Roswell UFO - Stalin Did It, Says Book
    By Hank Campbell | May 19th 2011 06:50 PM | 20 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments

    Comments

    This is just some more disinformation fed by the US military/intelligence apparatus to another gullible researcher/reporter (or she maybe part of the conspiracy). The idea is to confuse the story about UFOs so much that no one will believe anything. The truth is that extraterrestrial aliens did crash land in Roswell in 1947 and that Area 5 does have extraterrestrials working with US scientists as consultants on advanced technologies See ufocoverup.org for more info

    Gerhard Adam
    I can't believe you used the word "gullible" in your post.  "Confused" doesn't even begin to describe it. 

    The web-link you provided is a hoot! 
    Mundus vult decipi
    This was an Alien craft/ along with bodies NOT OF THIS WORLD.

    Gerhard Adam
    ...of course it was ...
    Mundus vult decipi
    Bonny Bonobo alias Brat
    The book that I own and have open in front of me now is called ‘The Day After Roswell’ written by the former Pentagon Official Colonel Philip J. Corso (Ret.) in which he claims to reveal a cover up about a 1947 crashed UFO at Roswell and the alien technology that it contained.

    Regardless of whether you believe in the existence of UFOs (and I didn't until I saw one myself) and aliens, the credentials of the author are quite impressive but of course this doesn’t mean that he didn’t go mad or lose the plot in later life. The book was also co-authored by William J. Birnes PhD who was editor in chief of the McGraw-Hill Personal Computer Programming Encyclopedia.

    The facts, whether you like them or not, are that for many years Colonel Philip J Corso was a key army intelligence officer who served on General MacArthur’s staff in Korea and later as a member of President Eisenhower’s National Security Council and the former head of the Foreigh Technology Desk at the US Army’s Research&Development department. In 1961 Corsos was a Lieutenant Colonel who was in command of one of the Pentagon’s highly classified weapons development budgets and during his 21 year military career he was honored with 19 medals for meritorious service. 

    He retired from the army in 1963 and went on to serve US Senators James Eastland and Strom Thurmond (who writes the Roswell book's foreword) as a staff member specialising in national security. Since then he has worked for the private sector as a consultant and contracts administrator. He was also employed as an expert commentator about Cold War U2 flights and testified before the House National Security Committee about American POWs being held in North Korea.

    In 1997 Corso published his book which made claims that he says were supported at the time by recently declassified, 50 year old documents which had just been made available through the Freedom of Information Act. In it he also says that he was provided with artifacts and secret information regarding the dismantling and appropriation of a crashed extra terrestrial spacecraft and he also identifies other US army personnel who were involved in the subsequent crashed UFO cover up and supply of disinformation to the American public and the eventual reverse-engineering of the alien technology found and which was then apparently reutilised and ‘seeded’ into the private sector.

    The book goes into quite boring, lengthy detail about how Corso managed a project that ‘seeded’ the alien technology recovered from the spacecraft into American companies such as IBM, Hughes Aircraft, Bell Labs and Dow Corning without them realising where the new technology had come from. He claims that these ‘seeded’ technologies were the precursors for today’s integrated circuit chips, fiber optics, lasers, and super-tenacity fibers. He also believes that this new technology enabled the US to then surpass the Russians in space and even spurred new initiatives such as SDI, Horizon and HAARP.

    I don't recommend the book for the general public, but do recommend it for techheads who can happily read reams of information about the possible real or imagined history of some of the emerging technology that we rely so heavily upon now.
    My article about researchers identifying a potential blue green algae cause & L-Serine treatment for Lou Gehrig's ALS, MND, Parkinsons & Alzheimers is at http://www.science20.com/forums/medicine
    Hank
    The facts, whether you like them or not, are that for many years Colonel Philip J Corso was a key army intelligence officer who served on General MacArthur’s staff in Korea, then later was a member of President Eisenhower’s National Security Council and the former head of the Foreigh Technology Desk at the US Army’s Research&Development department. 
    I doubt anyone sees any issue with his biography.  How that legitimizes your belief in a vast conspiracy to keep alien life from us is less clear.   Imagine if this study were produced:  "Cause of schizophrenia in old maids discovered: It's cats!"

    You can see why a researcher might have his correlation/causation arrows all messed up in that case but when it comes to your belief you saw an alien ship (or is the sentence "Regardless of whether you believe in the existence of UFOs (and I didn't until I saw one myself" not meant to convey aliens?) you don't seem to see any problem.    I have seen plenty of things I could not identify, that did not make them aliens.   
    Bonny Bonobo alias Brat
    Hank, where did I say that I 'believe' in a 'vast conspiracy to keep alien life from us'? I was just informing people about another book about Roswell and the crashed UFO that this blog is about. I also never said that the UFO that I saw was an alien aircraft, it was just an unidentified flying object. However, if I hadn't seen the UFO I would never have bothered to buy and read Corso's boring book or about 30+ other books that I have about UFOs. Yes I'm interested in UFOs and books about them, does that make me a schizophrenic old maid who is being controlled by cats? If so, where's your evidence?
    My article about researchers identifying a potential blue green algae cause & L-Serine treatment for Lou Gehrig's ALS, MND, Parkinsons & Alzheimers is at http://www.science20.com/forums/medicine
    Hank
    You always do this.

    You write things like:
    Regardless of whether you believe in the existence of UFOs (and I didn't until I saw one myself) 
    and then insist you didn't mean anything by it - "I also never said that the UFO that I saw was an alien aircraft" - well, who would ever deny seeing something they simply could not identify?  No one.  Why bother telling us 'whether we believe' in them or not and you didn't until you saw one - that was literally the first time you saw something and didn't know what it was, so you decided to buy a book an a government cover-up about alien life on Earth?   

    Basically, in every kooky speculation you decide to throw out, you first try to paint yourself as a neutral observer, then you throw out the kooky conclusion you always meant to throw out, then you say you never claimed to know what you are talking about.  So can we just skip to the part where you don't know what you are talking about and stop intermixing unidentified things with aliens and then saying you aren't doing it?  You know you are, I know you are, it isn't clever.
    Bonny Bonobo alias Brat
    that was literally the first time you saw something and didn't know what it was, so you decided to buy a book an a government cover-up about alien life on Earth?   
    It wasn't the first time I saw something and didn't know what it was. Once, at dusk I saw what looked like a slow moving star which I had assumed was a satellite heading northwards which suddenly altered direction and got me wondering what it could have been. Eventually I spoke to a guy in an observatory in Perth who said it was the European Space Station slightly changing direction over Byron Bay, the easterly most point in Australia, which it does quite often to recalibrate. So I was able to identify what it was after a couple of hours of investigation.

    If one morning you and a friend saw a round, saucer shaped, metallic 'UFO' which looked to be about the size of a double garage from your deck and it was silently rotating, and staying in one location for about 20 minutes and then you focused a telescope on it and saw it up close and still had absolutely no idea what it was, and then it suddenly tilted 45% and seemed to move in upwards in that direction before suddenly disappearing into thin air, what would you do and think? Wouldn't you also read up about UFOs like I did? Why does that mean that I have a definite opinion about what it was and believe in aliens any more than I have a definite opinion yet about whether there is substantial AGW? 
    Basically, in every kooky speculation you decide to throw out, you first try to paint yourself as a neutral observer, then you throw out the kooky conclusion you always meant to throw out, then you say you never claimed to know what you are talking about. So can we just skip to the part where you don't know what you are talking about and stop intermixing unidentified things with aliens and then saying you aren't doing it? You know you are, I know you are, it isn't clever.
    Hank, I'm not trying to be clever. People like me can search for knowledge and read books about a subject without necessarily being convinced one way or the other. I don't think that not having an opinion precludes me from making comments about what I have observed and read but maybe you think it does? 

    Its funny, I've just had breakfast with my husband and he more or less said the same thing, that if I didn't get off the fence about AGW then it could be grounds for divorce after over 25 years of married life. He feels that my attitude gives ammunition to the AGW skeptics and also it infuriates him. This fits nicely with your blog in which you reported that many couples were more likely to share the same political views than a lot of other attributes. 

    Next comment you'll probably say how it never ceases to amaze you how I make everything about me. Well that's the way I am, sorry but I don't think that my personal anecdotal experience is irrelevant to my viewpoint which is why I often express it in my comments. I am also female and that also probably makes a difference as to how I perceive and express things here. Is it really such a big problem?



    My article about researchers identifying a potential blue green algae cause & L-Serine treatment for Lou Gehrig's ALS, MND, Parkinsons & Alzheimers is at http://www.science20.com/forums/medicine
    Gerhard Adam
    I don't think that not having an opinion precludes me from making comments about what I have observed and read but maybe you think it does?
    What you don't seem to understand is that when you make comments, you commit yourself to expressing a particular perspective which is definitely NOT neutral.  When you mention UFOs and aliens in the same sentence, that isn't neutral. 

    Even your comment about AGW ... I can appreciate your husband's comments because it seems that you're more contrary than you are skeptical.  You claim to have no opinion, and yet you defend particular points of view.   In that respect your husband is correct about providing ammunition to AGW skeptics.  You don't keep your opinion to yourself until you've satisfied your quest for information and settled the issue.  You insist on arguing on their behalf hoping that someone along the way will convince you otherwise.

    As I've said before .... if you're looking to be convinced then you're wasting your time.  You must do the necessary research to determine what you believe.  If you insist on defending a position during the interim, then you shouldn't be surprised when you get blasted for having an opinion and not being regarded as neutral.
    Mundus vult decipi
    Gerhard Adam
    Helen, the impression you give is quite specific.  You're the one that specifically associated aliens with UFO's.
    Regardless of whether you believe in the existence of UFOs (and I didn't until I saw one myself) and aliens...
    More to the point, why would you think that a "belief" would be questioned?  After all, if something is simply unidentified then there is nothing to dispute.  The only reason to suggest that one might or might not believe in the "existence of UFOs" is if you are claiming more than the mere fact that they are unidentified.
    ...about 30+ other books that I have about UFOs
    You see, this is also where you play a bit loose with the definitions.  Clearly you don't have 30+ books about unidentified "whatevers".  You have 30+ books that undoubtedly discuss the issue of alien visitation and whether these "unidentified" aircraft are their space ships.

    This is very similar to the word games I've heard religious people use when they claim to be tolerant of other religions, while expressing "faith" that eventually these other people will come around to the one "true" religion. 


     
    Mundus vult decipi
    Bonny Bonobo alias Brat
    Helen, the impression you give is quite specific.  You're the one that specifically associated aliens with UFO's.
    Gerhard, Hank wrote the following about aliens and a spacecraft in the opening paragraph of this blog, not me. I was just making what i felt was a relevant comment. Sometimes I feel that everything I comment here is perceived as wrong by you guys but I still can't really understand why?
    Unless you have culturally been living under a rock, you have heard of Area 51 - Roswell, New Mexico.   Supposedly an alien spacecraft came down there in 1947 and a vast government conspiracy sprung up to build the thing and keep it secret for nearly 70 years.

    My article about researchers identifying a potential blue green algae cause & L-Serine treatment for Lou Gehrig's ALS, MND, Parkinsons & Alzheimers is at http://www.science20.com/forums/medicine
    Gerhard Adam
    How does Hank saying "supposedly" translate into "whether you believe it or not"?

    Quite frankly, it was you comment about how you didn't believe in UFOs until you had seen one yourself.  Whether you meant it or not, you made the point that you now believe in UFOs.  As has already been stated, that isn't necessary if you only treated them as unidentified aircraft.  However, since you didn't and equated it with aliens, then (whether you intended to or not) you stated that you now believed in UFOs and aliens.

    If your intent was simply to make the point about the book, then why state your own belief at all (especially if you're neutral or agnostic about it)?

    You never seem to stop a comment without inserting your own opinion into it.  Once you do that, you can no longer claim neutrality.
    The facts, whether you like them or not,...
    Comments like this are baiting the reader.  Why should anyone oppose the facts?  Of course, these "facts" don't actually have any bearing on the conclusions or assertions unless you want to make an argument from authority regarding UFOs.  You seem to join the "facts" about the biography with the assertions made later regarding alien technology.

    It is possible for his credentials to be accurate and his suppositions to be crazy.

    In short, I suspect that for as tedious as the book probably is, he never actually says anything that would demonstrate alien technology or information, but rather he presents all manner of (impossible to verify) names and places to establish credibility.
    Mundus vult decipi
    Bonny Bonobo alias Brat
    Quite frankly, it was you comment about how you didn't believe in UFOs until you had seen one yourself.  Whether you meant it or not, you made the point that you now believe in UFOs.  As has already been stated, that isn't necessary if you only treated them as unidentified aircraft.  However, since you didn't and equated it with aliens, then (whether you intended to or not) you stated that you now believed in UFOs and aliens.
    Sorry Gerhard but I'm afraid you are being very illogical here. I never equated it with aliens, you did and Hank also did in his opening paragraph. I also never stated that I now believed in UFOs and aliens, please get your facts right. I simply believe that there are some flying objects that are unidentified because I have seen one up close and it is still unidentified and therefore an unexplained flying object or UFO to me.
    It is possible for his credentials to be accurate and his suppositions to be crazy.
    I agree and that is why I said :-
    Regardless of whether you believe in the existence of UFOs (and I didn't until I saw one myself) and aliens, the credentials of the author are quite impressive but of course this doesn’t mean that he didn’t go mad or lose the plot in later life...
    I don't recommend the book for the general public, but do recommend it for techheads who can happily read reams of information about the possible real or imagined history of some of the emerging technology that we rely so heavily upon now.
    I also don't agree with your following statement :-
    You seem to join the "facts" about the biography with the assertions made later regarding alien technology.
    This is simply not true.





    My article about researchers identifying a potential blue green algae cause & L-Serine treatment for Lou Gehrig's ALS, MND, Parkinsons & Alzheimers is at http://www.science20.com/forums/medicine
    Gerhard Adam
    I'm not going to argue with you.  Ask your husband to read it and tell me the impression he has regarding your statement.
    Mundus vult decipi
    Bonny Bonobo alias Brat
    You must be joking?
    My article about researchers identifying a potential blue green algae cause & L-Serine treatment for Lou Gehrig's ALS, MND, Parkinsons & Alzheimers is at http://www.science20.com/forums/medicine
    Gerhard Adam
    Why?  You obviously think that Hank or I are reading something extra into what you say, and I'm simply saying that you have a funny way of expressing neutrality and including your own opinion at the same time.
    Mundus vult decipi
    Gerhard Adam
    ...lengthy detail about how Corso managed a project that ‘seeded’ the alien technology recovered from the spacecraft into American companies such as IBM, Hughes Aircraft, Bell Labs and Dow Corning without them realising where the new technology had come from.
    This is also where I have a problem.  What supposed "alien" technology are we talking about?  There is nothing that is in use, that doesn't have a normal evolutionary path of development as would be expected in the electronics industry.

    However, I still maintain that the biggest difficulty in the "alien" idea deals with microbial organisms.  A real visitation of extraterrestrials to Earth would introduce all manner of opportunistic microorganisms that couldn't be controlled.  Even if one were to allege the appearance of new diseases, there's nothing to suggest that these disease genomes are anything except a natural consequence of evolution on Earth. 

    All one has to do to envision the consequences of alien visitation is to view the results of species introduction into countries like Australia and New Zealand to see that these are non-trivial events with far-reaching implications. 

    In case anyone wants to suggest that aliens have taken "precautions", remember that at Roswell, we're talking about a crash, so that isn't a viable explanation.  Similarly, we can easily imagine humans attemtping to take similar precautions if they wanted to visit another planet and we would see how futile and impossible such a thing is.  Humans have 10 times as many microbes as they have cells and the majority are necessary in some fashion or another.  There simply isn't any way to take "precautions" to avoid contamination in the event of a crash (short of total incineration).


    Mundus vult decipi
    There has not been so much subterfuge, so many lies told and so much effort to redirect attention than Roswell. It has gotten to the point where disbelieving anything the government says is the only healthy approach. In fact, the Air Force could finally admit to a Roswell alien crash and the entire nation would immediately disbelieve that, too!

    So, now we have yet another author coming along saying it was this, or that.

    Yeah, so what?

    The subject of aerial phenomenon and Roswell will not make anyone rich anymore because... nobody believes what anyone else has to say. You can thank Uncle Sam for that much.