tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post8624735093716443660..comments2024-03-18T16:51:50.688-07:00Comments on A Different Perspective: Major Jesse Marcel, Sr.KRandlehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06333125414889883920noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-63185929476137655602017-06-19T12:56:09.684-07:002017-06-19T12:56:09.684-07:00Good article Mr. Randle. My thoughts on Marcel hav...Good article Mr. Randle. My thoughts on Marcel have always been a little mixed. On the one hand there is little doubt he recovered some debris out in the desert. On the other hand, some of the claims he made about his background make me wonder how accurate his claims about the material recovered are. (I.e. that a sledgehammer would bounce off of pieces thinner than the "foil on a pack of cigarettes".) <br /><br />I think he was a honorable guy who served his country well.....but a lot of guys of that generation (and I hate to generalize here) like to tell a good story.09rjahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14354154308391968845noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-74617081310089708212009-05-02T13:26:00.000-07:002009-05-02T13:26:00.000-07:00I surmise that Sheridan Cavitt didn't tell them it...I surmise that Sheridan Cavitt didn't tell them it was a balloon in 1947 because he didn't wish to directly contradict his boss, Major Jesse Marcel. This seems to me like perfectly normal human behavior. And after Major Marcel's 1979 interviews, Cavitt may simply not have wanted to be involved at all in the UFO controversy. This also seems like normal human behavior to me. But Cavitt's affidavit in response to the 1994 Air Force investigation was definite that it was a small debris field, a small amount of debris, and it looked balloon-like to him. <br /><br />Major Marcel described the debris to his son at ~2 AM on July 7th, 1947 as being from a "flying saucer", which indicates to me a prior consciousness on his part of UFOs.<br /><br />It is my best guess that Major Marcel, whose good military career really needed no embellishment, made an honest error in judgment in 1947, and then 30+ years later told some embellished stories about his military experiences.Doughttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15651095228714213299noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-86975277715235995782008-07-11T22:59:00.000-07:002008-07-11T22:59:00.000-07:00After many hours of deliberation I have come up wi...After many hours of deliberation I have come up with several other things that cast Marcel in a dim light. Well in my mind anyway. Keep in mind that he was the intelligence officer of the 509th bomb group, supposedly handpicked like the rest of the officers. These are a few of the problems:<BR/>1. He spent an entire day in a debris field that he described as 3/4 mile long and 200 yards wide and picked up nothing more than sticks, foil, and rubber.<BR/>2. When he was finished, he LEFT a 3/4 mile long by 200 yard wide field of what he believed to be ET material on the ground unguarded.<BR/>3. He stopped at his home on the way back to base to show the stuff to his wife and son.<BR/>So in one day he committed three acts seriously unbecoming someone who is supposedly of high enough caliber to the intelligence officer of the 509th.<BR/>Another thing that has started to bother me is his claim that Ramey took him into the map room while the debris was switched with fake stuff. Why bother to try and trick the man who found the stuff? He of all people should be more trustworthy than whoever it was that brought the fake stuff in and took away the real stuff. And in all the accounts that I have read about Marcel he has never mentioned that anyone ever told him not to talk about or that he was ever debriefed about the incident. Debriefing is stand military practice after anything odd that happens and this was certainly odd!!Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09595999902639827196noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-82917381272872834572007-05-25T15:11:00.000-07:002007-05-25T15:11:00.000-07:00Marcel had not given a thought to the ETH angle in...Marcel had not given a thought to the ETH angle in 1947, because at the time (early July 1947) there was no such idea in the public mind about UFO origins. The ETH angle (for Marcel) would have come slowly over the years between 1947 and when Stanton Friedman first interviewed him in early 1978. It may be that he never once considered this angle until STF met him. Marcel could not recall the date of this amazing event, kept no newspaper cuttings, had no photographs or diary of the events and continued his life, seemingly, as if nothing had happened. Yet we are supposed to believe that an event of momentous magnitude and supreme importance to science was kept secret by Marcel and a few other guys in the top military for 3 decades. He never even once informed NICAP or APRO of his knowledge, and never got in touch with the Condon Committee. <BR/><BR/>So Marcel, according to the gospel of Kevin Randle & others, knew and kept this 'great secret' for all this time, realising full well that another UFO crash could occur at any time and at any location (perhaps in Russia, China, etc). <BR/><BR/>So yes, your gut feeling is correct. Marcel did know the stuff was terrestrial wreckage and thought no more of it for many years. <BR/><BR/>Remember that in the Roswell Incident book he claims that the Fort Worth photos first show him with the actual (ET craft) debris then later with the alleged substituted debris. Believe that if you dare. <BR/><BR/>CDACDAhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02286117965667317691noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-32166173737316975622007-05-03T14:57:00.000-07:002007-05-03T14:57:00.000-07:00I have read many, many reports about Marcel and th...I have read many, many reports about Marcel and the rest of the Roswell story and it seems no two believers can agree on the string of events. The skeptics pretty much seem to parallel each other. My burning question about Marcel is this. If this man was one of the first people in the world to handle alien wreckage, why would he live his retired life as a tv repairman? He certainly seemed to crave the limelight in 1947. He reportedly never said a word about it until Stanton Friedman dug him out of the woodwork in 1970 (or whatever the date was). My gut feeling is that he knew full well it was terrestrial wreckage he was dealing with. Well that's my two cents worth!cosmosis66https://www.blogger.com/profile/09672449992683715746noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-19361325580932229442007-04-20T11:10:00.000-07:002007-04-20T11:10:00.000-07:00Borky -The stream of consciousness is really the w...Borky -<BR/><BR/>The stream of consciousness is really the way the transcript is laid out and not necessarily the way Marcel spoke. It is the format of the transcript that leads to most of the confusion and it might be why there are problems with it. I'm also note that those unfamiliar with the military often have mistaken notions about it. <BR/><BR/>Anyway, I think the flaws in the transcript are more the fault of Pratt than Marcel. But, we'll never know because the tape is gone.KRandlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06333125414889883920noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-6501116765318754372007-04-20T11:02:00.000-07:002007-04-20T11:02:00.000-07:00Bob Barbanes -The Pratt interview was conducted in...Bob Barbanes -<BR/><BR/>The Pratt interview was conducted in 1979.<BR/><BR/>Yes, memories can be faulty and can be influenced by outside sources, but not every memory is and not everyone makes memory mistakes.<BR/><BR/>I don't pretend to know why Marcel might have said those things. I do know that the tape didn't survive so we don't know if Pratt got the stuff wrong, misheard it or if Marcel said it...<BR/><BR/>I do know that Marcel didn't make similar claims in later interviews and that what he said about his involvment was accurate.KRandlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06333125414889883920noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-67908429089714890872007-04-06T12:46:00.000-07:002007-04-06T12:46:00.000-07:00Krandle, there's two things I notice about the exc...Krandle, there's two things I notice about the excerpts you've provided that distinctly remind me of time spent as a student taking notes.<BR/><BR/>The tone of Jesse Marcel Snr. is very similar to that of a lecturer who's given the same lecture so many times before he's become bored out of his mind.<BR/><BR/>Basically he doesn't want to be there, and is only giving the damned thing because he feels obliged to, hence his sentences have that gradually pared down, worn out, fade in and fade out, stream of consciousness feel.<BR/><BR/>Pratt's note-taking of the Marcel Snr. recording, on the other hand, has the feel of a perky student who's convinced he's so utterly fascinated by what's been said he's never go'n'o forget a word of it for the rest of his life, anyway, but he may just as well take down a few jottings to maybe remind himself of the order things were said in, hence he's happily gone along with Marcel Snr.'s gradually pared down, worn out, fade in and fade out, stream of consciousness tone.borkyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05042275165058229970noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-22066009103003353082007-04-06T10:05:00.000-07:002007-04-06T10:05:00.000-07:00Kevin, what year was Pratt's inteview with Marcel?...Kevin, what year was Pratt's inteview with Marcel? I ask because my father was also in WWII. By the time I got old enough that I could understand his stories (mid-1960s) his memory was extremely faulty. He'd say something inaccurate and my <I>mother</I> would cluck her tongue and go, "Oh Bill, that's not right..." Even now, as a pilot myself I think back to some of the things dad said and go, "That couldn't be right."<BR/><BR/>My point is that memory is not perfect. Memories get changed, colored, and influenced by current events. Happens to me now, even. We can't be too hard on Marcel.<BR/><BR/>I don't know why Jesse Sr. might have said those things that are provably wrong. Maybe he was simply remembering it wrong - or maybe he was trying to embellish his past. But as you know, it doesn't matter in the long run.<BR/><BR/>As far as Roswell is concerned: First he said it was otherworldly debris - after all the years of Buck Rogers sci-fi, they must have been incredibly excited - thrilled, even! - by the PROOF of life on other planets! They must have thought that the news would break wide open and be welcomed with great anticipation by earthlings hungry for just such a revelation. He had no reason to expect that it would be suppressed and even denied.<BR/><BR/>Instead, the government shut him down. We must be aware of the tremendous pressure Marcel was put under. Wasn't the UCMJ first published in 1947? <I>"Yeah Marcel, we know you already said it was a spaceship. We're gonna hang Ramey's ass for that! Meantime, you WILL say it was a weather balloon, and you better sell it like your life depended on it, bud, nudge-nudge, wink-wink."</I><BR/><BR/>You can see "that look" on Marcel's face in the pic of him with the weather balloon debris. Talk about a man under the gun! You can just tell he was lying...and not happy about it one little bit.<BR/><BR/>I've always believed in Marcel's integrity in the Roswell case. And knowing the military the way we do, I've always felt so incredibly sorry for him. He knew the truth, yet was unable to tell it.Bob Barbanes:https://www.blogger.com/profile/12344068760904928223noreply@blogger.com