Thursday, June 07, 2007

Roswell Questions and Answers

Over the course of the last few weeks, British skeptic (or should I say sceptic) Christopher Allen and I have engaged in a discussion of the Roswell case. It was sparked by my thoughts on Sheridan Cavitt, the counter- intelligence agent who accompanied Jesse Marcel out to the debris field in the Roswell UFO crash case. I thought it was of sufficient interest, and of a civil tone, that it might be better to move it to a more prominent place here. For those who wish to read the essay that began this, and the other comments about it, see the Saturday, April 28, 2007 blog which can be accessed under the archives.

In the last of his comments CDA wrote:

Re: David Rudiak and the Ramey memo; you suggest that Rudiak may be right. I am not going into all the intricate letter-by-letter, word-by-word analysis, as this has been done ad nauseam by others. I will instead give what is known as a 'reductio ad absurdum' answer.
If Rudiak is right, this would be the first official document acknowledging an event of momentous importance to the world, namely the discovery of intelligent ET life and its visit to our planet. Therefore there would be (as per my previous posting) several miles deep of official documentation on it, involving the work of countless scientists, committees, institutions, etc etc. As such the GAO would undoubtedly have unearthed this stuff during their searches (which is what they were contracted to do). Since no such documents surfaced and since all the relevant agencies deny the existence of any such documentation, Rudiak is wrong. QED.
Nothing more need be said; but I would rate the chance of Rudiak being right on a par with the chance that the CIA murdered Princess Diana.
Re: the FBI teletype, again there was no follow-up because there was nothing to follow up. The AF explained it all at Ft Worth, hence the FBI decided there was nothing further to do. There are no inaccuracies in the teletype either, merely a disagreement between those at Ft Worth, who had seen the debris, and those at Wright Patterson who had not (at least not at that point). Had there been a follow-up message, that too ought to have been found by the GAO.
The AF were concerned enough about the Arnold sighting to send two officers to interview him, and keep in touch with him. They spent far more time on this case than on Roswell, and there is quite a bit of paperwork on the case. These same officers later died in the plane crash after Maury island (another cover-up of course!).
The Mogul answer fits quite well if you go by the 1947 accounts. It is not such a good fit if you go by accounts given 30-50 years afterwards. It has its problems sure, but it is a far better answer than the ET one. (A 60 year ET secret indeed. And not one iota of hardware or paperwork to back it up).
Brazel held incommunicado by the military for a week? I just don't believe it. Brazel, and other civilians, never once saying anything about this amazing, extraordinary discovery (if that be what it was) until his death? I don't believe that either.
Elsewhere you talk about General Exon. According to Karl Pflock Exon did not even have second-hand evidence about wreckage & bodies, let alone firsthand evidence. His story was based entirely on rumors he had heard at WPAFB. And rumors do not count as secondhand or even thirdhand evidence. They are rumors, nothing else. Perhaps Exon was referring to rumors following the Scully book in 1950, as certainly was Sarbacher in his infamous letter of Nov 1983. (The Exon story is in Pflock's book, p.124. )
David Rudiak and others are clutching at straws. And that is all they ever will be clutching at.

First, let me say that your (CDA) belief in something or disbelief is totally irrelevant. Believe Mack was held by military authorities or don’t, but the fact is that family members other than Bessie say he was. Military men, including Edwin Easley said he was. Friends saw him in Roswell and friends reported that he complained to them about being held in jail when he visited them within days of his release. True, the guest house on the base is not the same thing as a cell in the sheriff’s office, but if you’re not allowed to leave, then it is close enough. Finally, once again, there are the newspaper articles that put him in Roswell on Wednesday so we know, contrary to what Bessie said, her father did return to Roswell.

There was no one with him when he died in the early 1960s, so we don’t have a "deathbed" statement about it. We do, however, have a number of his friends telling us that Brazel did complain about his treatment on his return from Roswell. It seems that we run into this belief roadblock of yours all the time and when all else fails, you retreat to the "I don’t believe it" tactic.

Second, let me say that I’m not married to Dave Rudiak’s interpretation of the Ramey memo. Clearly some words can be read in memo held by Ramey. Just as clearly there is some wild speculation about many of the other words in it. I have read the various documents about it and even helped design some of the experimentation to check on it (and don’t think that made me a hero in the eyes of the UFO community). While I believe that the evidence in the memo is taken about as far as it can be, and that I doubt we’ll ever have a universally accepted interpretation, there is always the possibility that some sort of breakthrough will allow us to read the memo accurately... and that will be interesting.

But now let’s talk about General Exon. Karl Pflock devoted very little in the way to a discussion of Exon, most of that quite dismissive. Philip Klass, in his book, was even more dismissive, never really addressing the testimony, but rejecting it because of what Pflock had to say about it. Pflock’s attempt, Klass’s attempt and your attempt to dismiss what he said as nothing more than rumor and second or third-hand stories is just flat wrong, an attempt to appeal to authority, and certainly not part of a sustained and intelligent dialogue.

Exon told me, and he told others, that he had flown over the sites in New Mexico. He gave us the orientation that was correct, meaning northwest to southeast. He talked of seeing markings on the ground that include the gouge and then vehicle tracks. If correct, then Mogul is eliminated because Mogul wouldn’t gouge the ground (as Charles Moore told me personally) and there wouldn’t have been two sites. This then, would be first-hand testimony. And I point out, that unlike some others who have been dismissive of Exon (Pflock interviewed him on the telephone once), I met him in person at the Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, as well as interviewed him on the telephone.

But here’s the total of what Pflock said on page 124, " When first made public in 1991, it seemed Exon’s memories of the possibility that the bodies had been flown from Roswell to Wright Field in 1947 might be based on firsthand information. If so, this would be highly significant, especially since Exon also seemed to have firsthand knowledge of the debris field and crash site, as well as a shadowy high-level group established to keep the truth about Roswell under wraps. However, in a lengthy September 1992 telephone conversation, Exon told me his comments about bodies and debris at Wright Field were based solely upon rumors he heard from colleagues at Wright Field and nothing more. As for the ‘control group,’ he said he was merely making educated guesses as to who likely would have been selected for such a group. Finally, with respect to his all alleged knowledge of the debris and crash sites, he told me he remembered flying over several sites in New Mexico quite some time after July 1947, on missions having nothing to do with the Roswell incident. One such location might have fit what he had been told about the crash site by ufologists because it had vehicle tracks running to it."

That’s all that Pflock has to say about Exon. He references a personal telephone call to Exon, provides nothing in the way of transcripts or tape of that conversation, and then dismisses the testimony as irrelevant and unimportant. Exon didn’t see anything first hand. Exon heard rumors. Exon didn’t fly over the crash site... well, maybe he did, but it was later and it might not have been the right place.

But we don’t have to rely, in my case, on my impressions of what Exon said in private telephone calls that can be filtered through my belief structures. I have the tapes, have published quotes in my books on Roswell, and Exon even said the quotes were accurate. Remember that point. Exon said the quotes were accurate. Exon wrote to me, "Further, you both [Don Schmitt and I] likely recall on many occasions during my visits with you in person and on the phone [please note the phrase, "on many occasions during my visits with you in person and on the phone," which means more than an undocumented telephone conversation offered by Pflock] ...that I did not know anything firsthand. Although I believe you did quote me accurately, I do believe that in your writings you gave more credence and impression of personal and direct knowledge that [sic] my recordings would indicate on their own! I felt that throughout the portions where my name was used." Please note he didn’t like the weight I assigned his statements, but that’s an editorial choice on my part and it in no way compromises the validity of the quotes... "I believe you did quote me accurately."

So, then what did Exon say even if we just take everything and label it as second hand? Exon talked about Roswell debris being flown to Wright-Patterson. "The boys who tested it," Exon said, "said it was very unusual....It had them pretty puzzled." Here an Air Force general, even if he's only giving his general impression of what he's heard about Roswell, says the same things about the Roswell debris as some of the controversial first-hand witnesses do. If you put any weight on Exon's impressions, the Mogul theory takes a big hit which might be why we now have to reduce Exon’s testimony to alleged rumor.

Also remember that Exon said, "The metal and material was unknown to anyone I talked to. Whatever they found, I never heard what the results were. A couple of guys thought it might be Russian but the overall consensus was that the pieces were from space."

It’s clear that Exon didn't handle or analyze the material himself, and even that his knowledge was limited. But he appears to think he'd spoken to people who knew at least something about what the analysis had shown. How sure was he of this knowledge? Exon said, "I know [my emphasis] that...[General Ramey] along with the people out at Roswell decided to change the story while they got their act together and got the information into the Pentagon." (UFO Crash at Roswell, paperback, p. 111.) Another Exon quote, "I just know [again my emphasis] there was a top intelligence echelon represented and the President's office was represented and the Secretary of Defense's office was represented..." (He's talking about the secret UFO committee that he's sure existed; UFO Crash, p. 232.)

Here’s what we learn from Exon quotes (which Pflock ignores in his book, and which the Air Force ignores in their latest Roswell investigation), (a) that Exon certainly thought he knew quite a bit (even if not first hand) about the subjects he was quoted on, that (b) he says quite clearly that he'd talked to people who were involved first-hand, and (c) "Most of the people you're talking to are a little bit like me. Close enough to know that there was something happening. They had no direct responsibility for any of it."

Here’s what Exon said, which is far beyond anything Pflock discussed in his book. You might also want to ask yourself why the Air Force didn’t interview Exon. They certainly could have because he was alive during their investigation and I gave them his telephone number and address (as if they couldn’t have found that themselves). Then, rather than interview some civilians 9like those working on Project Mogul) who had no real knowledge of the Roswell case, they could have talked to one of their own and gotten his impressions... not to mention the taped (video and audio) with other officers who were involved, which they didn’t bother to do.

So, Exon said:

1. He believed the Roswell crash was extraterrestrial. ("Roswell was the recovery of a craft from space.")

2. He said he knew that debris from the crash was studied at Wright-Patterson, and that the debris was extremely unusual. His description matches that of alleged first-hand witnesses and moves it away from Mogul.

3. He said that "apparently" there were bodies found, and that they were located at "another location," or in other words not at the location of the metallic debris. The main body of the craft, he said, was also found there.

4. He said the bodies were taken to Wright-Patterson. He said that one was taken to Denver because the Army had a mortuary service there.

5. He said he flew over the Roswell crash site, and saw the "gouge" the crashed object made in the ground.

6. He said there was a coverup. In fact, he called it (on the tape) "a national coverup project."

Is all of this remarkable? Of course it is. An Air Force general, whose assignment at Wright-Patterson suggests he might have been in a position to know what he was talking about, says, in great detail, that he thinks the Roswell crash was real. Yet, you wish to ignore this testimony and rely on the very little that Pflock offered in the way of evidence for his position on the Exon testimony. Believe or disbelief, the problem here is that Exon was at Wright Field in 1947, he had first-hand knowledge, he talked to people involved in the research, and when questions about the validity of the quotes were raised, Exon verified that they were accurate.

Philip Klass is even more dismissive than Pflock, reducing mention of Exon to a footnote and the claim that Exon was engaging in gossip (or to be accurate, just telling rumors he had heard... rumor being defined as an unverified or unfounded report, story, etc., circulating from person to person). Exon was clear that his information came from specific people who were the ones who conducted the testing on the debris and who were involved in the retrieval and preservation of the bodies of the aliens. Kal Korff was even worse, misinterpreting Exon’s statements and cherry picking the information to fit his preconceived notions.

But the real point is that Exon provided both first and second-hand testimony, based his statements on what he had observed himself and provided by officers he trusted, and who, when push came to shove, verified the accuracy of the quotes I attributed to him.

(NOTE: Yes, some of this is taken from a letter that Greg Sandow wrote on UFO Updates a number of years ago, and from which I quoted in one of my postings about Kal Korff and his suggestions that I was less than accurate in my reporting. In my upcoming Roswell Revisited, from Fate and due out this summer, I go into greater detail about this.)

For those interested, I have limited copies of:

The UFO Crash at Roswell ($5.00)
The Truth about the UFO Crash at Roswell ($10.00 hardback, $5.00 paperback)
Roswell UFO Crash Update ($10.00) (in which is information about Frank Kaufmann that is now horribly out of date, which is to say, inaccurate).

Plus $5.00 shipping and handling

Available at :

PO Box 10934
Cedar Rapids, IA 52410


Bob Koford said...

KR: As an ancillary to that, why no mention of Roswell in the Project Blue Book files. Given the media attention to the case, and the fact that other hoaxes are well represented in those files, Roswell should be there but it’s not. That might be significant... and no, the single mention in a short news article about flying saucers in a file unrelated to Roswell does not count.

Exactly! That point isn't discussed enough.

The Blue Book Archives contains information, every-which-way, up...down...everyway 'round about...all information about supposed UFO crashes. Some of these are left as unknowns...and in their own right certainly should not be ignored. After all is said and done, we are still left with the question...where is all this "mistaken for a flying-saucer" information dealing with the events at Roswell?

It should be there. Where are those photographs, the ones we are all now use to? (not there) Where are the news stories? (not there). There is no good reason that I have seen or heard yet that can explain this.

CDA said...

I have reread your chapter on General Exon in "UFO Crash at Roswell". There are problems with it. One point that you omit is the question of exactly how you located this man. Did he approach you or vice-versa? Who put you in touch with him,or did he pop up as a result of a TV show on Roswell (as did Gerald Anderson)? We ought to be told. There is a hint in this chapter that Exon was familiar with the Roswell story, but not as a result of hearing rumors at WPAFB in '47. Rather that he had read a bit, such as the Moore-Berlitz book, perhaps knew a good deal of UFO-lore from the past, and the like. I suspect (though I have no way of proving it) that Exon is recounting the same tales that Dr Sarbacher wrote in his famous letter to Wm Steinman in Nov 1983, i.e. he is recounting tales and rumors of crashed saucers & bodies picked up from his workmates & friends in WPAFB during the '50-51 period, soon after the Scully book came out. Your chapter tells how Exon was sure there were reports, photographs (both of the debris & bodies), and in fact "everything needed to prove that Roswell represented the crash of an extraterrestrial spacecraft would be found, if those reports were ever to be released". He was also sure there was an oversight top secret committee, "The Unholy Thirteen" you call it, involving Ike, Hillenkoetter, Twining & others. You have spent much time debunking MJ-12 in the past (for which much credit to you), but seem very willing to accept Exon's version of another committee very similar to MJ-12. But to me the most interesting piece is this quote, from Exon: "Roswell was the recovery of a craft from space". Having had no first-hand knowledge of it, how did Exon form this extraordinary conclusion and tell you this 42 years afterwards? Does Exon know what an ET craft (and their occupants) look like? Did he in 1947? Or is he going just by the rumors he heard all those years earlier? Just as important: why, when he had this great knowledge, did he not inform all those UFO groups (NICAP, APRO, MUFON etc) so desperately wanting the proof that UFOs were interplanetary of this fact during the 1950s & 60s? (The same could apply to all the other Roswell witnesses couldn't it?) In short why did Exon not speak out much earlier? Your answer presumably is that he was sworn to secrecy. That is the only answer the pro-ETH Roswellites can give in these cases. Secrecy was, and is, paramount. Hence the long (very long) silence from everyone. Until 1979 and the advent of Friedman & Moore. Then all hell breaks loose and everyone starts talking.

Perhaps (!) one day all those reports & photos Exon talked about will surface but that, assuredly, is a pipedream. As I said before, the GAO would have uncovered all of these in 1995. In fact they would not have needed to, since they would have been in the public domain decades ago. No such reports exist, no bodies exist, no wreckage exists. And Gen Exon is recalling rumors and nothing else. There is no reason to suppose your interviews with him, whether in person or by phone, are more worthy of consideration than was Pflock's lengthy phone conversation with him. In fairness, I concede that they are no less worthy of consideration either. It all depends on which side of the fence you want Exon's testimony to be.

So to get to the real points: How did you locate General Exon in the first place? What familiarity with UFO history did he have (from reading & films, TV and such)? How was he able to pronounce so definitively that "Roswell was the recovery of a craft from space"? Another question: How and why was Exon ever let in on this highly secret matter anyway? Did he have a 'need to know'?
A final question: Where are all those reports?

I have to agree with you that the USAF should have interviewed Exon in 1994. Perhaps they should have interviewed a few civilians as well, for completeness. But if they had, and had then come to very different conclusions to those of yourself and others, you would have had further cause to attack the AF, again.

Perhaps sometime you can also comment on the recent Schmitt-Carey book, especially about Walter Haut's alleged new affidavit which paints a very different picture from his earlier one.


KRandle said...

I don't have a lot of time to respond, at the moment, to all this, but will say that I found Exon. Another witness told me that someone I should talk to was Arthur Exon. I located him in California and called him, asking about his involvement with Project Blue Book. He told me that he was responsible for dispatching aircraft and investigators to the scene of UFO sightings. This was in the 1960s. I let the conversation flow naturally.

This was in the early 1990s, before Roswell hit the big time. Karl Pflock and Phil Klass ignored him almost completely because they didn't have good explanations for what he said.

The same with Edwin Easley. I found him because he had been the provost marshal at Roswell and I knew he would have been involved in this.

Finally, quickly, Exon did have first-hand knowledge to some of it, such as flying over the crash sites in 1947. So, Exon can't be as easily dismissed as both Karl and Phil attempted to do.

CDA said...

Since writing my piece I have reread Stan Friedman's Top Secret Majic and his version of the Exon testimony, and it sheds a lot more light. Apparently Stan first spoke to Exon in 1989 and followed up by sending him a mass of UFO/Roswell info & some of his (pro-ETH)papers. Hence Exon was well primed in UFO lore by 1989. The crucial point is this (and you may want to take your time): Did Stan Friedman contact Exon before you did, or after? I'll await your response.

Yes, it is important. Stan also says that Exon thought highly of his pro-MJ12 stuff. I suggest this is what gave Exon the idea of the 'controlling committee', i.e. the 'Unholy Thirteen' that you talk about. In other words, Exon got the idea of this committee from what Stan had told him about MJ-12! If so, this rather negates your own analysis. I am not saying which of you is right or wrong. I am merely suggesting that if Friedman 'got at' Exon before you did the picture changes quite a bit.

When you have more time I'd appreciate your comments. Thanks.


KRandle said...

I spoke to Exon BEFORE Stan, and in fact, told Stan about him in August 1989. After I wrote the article about the "Unholy Thirteen", which speaks to the secret group controlling the UFO data (and we really don't need to argue about the reality of that for this discussion), and since the composition of that committee, as described by Exon differed significantly from MJ-12, Stan attacked. If Exon was right, then MJ-12, as described was a hoax...

Which explains Stan calling Exon and reading segments of my interviews with him to him... and Exon suggesting he had been misquoted (at least, according to Stan). When I sent a copy of the book and a copy of the tape to him and asked where he had been misquoted, he said that all the quotes were accurate... that we (meaning me) had over emphasized the importance of what he said, but the point was, he said it, and when he had a chance to object, to me, he did not.

Yes, Stan sends packages of material to witnesses BEFORE he interviews them and I have suggested this might not be the best technique. But, when I interviewed Exon, he had not received Stan's package and he had not been immersed in Roswell information.

So, the point is, you cannot suggest that Exon was primed by this material. He had little knowledge from outside sources and was providing his descriptions of the events based on his experiences at Wright Field in 1947. He provided the specific names of people based on his experience and not on some kind of priming from the MJ-12 documents.

I will note that some of the names he provided made sense in the context of the time. Stuart Symington, for example, was the Under Secretary for War for Air in 1947 and given this was an Army Air Force activity, it made sense that he would be involved. And doesn't this sort of negate your claim because, if Exon had been contaminated by the MJ-12 material, he would not have come
up with new names as he did? Instead, he would have given those
names already identified as MJ-12.

Remember, here, I'm not arguing for the authenticity of the information, merely that the information came from a source who had not been contaminated by Stan's package of materials, who had not been exposed to the media versions of Roswell because the big explosion of interest was to follow, and who was relating to me, as best he could, the composition of the committee and his experiences at Wright Field.

CDA said...

OK, I accept that you spoke to Exon before Stan did. I hope you are positive about your timescales.

I have been looking at some of your other books (including “Case MJ-12“ and “Roswell UFO Crash Update“), and things are far from clear about Exon’s dates & events. The similarity of “Majestic 12” to the “The Unholy 13” is still a bit too close to be coincidence. (Don’t forget that there were in fact 13 members of MJ-12 since Bedell Smith replaced Forrestal upon the latter’s death, as Friedman has reminded us). Stan Friedman tells us that he first learned of Exon from J.Bond Johnson but that when he contacted Exon, Exon told him Johnson had grossly exaggerated his (Exon’s) true involvement with Roswell. I assume you also learned of Exon from Johnson, but you don’t indicate this. Stan then tells how when he contacted Exon again in 1991, the latter told him that you also exaggerated Exon’s involvement. Exon later wrote to you saying a bit of one thing and a bit of another. (I am quoting from your “Roswell UFO Crash Update” where you print Exon’s letter).

Regarding the interview with Don Schmitt, in this book (p142-7), it is not coherent. Exon seems to jump about, mixing up events, names and dates. He names Symington & Spaatz as two of the control group, but if you look at the transcript, he confuses this with the period he is talking about, i.e. the 1964-65 period, when he was responsible for the so-called planes he prepared for secret UFO missions to Montana & Wyoming. Perhaps Don has done some bad editing here, but the confusion remains. Then Exon goes back in time and describes the Roswell material; then he jumps forward to the late 1950s. He is more than confused, wouldn’t you say? He is wandering from decade to decade, and then brings up the missing 4 planes, at one point saying “I am trying to put a time period with this because I can’t figure out for sure why ...” Exon’s whole paragraph on p146 is a shambles.

How anyone can read this edited interview and come out with a favourable impression of Exon’s memory escapes me. And at the time of this Schmitt interview (June 1990) we may be quite certain that Exon was indeed familiar with MJ-12 from previously talking to Stan, and receiving Stan’s bulging UFO papers.

Re the case of the missing 4 aircraft from Kentucky or Tennessee whilst pursuing a UFO (your other book p58), you say there is no reason to suspect Exon is wrong or deluded. I would say: deluded no, wrong yes. The case sounds similar to the Mantell case where 4 planes were involved, even though only one crashed, and wreckage was found. True, the date is offset a bit, but Exon was recalling this 40 years or so later. It is a common fault to get distant timescales confused, and Exon sounds more than a bit confused, as I have said. If you reject my idea, then consider another case (Jan 1956) of Col Lee Merkel, also from Kentucky, given by Keyhoe in “Aliens from Space”, p192-3. I would place a high bet that one of these two cases is the one Exon is referring to.

You have written extensively on the Mantell case, yet the likelihood that Exon was referring to it didn’t occur to you? And if Exon has got this story & dates a bit muddled, what does it say about the reliability of his Roswell testimony, or anything else for that matter?

KRandle said...

I learned about Exon from Johnson in February 1989 and told Stan about both Johnson and Exon in August 1989. I found Johnson through the Special Collections archives at the University of Texas at Arlington as I was attempting to get high quality copies of the various photographs.

Don Schmitt, in his interviewing technique, tended to jump around, believing that this would provide clues about the veracity of a witness. I'm not sure where he learned the technique, but I know that it sometimes disconcerted me as we attempted to interview a witness. I liked to let them talk, but Schmitt would interrupt to ask his questions.

I had wondered about Exon confusing the Mantell case and the dates, but Mantell was killed before Exon moved on to an assignment at the Pentagon. He seemed sure of the timing, based on his assignment. That tended to rule out Mantell. Merkel, on the other hand, might be right.

Finally, if Exon had been contaminated by Stan's material, then wouldn't he had also suggested the same members of the oversight committee. I was struck with the names Exon provided tht made sense when you learned who they were and what they were doing in 1947.

I also think, that before we get to far into the weeds with this forty-year-old memories thing and reject testimony because the events are old, we must remember that studies of memory show that these older memories are often very accurate. True, about 25% of the people in the studies screw up everything, but at the other end are those who remember it all very accurately. So, we can't reject testimony just because the event was deep in the past. We have to find a better reason than that.

CDA said...

We can dispute Exon's testimony forever but in the end it will be a case of us
agreeing to disagree. However, my main point is this: How did General Exon,
who had heard these rumors back in 1947, but who had never seen anything first hand,
manage to come out with the extraordinary conclusion " Roswell was the recovery
of a craft from space". ("UFO CRASH... p.112) ?

This is not some frivolity that can be brushed aside (unless he had tongue in cheek).
Here is a US military person of the top rank making this
sensational pronouncement to you, based solely on rumors.
It simply defies all logic and commonsense. I remind you that there is no such
thing as a craft from space. There was not either in 1947 or now in 2007. Science
does NOT admit the existence of any such craft. There may have been such visitations
in the very distant past; we cannot say. But no such craft have visited the earth in modern times
and all such claims that they have are still in the
realm of science fiction. For Exon to make such a claim implies either that he knows
what such a craft looks like and has seen one (as he could claim of an automobile,
airplane or rocket) or that some trustworthy informants have told him they had seen one (and this means
that they also knew what such a craft looked like). You cannot make such a
claim based solely on tittle tattle.

And we may be quite sure Exon was not told this officially because there was absolutely no need for
him to know. Allegedly, it was, and still is, the 'great secret'. Thus he was far too junior to be 'in the know' in 1947.
Nor, for the same reason, can he have read official documents confirming ET existence.
If perchance he had, zillions of others would also have read them
by now, (including you & me) confirming his pronouncement, and the truth would be public knowledge.

The same argument applies to Jesse Marcel jr. Although he did
at least see & handle some debris 60 years ago, he also has assumed he
handled an ET craft. Why? Perhaps you ought to point out to Marcel that there is no
such thing as an ET craft. If he still believes he saw one (or portions of one), why not ask
him how he is certain of this. I repeat: how does Marcel know what an ET craft looks like?
Did his dad possess this great top secret knowledge and confide it to the family?
And if Jesse jr had the slightest inkling of this in 1947, I wonder why he never told the UFO world
until two pro-ET ufologists repeatedly interviewed him and influenced his mind
some 30+ years afterwards. (I also wonder why either Marcel, sr or jr, allowed such
highly important material to be swept into the yard and be concreted over to form a patio!).
All Marcel jr can legitimately say is that
he handled some odd looking debris which his dad recovered from a ranch, and which did not
resemble anything he, as a boy of 11, had ever seen before, but that he did not think it important
enough to retain any at the time. For him to now claim that he handled
alien spacecraft wreckage in 1947 is, quite simply, twaddle. It only reinforces my conviction that people
have planted ideas in his mind that were never there in '47. I have not seen his recent book
but assume he continues with the 'I handled an ET craft' theme.

Kevin, there is nobody on earth who can say what an ET craft looks like because no such
thing exists. So all those witnesses, like Exon & Marcel, who tell us they know Roswell
was an ET craft, are fantasising. This sums up my case.

'The Unholy 13' ? As fictitious as 'Majestic 12'. Where are all the documents 'The Unholy 13'
must have produced? At least we do have some Majestic 12 documents whatever you
, and I, think of them. But papers from the Unholy 13? None at all.
You are impressed by the names Exon gave you and that they made sense in terms of what
these people were doing in '47?
We both know a prominent ufologist who is even more impressed by the MJ-12 names
and what they were doing in '47. Sorry, but Exon's committee has no more validity than
the infamous MJ-12 committee. By the way, was the word 'unholy' your terminology or Exon's?

I have never met a single Roswell witness, nor have I spoken to any on the phone.
So you may regard my opinions as valueless, if you want. But you can apply an awful lot
of plain commonsense to the Roswell scenario, and the more you do the more the whole
thing looks like a manufactured mystery, a space tale which never once entered anybody's
head in the late 1940s, but which slowly built up from the first investigations (by ETH believers) in 1979.

One other point: I presume you are positive that the tracks and gouge Exon saw in the desert were not
present before the said 'crash'. I say this because Bob Young told me they were there in 1946.

Please give us your views on Haut's latest 'after my death' affidavit, and whether it adds anything
of value to the Roswell cause. Or is it just another diversion?