On
Monday, someone had posted to Facebook, a YouTube link to an interview with
Glenn Dennis conducted on November 19, 1990. Dennis is seen in casual clothes,
relaxed, and told the story of his missing nurse, his involvement in the
Roswell UFO crash case, and what all he knew about it. He told an intriguing
story that has many people convinced that what he said was true. That was underscored
by the source of the tape which was listed as the Department
of Defense, Department of the Air Force, Office of the Secretary. Office of the
Administrative Assistant. Office of the Deputy for Security and Special
Investigative Programs. Research Declassification Team.
All that is untrue.
 |
| Glenn Dennis in 1990. |
Oh, the tape was made
on November 19, 1990, and it was Glenn Dennis sitting in the chair in Roswell,
but the government, the Air Force, and all those others mentioned had nothing to
do with the creation of the tape, and that is the real problem here.
The first interviewer’s
voice you hear on the tape is Don Schmitt. The second is Mark Wolf and the
third is me. This was an informal interview and was conducted mainly by Mark
Wolf with both Don and me offering questions and advice.
Two days later we did a
more formal interview that I conducted. These were done as part of the
documentary, UFO Secret – The Roswell Crash. I have the original tape (on
Beta, if you can believe that) of the first interview. Mark Wolf took the
second interview with him when we all left Roswell. Wolf was afraid that
something might happen to the tape as he passed through airport security and
since I was driving back home, I took the first interview with me. His thought was
that we wouldn’t lose both interviews.
Wolf said later that
there had been some trouble at one of the airport check points and he thought
someone might have searched his luggage and had fiddled with the tape. When he
got home, he found that there was nothing wrong with any of the tapes, other
than evidence of a close examination of them.
Given the state of the
investigation in 1990, we had no reason to suspect that Dennis might not have
been as candid as he could be. After all, it was Walter Haut who supplied
Dennis’ name. Subsequent research demonstrated the unreliability of Dennis’ testimony.
You can read about that journey here:
(As an aside, you can
see a picture of Glenn Dennis from that interview posted to that YouTube entry.)
The real problem here
is that the posting of the Dennis interview to YouTube does not cite any of
this. Instead, it looks as if some government agency conducted the interviews
and that provides a note of authenticity to the tape. Comments are not allowed
which prohibits me from providing the necessary context for the interview and
the resulting investigation.
This worries me because
those not familiar with the story will now believe that Glenn Dennis was
involved in the case and that his nurse friend was killed not long after her
involvement in Roswell. What might not be clear is that there is no truth to
what Dennis said on the tape other than his name, he lived in Roswell and that
he had worked at Ballard’s Funeral Home.
There is enough of
these fake stories circulating through Ufology in general and the Roswell case
in particular to alter the truth. It is a problem because all too often those
doing research will find the confirming information and look no further. This
tape should be labeled for what it is… the fantasy of a man who had no real
involvement other than he lived in Roswell in 1947.
I should note here that
I have notified the National Archives of the error in claiming the tapes were
created by those government agencies cited. No military or government agencies
were involved in this interview and we supplied copies of the tapes to the Air
Force during their investigation and to both CUFOS and FUFOR in the earlier
1990s. Since comments are not permitted on YouTube to correct the error, I have
suggested that the posting is in violation of copyright. Had the source been
revealed, this drastic action would not have been needed.
6 comments:
I have to admit, he really had me fooled. He spoke so confidently, he just didn't seem the lying sort. It's funny, I've read so much on the Roswell case I've started to forget stuff, was it only about his nurse friend that he was caught lying about? Because in that instance, I can understand he might have fibbed to protect someone he loved who wanted no attention. I do get that. Could it be that he was sincere about Roswell and was just lying about the name of the nurse to protect her? Or was there more to it?
I just don't remember.. might have to hit the 'Roswell books' again..
Good Evening, Kevin.
I have been going over "the files" again and while reading the Confidential MOIC "UNEXPLAINED FLYING DISCS 7 July 1947" I had this strong feeling of realization that it was important to remember that when you began your research, you had good reason to consider that something weird had happened. There was already quite a bit of evidence in the files of activity, especially on the fourth of July. There were, as you know, several sightings of "Flying Discs" as well as "Flying Saucers" during that time. One or two from the Base itself. As if that weren't enough, if one includes the UFO files that we only know now, we can see that there were also several reports of "unknown objects" seen to be heading for impact with the earth. Some of these sightings were from aircraft.
So, it isn't crazy to consider that the more serious and trustworthy witnesses you have found, over the years, were being truthful and that something, whatever that something truly was in its entirety, took place and was covered up. Some of your witnesses are military heroes. I think that if they served in World War 2 then they were all heroes. That makes it difficult to grasp their reasons for making anything up which tends to cause one to begin looking at Psyops. It is just hard to understand why they would do this.
I'm am totally all for tossing out the old information that doesn't hold up...totally...but I also can see from the files that there is a very real possibility that there were several impacts or landings of different sorts during that period-of-time. It is not “conspiracy theory”, it is in the UFO files. There was quite a bit of activity, over-all, in that early 1947 period.
It is proven from the documents that they were very concerned, in particular, with Flying Discs. The MOIC I mentioned before was written on July 7th. It compiled eyewitness testimony from several witness, including police officers, from the July 4 incidents in Portland. I also now know that an important ADC letter was issued 7 July 1947. It couldn't have been because of the Rhode's sighting because they didn't know about it yet (or did they?) It appears that "something" was a catalyst for Flying Disc interest, which included interest from Air Defense Command on July the 7th. The opposite-view Ramey thing was on the 8th.
I still say the evidence is good that something of a Flying Disc nature occurred on or about 7 July 1947. Based on the documents, that is. If something (crashed disc) happened on the fourth or the second or third, I don't know. But just on the available documents, that we know are authentic, then the date in question for disc "incidences" would be the 7th.
Thanks for your on-going research,
Regards,
Bob Koford
Fascinating to take a quick look at how this interview ended up on the internet. It appears to have been acquired by Public.Resource.Org, possibly from bulk.resource.org/ntis.gov/ (National Technical Information Service, Dept. of Commerce) and posted in 2009 along with an interview by Stanton Friedman of Gerald Anderson. Subsequently, it was posted by youtubeemp3.az (date unknown) from Azerbaijan. Then it was picked up by thedemonical.blogspot.com (reported error, no longer playable) in 2015. On Feb 12, 2017 it was posted on youtube by Glenn Morales. Likely, the same person re-posted it to youtube on Feb 17, 2017 using the name AFilipaGomez. Public.Resource.Org is worth taking a look at as they indicate they are non-profit and also maintain archeive.org.FedFlix and law.resource.org and generously thank the Department of Defense on their website, as well as the Honorable David Ferriero, National Archivist of the United States. They have 190,000 subscribers.
Well, shortly after I posted the above comment regarding Public.Resource.Org, I realized the purported DOD and AF interviews, actually conducted by Kevin and associates and Stanton Friedman, were both proven bogus statements and they were probably released with the false provenance to lend creditability to their lies. Apparently, someone wants us to believe their statements were true. And, shortly afterwards my computer was hacked and my bios (Dell) was corrupted and disabled. I lost several years of personal data. I pulled the hard drive, but windows won't read it. I'm typing this on a recently purchased computer that required a 60 mile round trip to purchase (it). Tired of these guys, but still alive. All roads seem to lead to Roswell.
There are other possibilities about the "nurse story', similar to what others here have speculated on; that if the story and the nurse in particular were real, he was never going to tell the truth about it because it was to embarrassing and would compromised other people as well, especially the nurse. It's probably not a leap to say that the Roswell of the 1940s was a small, conservative town and affairs of the heart were often hidden....
My latest article on this subject, as of a few days ago:
https://mysteriousuniverse.org/2019/12/the-ongoing-controversy-of-the-roswell-nurse-and-those-strange-bodies/
Post a Comment