFO story in order to create a new paradigm with an agenda they could profit off of. And they have profited -- TV appearances, radio interviews, Salas has co-authored a book on the topic, and there are those video tape sales to bring in a paycheck as well. It's obvious that Salas was at one time in a position of "classified authority and legal trust," otherwise he wouldn't have know how best to capitalize on these incidents for his own personal gain (and yet, he still managed to screw it up, and come off sounding like a loon or a liar). He picked up a copy of UFO magazine, and probably figured, "y'know, these clowns are idiots -- I bet I can exploit that, using my highly classified, military background. Heck, maybe I'll get laid in the process..."

The day I found out that Salas had originally claimed to be at November Flight is the day I absolutely KNEW he had lied about the whole thing -- because there actually were rumors of UFOs being sighted around November Flight during that period of time. It was only after this example of "poor memory" was made public that his fully fictionalized account of the events at Oscar Flight came out. He couldn't fall back on his November Flight lie, and he wasn't at Echo Flight -- which was the only fully investigated missile outage. If it wasn't for the fact that this fully documented investigation had made very plain who was on duty when and where, I'm certain he would have first claimed to work at Echo Flight. But he couldn't, and that's why he claimed to work at November Flight first -- he didn't think he'd get called on it, and he needed something to back up his story. Well, he was called on it, and that's why he was forced to bring out Don Crawford and the whole Oscar Flight fiction.

And now, the whole thing is part of the Disclosure Project, and people actually believe our government is hiding the true events of what went on March 16, 1967. Well, our government may be hiding something, but not that -- for the most part, our government has declassified the whole incident, an incident that was VERY highly classified at one time.

One more short comment before I close up -- CUFON and Salas have made much of the fact that the original SAC command message states that the loss of the 10 Echo Flight missiles "is cause for grave concern to this headquarters." That really shouldn't be interpreted so wildly. Whenever "grave concern" is used in a message, all that means is that the message is classified Secret, and since it's stamped Secret at the top of this now-declassified message, it really shouldn't be considered as an exceptional sign of a concern that goes beyond the classification.

ciao -- James Carlson

Link to comment
Share on other sites

name='James Carlson' date='Oct 23 2006, 12:30 AM' post='1400428']

Maybe it's just me, but I've got to be honest with you, I get this impression a lot when it comes to things like UFO reports. It's just a vague uneasiness, frankly, but with UFO reports, it does seem like there are people out there keeping an eye open for incidents that go back a few years that they can spin into a UFO contact story. Take for example this incident at Malmstrom AFB. When Robert Salas first wrote up his little story for publication, he said that he worked at November Flight LLC -- you'll note that isn't anywhere near Echo Flight where my Dad worked, and where the missile systems were shut down due to that 10 volt pulse we've already mentioned. There were rumors of UFO activity for that period at November Flight, and that's probably why Salas wanted people to think he had worked there, not realizing that someone might actually remember that he never worked at November Flight. Salas worked at Oscar Flight -- and you'll note that nothing ever happened at Oscar-Flight whatsoever.

No dates, no names, no verification -- NOTHING. But it's this ridiculous bit of testimony that puts UFOs at Echo Flight -- nothing else.

Actually, that is where you are incorrect. It was no secret that Air Force contractors became involved in the Malmstrom AFB incident to investigate what happened at the Malmstrom AFB missiles fields and another missile commander from another flight also confirmed the incident because he was affected as well. In 1975, UFOs made a repeat visit at Malmstrom AFB only this time two interceptors were scrambled after the UFO. This document confirms official Air Force acknowledgement that the Malmstrom AFB incident took place as reported. Note, Hill AFB on the document. I was stationed at Hill AFB after my deployment in Vietnam. At Hill AFB, there was a special train that was sent to retrieve Minuteman missiles to bring them to Hill AFB. I often watched in amazement as a huge white trailer lowered and raised the missiles from a special silo next to my building.

http://www.cufon.org/cufon/malmstrom/5_msg1.gif

This is the Director's log on the 1975 Malmstrom AFB incident. Note: There is no queston the Director's log is referring to UFOs in the vincinity of the Malmstrom AFB missile fields.

http://www.nicap.org/foia_002.htm

Edited by skyeagle409
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My personal view on The Disclosure Project is that it is one of the most convincing i've seen to date.

As far as the TDP interviews go, hav'nt their been professional theropists of any kind come forward stateing that these people are telling the truth, lying out their teeth, under hypnotic mind control or drugged to the eye balls,...or mabe all the above put together, just by body observation or even LDT.

My apoligy if this question has been asked and or answered before, i hav'nt had a chance to read the whole thread.

Edited by REBEL
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is what drives people crazy, when people muddy the waters to make a name for themselves. If this guy was working in another area and it could be proved then he is an idiot. The fact that there is someone's kid on here is totally aware of the facts and willing to share is strange too. I want to believe, but I want there to be more proof even more than I want ot believe. :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd be interested to know why your dad didn't go on tv to clear this all up though??..Afterall he could have stipulated his fee went to charity and had the producers add a note overthe credits to make this clear couldn't he?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought Greer a very intelligent person. I heard a whole show on coast to coast.. hadn't really heard him before. If one has had TRUE ET experiences, obviously they can tell if the person is telling the truth or lying. When he talked about vectoring, that is innate to me.. he knows what he's doing. It would be more interesting to have a one on one WITH HIM, instead of posting it on a bulletin board, so that he can answer the comments you make.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought Greer a very intelligent person. I heard a whole show on coast to coast.. hadn't really heard him before. If one has had TRUE ET experiences, obviously they can tell if the person is telling the truth or lying. When he talked about vectoring, that is innate to me.. he knows what he's doing. It would be more interesting to have a one on one WITH HIM, instead of posting it on a bulletin board, so that he can answer the comments you make.

I thought Greer credible also, but people claim he's a little el wacko. :mellow:

I think the truth will come out sooner rather than later about The disclosure Project and Greer himself. :mellow:

Reason being, it's such a hot topic and the claims being made are mind blowing. :w00t:

Edited by REBEL
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, that is where you are incorrect. It was no secret that Air Force contractors became involved in the Malmstrom AFB incident to investigate what happened at the Malmstrom AFB missiles fields and another missile commander from another flight also confirmed the incident because he was affected as well. In 1975, UFOs made a repeat visit at Malmstrom AFB only this time two interceptors were scrambled after the UFO. This document confirms official Air Force acknowledgement that the Malmstrom AFB incident took place as reported. Note, Hill AFB on the document. I was stationed at Hill AFB after my deployment in Vietnam. At Hill AFB, there was a special train that was sent to retrieve Minuteman missiles to bring them to Hill AFB. I often watched in amazement as a huge white trailer lowered and raised the missiles from a special silo next to my building.

http://www.cufon.org/cufon/malmstrom/5_msg1.gif

This is the Director's log on the 1975 Malmstrom AFB incident. Note: There is no queston the Director's log is referring to UFOs in the vincinity of the Malmstrom AFB missile fields.

http://www.nicap.org/foia_002.htm

My apologies -- I was perhaps too inclusive and may have given the impression that there has NEVER been any other evidence of UFO sightings at Malmstrom. I meant to convey -- and obviously did a poor job of it -- that there was never any evidence of UFO incidents involving the Malmstrom AFB missile failures in March, 1967. I don't know anything about the incidents of 1975. By 1975, we were living in Atlanta -- we hadn't lived in Montana for many years by that time. As for the missile failures in 1967, all of that information has been declassified and released via FOIA queries, and the investigation regarding this was extemely thorough, as can be expected. None of the other Flights had missile failures at the time -- only Echo-Flight -- and the only UFO rumors around any of the Flights were at November Flight, and these were discounted by the mobile security teams, each and every member of which testified that absolutely nothing odd had happened. Don Crawford was a member of the relief team at Echo-Flight, and his testimony regarding UFOs has no dates, no specifics, no names and no facts -- it can't even be supported as believable background information. Slas wasn't at Echo-Flight or November-Flight, although he did try to claim at first that he was at November. He was at Oscar-Flight, and none of his claims are supported by anything, not even bits and pieces confirmed by other witnesses. He claims a member of the security team was injured and had to be evadcuated by helicopter, but he doesn't give any names, there are no hospital records available, and this person has never come forward. He further claims that when he called in the UFO report, his commander heard the warning klaxons sounding, then "another alarm went off at another site, then another and another simultaneously. Within the next few seconds, we had lost six to eight missiles to a 'No-Go' (inoperable) condition." If this is true, why was ther eno investigation, like we saw at Echo-Flight? Salas was the Deputy Crew Commander (as was Don Crawford), yet he expects us to believe that aalthough all of this noise and power anomalies going on at Oscar-Flight, the actual Crew Commander neglected to log it on the watch log. In addition, the Crew Commander has never come forward, there's no corroberating eyewitness reports, no security team logs, and no next-day visits by civil contractors, like we saw at Echo-Flight. Can you think of anything more unlikely? We're talking, after all, about a nuclear silo system during one of the most stress-laden periods of the Cold War. And yet there's NOTHING, not even a Blue Book investigation, and they looked into just about everything else.

Salas is such a bullsh**ter. He's changed his story so many times now, his credibility is crap. He now says "I [now] think it is more likely that Oscar Flight went down on some date after the Echo Flight [shutdown]. In other words, he now claims to have no knowledge of UFOs at Echo-Flight! Look at his history: He first said he was at November Flight and saw the UFOs that were originally rumors. Ooops -- the lie was caught. Then he testifies to detailed incidents at Echo-Flight, although he was never there, and an investigation of the missile failures that he had nothing to do with. He says "I think, Oscar wasn't mentioned later is because by then the Air Force wanted to keep a secrecy lid on it and avoid the possibility of a leak by the indication of a growing and continuing problem. That would have made quite some headlines in the press." He also claims that he "personally received a call from an NCO after the Oscar shutdowns, practically begging me to come talk to him and others about the incident." If so, where is the investigation report? Do you think there would have been no investigation? This guy isn't just a liar, he's a stupid liar. He's even changed the date now -- March 23-25 -- claiming that his memory is faulty. I guess his memory wasn't to faulty to write a book on it.

James Carlson

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah there was this other "el wacko" back in the day going around telling people that the Earth revolved around the sun, nobody believed him either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

name='James Carlson' date='Oct 24 2006, 07:34 AM' post='1402099']

My apologies -- I was perhaps too inclusive and may have given the impression that there has NEVER been any other evidence of UFO sightings at Malmstrom. I meant to convey -- and obviously did a poor job of it -- that there was never any evidence of UFO incidents involving the Malmstrom AFB missile failures in March, 1967.

My base at Hill, (OOAMA) was involved in the 1967 Malmstrom AFB incident investigation and sent additional engineering suport to aid in the investigation and that was in regards to E-Flight's missiles. What many folks were unaware of is that there were numerous UFO reports in the general area and some of those reports came from non-military sources including sheriff duputies. One report even listed a UFO landing near Belt. That report was issued on March 25, 1967 by the 341 SMW, to the following on the distribution list:

RUWMBOA---Washington D.C.

RUEDHQA/OSAF---Washington D.C.

RUEDHQA/CSAF---Washington D.C.

RUEDHQA/FTG---Wright-Patterson AFB

There seems to have been quite a bit of UFO activity in that part of the United States. Just a few months ago, interviews of the B-52 crew that was involved in the Minot AFB UFO sighting were interviewed on TV. That UFO incident happened in the same month and year as the Malmstrom AFB incident.

http://www.nicap.org/670305dir.htm

The Soviets also revealed that UFOs also affected their strategic missiles. In one case, one of the missiles indicated a ready-to-launch condition, which sent cold chills down the spines of the Soviet missile commanders because something had taken control of one of their missiles. The Soviets blamed a UFO that was seen hovering nearby. It seems that UFOs have affected other nuclear facilities as well. One of my compatriots who was at RAF Bent-Waters in 1980, told me that in the Rendlesham case, a UFO affected nuclear weapons, which were stored there.

Salas said the military personnel saw a UFO and others say they did not and I would find it very strange that security personnel in the O-Flight area didn't see what many other military personnel and civilians were reporting. The following is what Salas had stated.

Captain Robert Salas

["...The same thing occurred at ECHO Flight." ECHO Flight is another squadron, I'd say probably 50 - 60 miles away from our location but they had the same sort of thing happen. They had UFOs that were hovering, not at the launch control facility but at the actual launch facilities where the missiles are located. They had some maintenance and security people out there at the time and they observed the UFOs at those sites. Now they lost all ten of their weapons' all ten."]

According to official documentation issued from Hill AFB, that is the number of missiles affected but only E-Flight's missiles were investigated.

Edited by skyeagle409
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What exactly has the disclosure project disclosed; anyone know?...maybe they cut a deal with SETI to just play dumb! :alien:<_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

name='limited' date='Oct 24 2006, 06:46 PM' post='1402693']

What exactly has the disclosure project disclosed; anyone know?...maybe they cut a deal with SETI to just play dumb! :alien:<_<

Actually, I think the SETI is a joke and as Frank Drake once mentioned in a video interview, he could "very well be part of a cover-up" and he said it with a smile on his face.

You can go here to the Disclosure Project website.

The Disclosure Project

The Disclosure Project is a nonprofit research project working to fully disclose the facts about UFOs, extraterrestrial intelligence, and classified advanced energy and propulsion systems. We have over 400 government, military, and intelligence community witnesses testifying to their direct, personal, first hand experience with UFOs, ETs, ET technology, and the cover-up that keeps this information secret.

http://www.disclosureproject.org/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah there was this other "el wacko" back in the day going around telling people that the Earth revolved around the sun, nobody believed him either.

Yea, first they wanted to BBQ him for it, but instead they threw him in a dungeon for life. Then they labled el wacko just for good measure.

That's just typical of human nature 'c'. Shoot first, ask questions later.

Or if you like, How much easier it is to be critical than to be correct.

The greatest obstacle to discovering the shape of the earth was not ignorance but the illusion of knowlege. - Daniel J. Boorstin.

Edited by REBEL
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My base at Hill, (OOAMA) was involved in the 1967 Malmstrom AFB incident investigation and sent additional engineering suport to aid in the investigation and that was in regards to E-Flight's missiles. What many folks were unaware of is that there were numerous UFO reports in the general area and some of those reports came from non-military sources including sheriff duputies. One report even listed a UFO landing near Belt. That report was issued on March 25, 1967 by the 341 SMW, to the following on the distribution list:

RUWMBOA---Washington D.C.

RUEDHQA/OSAF---Washington D.C.

RUEDHQA/CSAF---Washington D.C.

RUEDHQA/FTG---Wright-Patterson AFB

There seems to have been quite a bit of UFO activity in that part of the United States. Just a few months ago, interviews of the B-52 crew that was involved in the Minot AFB UFO sighting were interviewed on TV. That UFO incident happened in the same month and year as the Malmstrom AFB incident.

http://www.nicap.org/670305dir.htm

The Soviets also revealed that UFOs also affected their strategic missiles. In one case, one of the missiles indicated a ready-to-launch condition, which sent cold chills down the spines of the Soviet missile commanders because something had taken control of one of their missiles. The Soviets blamed a UFO that was seen hovering nearby. It seems that UFOs have affected other nuclear facilities as well. One of my compatriots who was at RAF Bent-Waters in 1980, told me that in the Rendlesham case, a UFO affected nuclear weapons, which were stored there.

Salas said the military personnel saw a UFO and others say they did not and I would find it very strange that security personnel in the O-Flight area didn't see what many other military personnel and civilians were reporting. The following is what Salas had stated.

Captain Robert Salas

["...The same thing occurred at ECHO Flight." ECHO Flight is another squadron, I'd say probably 50 - 60 miles away from our location but they had the same sort of thing happen. They had UFOs that were hovering, not at the launch control facility but at the actual launch facilities where the missiles are located. They had some maintenance and security people out there at the time and they observed the UFOs at those sites. Now they lost all ten of their weapons' all ten."]

According to official documentation issued from Hill AFB, that is the number of missiles affected but only E-Flight's missiles were investigated.

You're right -- that's exactly what Salas says -- and for years he maintained that UFOs shut down the missiles at Echo-Flight on March 16 1967. But, he was never there, he was never involved in the investigation, and everything he's ever said on the subject of Echo-Flight has been repeatedly disproven. Everytime an incident he that he's discussed is disproved, he changes his story. And now, he maintains that he had it all wrong -- UFOs had nothing to do with the shutdown at Echo-Flight. He says his memory of the events is faulty, but he still wrote a book on the subject! That doesn't sound like faulty memory -- if you've got faulty memory you don't write a book on he subject. You might do that, however, if you're a liar. The final report of the shutdown at Echo-Flight is very well known; if missiles were also shutdown as Oscar-Flight, as Salas now contends, why was there no summary or final report of the investigation, like there was at Echo-Flight? Salas wants us to believe that the government didn't publish a final report because they wanted to cover up the incident, but you and I both know that the government doesn't cover up an incident by ignoring it -- they publish a report of an investigation that says the reason the missiles shut down was something very conventional, like a computer error. By ignoring it, especially when there are other witnesses, you're simply throwing extra wood on the fire, calling attention to the incident by your very silence on the matter. Before believing him, I'd like to know why the Crew Commander -- his direct superior -- has never mentioned it to anybody; I'd like to know who these security personnel he continuously mentions were, why there aren't any debriefing statements available, even if just to deny any UFO observations.

In fact, Salas never changes his story until someone comes around and refutes his "evidence," so as far I'm concerned his credibility is crap. You can believe him if you want to, but I think you'd have to be pretty naive to do so. As for non-military reports of UFOs, I've got to tell you, that has no bearing at all on whether or not the missiles my father was in charge of were shut down by UFOs. There are no witnesses at all, civilian or military, that indicate UFOs were hovering around or landing at Echo-Flight. Security teams at both Echo-Flight and November-Flight were interviewed -- interviews that even Salas now agrees were accurate -- and they all said the same thing: nothing strange happened. At Echo-Flight, the power grid dropped off line, the backup generators came on automatically as it was designed to, and the ten Echo-Flight missiles shut down. This was due to a power surge in the logic coupler of about ten volts. There were no reports of UFOs except those from Salas made many years later, reports that he now claims were incorrect. There were no civilian UFO reports made that night, and no military reports made that night either. The investigation even went into full radar and atmospheric characteristics, because they needed to know whether a lightning strike may have caused the power surge; all of the radar and atmospheric reports were also negative. There isn't a single piece of evidence supporting the claims Salas made regarding the Echo- and November-Flights -- nothing. The man has simply been caught telling too many lies, and I think any honest person would have to discount everything he has ever said on the subject -- and this is the ONLY person who has ever claimed that UFOs They had UFOs "were hovering, not at the launch control facility but at the actual launch facilities where the missiles are located. They had some maintenance and security people out there at the time and they observed the UFOs at those sites. Now they lost all ten of their weapons' all ten." The reports of the investigation, however, includes interviews with all of the maintenance and security people, and not one of them support his claims. There's absolutely nothing that supports his story in way whatsoever. On the other hand, there are a lot of people who have said there were no UFOs. You can believe his story about Oscar-Flight, if you like, but ask yourself, if a member of Congress was trying to substantiate some kind of an outrageous claim, and was forced to retract those claims on three separate occasions, changing his story each time to take into account each discrepancy, finally resting on a single tale that no one can challenge until the next eyewitness comes forward to note another fault in his story, and if this Congressman then writes a book on the topic, much of which he ends up having to deny -- well, would you believe him? Would you still trust him?

I don't discount that UFOs may have showed up in other places from 1967 to now. Maybe they did buzz nuclear missiles sites in Great Britain, the Soviet Union, or other U.S. sites -- I just don't know. What I do know, however, is that UFOs were not involved in the shutdown of missiles at Echo-Flight on March 16, 1967, and that Robert Salas has repeatedly lied about the topic -- lies that have all been disputed so often and so definitively, that he has now been forced to change his entire tale. In my opinion, everything he has ever said on the subject should be most strenuously doubted. As for me, I believe my father, who was only the on-duty Crew Commander at Echo-Flight on March 16, 1967 when the ten missiles dropped offline for what was later determined to be a power surge. Not only can he speak on the subject with a hell of a lot more authority than Robert Salas, he's also possessed with a hell of a lot more integrity.

ciao -- James Carlson

Link to comment
Share on other sites

exackery REBEL, I have always said that all these wonderful things people enjoy that enrich or enhance their life were once the flights of fancy for some daydreamer. Ford probably had the same problems trying to convince everyone that a machine that had the word combustion in it wouldn't blow people to kingdom come. Why doubt something new, why are new ideas so scorned. Its a product of the over all intellectual laziness of the human race. Where one new thought can cause you to reevaluate a lot of different things. Pride comes into play here too, people of a higher intellect who have been told all thier lives how smart they are, don't like to here that they are not as smart as they think. Ego has destroyed more knowledge than all the libraries now hold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd be interested to know why your dad didn't go on tv to clear this all up though??..Afterall he could have stipulated his fee went to charity and had the producers add a note overthe credits to make this clear couldn't he?

That's a good question, and I asked him about it. I think his answer shows a pretty wide-ranged understanding of the whole UFO witness phenomenon -- especially when people are willing to come forward to show how ridiculous some of those claims can be (NOT all -- "some" of the claims -- neither one of us can possibly say, or would even want to do so, that ALL UFO sightings are bunk; we speak of what we know, and don't claim to have any insight on anything else or any other sightings).

He told me a couple of things -- first, that there would be no fees whatsoever -- and that means even if he were stipulate giving the money to charity, there wouldn't be any. People simply don't pay to have their eyewitness reports confirmed as "nothing special". They want UFOs -- and they'll pay you for testimony, for video tapes, and a LOT for books, but they won't pay you to come forward and tell them that the stories they've already paid for are fiction.

Second, if he came forward and pointed out the errors and showed exactly where the crap on the road was, he would be doing so for the rest of his life, over and over again, and he just didn't care that much about it, and was too old to want to keep going over the same incident in his life over and over again. You can hardly blame him. I came forward on this forum to tell his story about a single night in March, 1967, and all of sudden there are people misinterpreting my story, coming to the conclusion that I'm saying ALL of the UFO reports at Malmstrom AFB were false, including sightings in 1975. I correct that impression, saying that I'm speaking only about the Echo-Flight missile shutdowns of March 16, 1967, and then someone adds that I'm wrong, there were missile shutdowns in Great Britain, the Soviet Union, and the U.S. So I answer again -- you're really not paying attention to what I'm writing. Feel free to believe anything you like -- it doesn't affect me, and this is still America -- believe what you want, I don't care. I honestly don't know anything about missile sightings at nuclear silos all over the planet -- why would I? I doubt anybody does. I do have some knowledge, however, that might help you reach a decision regarding this one, little incident. Some of the ramifications of this one incident, however, are a bit farther reaching, but only because the source of the original reports -- Mr. Robert Salas -- can be shown as having repeatedly lied about the one incident he claims to be an authority on. I point that out, and I show people through this forum exactly when, how, and what he lied about, and suggest that maybe people might want to take this into account before they accept any other stories this man has to offer up, and some people reach the conclusion that I must have an agenda of my own. It's even been suggested that I'm wrong, because my story doesn't match the story that Robert Salas has to tell! Well, of course it doesn't. I know that the man's a liar -- why would our stories match? All I'm asking is that you take a look at the history of his disclosure -- he mentions no witnesses, he gives no specific dates, and his story, now that he's finally stopped changing it for the moment, can't be confirmed or checked out by anybody. Why would anybody possibly anything this man has to say?

Can you imagine my father coming forward with his story? He would never be able to rest; he would be spending every day retelling the same incident and having people misinterpret his claims for purely emotional reasons. He would be spending the rest of his life on the defensive for doing little more than pointing out to people that Robert Salas is a liar, and shouldn't be trusted. He doesn't care that much about the subject to put himself into that kind of a position. He's recovering from heart surgery, and isn't the healthiest man of his age -- which is, frankly, advanced. He's very proud of the many years he gave to his nation in service with the Air Force, and he has no intention of being forced into the position where he'd have to continuously defend himself and his integrity to a bunch of people he doesn't know, who would apparently prefer to believe that he's spent the better part of his life lying about an incident that was repeatedly investigated and disclosed and researched and accepted as a minor electrical fault until Robert Salas comes out of the closet to declare that aliens from outer space shutdown our nuclear defense capabilities during my father's watch, and that anybody who declares differently is covering up the truth. There's not a single good reason for someone in his position to come forward, unless that person was so concerned with what the UFO-believer community thought that he'd be willing to make such a large sacrifice in order to correct that coummunity's misconceptions. And to put it bluntly, he really doesn't give a damn about UFOs, those people who believe in them, and those people who profit from them. He's never seen one, has little opinion on their existence, and his only contribution to the question can summarized in the following: "Robert Salas is a liar; he has repeatedly changed his story when confronted with his lies; he has made a lot of money from his lies and then retracted them; his history of lies is easily verified, and anybody who believes him is an idiot."

ciao -- James Carlson

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I came forward on this forum to tell his story about a single night in March, 1967, and all of sudden there are people misinterpreting my story, coming to the conclusion that I'm saying ALL of the UFO reports at Malmstrom AFB were false, including sightings in 1975. I correct that impression, saying that I'm speaking only about the Echo-Flight missile shutdowns of March 16, 1967, and then someone adds that I'm wrong, there were missile shutdowns in Great Britain, the Soviet Union, and the U.S. So I answer again -- you're really not paying attention to what I'm writing. Feel free to believe anything you like -- it doesn't affect me, and this is still America -- believe what you want, I don't care.

Hey James,

I'm sorry for not responding sooner than I have. I have to say your responses have been very enlightning.

As an amature researcher I find it isn't always prudent to respond immediately. However, I've completely understood what you have related here , and haven't misunderstood anything you've said.

So please keep that in mind that what your saying is being looked at seriously, and your not wasting your breath here.

l_s

Edited by lost_shaman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

name='James Carlson' date='Oct 26 2006, 02:18 AM' post='1404754']

That's a good question, and I asked him about it. I think his answer shows a pretty wide-ranged understanding of the whole UFO witness phenomenon -- especially when people are willing to come forward to show how ridiculous some of those claims can be (NOT all -- "some" of the claims -- neither one of us can possibly say, or would even want to do so, that ALL UFO sightings are bunk; we speak of what we know, and don't claim to have any insight on anything else or any other sightings).

I agree with FireMoon, and I think that he should come out and clear up the issue regarding Salas but I wonder if the UFO document, which emanated from Malmstrom AFB on March 25, 1967, and the UFO incident over Minot's Minuteman missile fields on March 5, 1967, had something to do with the Malmstrom AFB issue being what it is today.

What hurts the whole UFO issue the most are those who concoct UFO hoaxes and those who are out to make a 'fast buck' on the UFO enigma. And once again, I can confirm that my former base supported the investigation into the Malmstrom AFB shutdowns because I have seen the documents to that effect and that was in regards to E-Flight's missiles since Hill AFB had a responsibility toward Minuteman missiles but there is nothing in those documents that support Salas's claims so I think that it is imperative that this issue be cleared up and the more support, the better.

Edited by skyeagle409
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Ok, Drew...

the statement you made about technology destroying the earth, is what I would mainly like to comment on.

First of all, technology has so far been very detrimental, not to the "earth" but to the life and ecosystems on the earth. The earth cannot "die" by humans hands, though most of the current life upon it likely could. I would reccomend reading the writings of scientist James E. Lovelock. Secondly, although it is very true that technologies are damaging to the global environment, it is also true the technology is progressing in a way that is becoming less impactful and if we continue on the current trend, we may all be able to not only lesson our footprint, but possibly even reverse some of the damage which has already been done (with the assistance of the earths natural ability to regenerate and regulate itself, of course).

As far as debunking the Project for Disclosure, I actually found this thread while searching for a valid debunking if this project. Unfortunately, I was unable to find that here. Your comments, though somehwat persuasive, are based on your personal beliefs. The fact is, that none of us truly know any of the answers to the questions that we are asking, and there are likely very few men who do. I found the press release to be very interesting, however I am unable to fully believe ANYTHING without seenig or experiancing it for myself. Even, if I saw a UFO myself, I wouldn't entirely believe it until I could verify it with my other senses as well. There are such things as naturally occuring illusions, or even unnatural illusions. The only reason i give any of this any credit at all is the consistency in eye witness accounts, and the consistency of data from electronic equipment (i.e. radar). There are so many things we do not understand, we should really try to avoid jumping to conclusions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as debunking the Project for Disclosure, I actually found this thread while searching for a valid debunking if this project. Unfortunately, I was unable to find that here. Your comments, though somehwat persuasive, are based on your personal beliefs. The fact is, that none of us truly know any of the answers to the questions that we are asking, and there are likely very few men who do. I found the press release to be very interesting, however I am unable to fully believe ANYTHING without seenig or experiancing it for myself. Even, if I saw a UFO myself, I wouldn't entirely believe it until I could verify it with my other senses as well. There are such things as naturally occuring illusions, or even unnatural illusions. The only reason i give any of this any credit at all is the consistency in eye witness accounts, and the consistency of data from electronic equipment (i.e. radar). There are so many things we do not understand, we should really try to avoid jumping to conclusions.

I would agree with you. As I see it there is not really any reason to debunk the disclosure project as there is nothing to debunk, in my honest opinion. They put out a lot of declassified papers, however, most of it is not really relevant as it is either completely unsubstantiated or way past due it's expiration date. And no conclusions has really come out of it. So while the Disclosure project have had a reason for being in existence, well, I think it should change to being more of a searchable library so one can make one's own conclusions rather than this sitting-between-two-chairs entity it is now.

Best,

Badeskov

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Debunked? Not hardly.....

What color is the sky Drew?

Whatever color you would say I will disagree with you and therefore I have debunked your theory about the color of the sky.

Just trying to follow your logic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They put out a lot of declassified papers, however, most of it is not really relevant as it is either completely unsubstantiated or way past due it's expiration date.

Actually, some of those cases presented at the Disclosure Project are well known, and have been substantiated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder what drives these 'alone in the universe' guys. How does all this energy go into defying logic and reason just to be the only organisms in the universe?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder what drives these 'alone in the universe' guys. How does all this energy go into defying logic and reason just to be the only organisms in the universe?

It is amazing, given the numbers in the universe.

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.