tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894698457228353216.post5249542997429256921..comments2023-06-02T08:24:13.828-07:00Comments on THERE'S SOMETHING IN THE WOODS...: Is This The Flatwoods Monster?Nick Redfernhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07199813303416083671noreply@blogger.comBlogger32125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894698457228353216.post-66903554230343434662010-09-30T11:58:33.757-07:002010-09-30T11:58:33.757-07:00Is THIS the Flatwoods Monster?
http://www.wired.c...Is THIS the Flatwoods Monster?<br /><br />http://www.wired.com/underwire/wp-content/gallery/cheesy-sci-fi/07_robotmonster.jpgAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894698457228353216.post-78104015456563506552010-09-30T09:33:21.182-07:002010-09-30T09:33:21.182-07:00RPJ:
LOL, yes you're right!RPJ:<br /><br />LOL, yes you're right!Nick Redfernhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07199813303416083671noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894698457228353216.post-67049961526996426272010-09-29T18:33:39.136-07:002010-09-29T18:33:39.136-07:00"This tells the story of a cabal of scientist...<i>"This tells the story of a cabal of scientists faking a number of UFO crashes around the world to try and unite the planet into a New World Order - albeit a benevolent one."</i><br /><br />Nick: <b>ALL</b> New World Orders are benevolent... in the minds of the people fixed on establishing them, that is ;)Red Pill Junkiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14738203580562140501noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894698457228353216.post-69078519619043379802010-09-29T15:20:40.837-07:002010-09-29T15:20:40.837-07:00You're right, Nick - I hadn't considered t...You're right, Nick - I hadn't considered the idea of a fictional object being the inspiration for propaganda purposes. The Trojan Horse, fictional or not, must have inspired innumerable copycat schemes, so whether 'Il Spauracchio' existed or not is irrelevant to the case.NickJoneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04692930261848771802noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894698457228353216.post-85282060449078044682010-09-29T09:22:51.117-07:002010-09-29T09:22:51.117-07:00hmmm, it's still not going direct to the link....hmmm, it's still not going direct to the link. Instead, copy-paste the link above, go to "Features" and then click on "A Supernatural Cover Story?" and that's the one.Nick Redfernhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07199813303416083671noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894698457228353216.post-56792163233091201892010-09-29T09:21:03.490-07:002010-09-29T09:21:03.490-07:00The Patrick Huyghe link appears to have got muddle...The Patrick Huyghe link appears to have got muddled. Here it is again:<br /><br />http://www.astralgia.com/webportfolio/omnimoment/archives/features/supernatural/index.htmlNick Redfernhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07199813303416083671noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894698457228353216.post-42836112665583014682010-09-29T09:18:14.637-07:002010-09-29T09:18:14.637-07:00Nick:
I think the important issue about Maskelyne...Nick:<br /><br />I think the important issue about Maskelyne is that his story appeared in a RAND report prepared for Air Force Psychological Warfare operatives.<br /><br />We could hypothesize that even though his work on some highly novel projects can be validated, if this story of his was exagerrated, or born out of his imagination, there might be some irony in the issue of someone thinking that to use such a scenario still might be a good idea.<br /><br />And, I still think, the vaguely human shape, the same 12-foot height, that both stories concerns sightings in little towns, and that this went to USAF psy-war people (who we know have played a role in UFO events, and taken an interest in such), suggests we should still dig deeper.<br /><br />And there are, for example, other examples where stories of weird and legendary beasts may have been deliberately exploited by the official world, such as the following from Patrick Huyghe:<br /><br />http://www.astralgia.com/webportfolio/omnimoment/archives/features/supernatural/index.html<br /><br />Then there's the 1950 novel by Bernard Newman (The Flying Saucer, which, coincidentally, has just been re-released). This tells the story of a cabal of scientists faking a number of UFO crashes around the world to try and unite the planet into a New World Order - albeit a benevolent one.<br /><br />Of course, there have since, been rumors of faked UFO crashes to protect crashes of real military hardware, and the idea that governments might use the UFO issue as the next tool of fear to further erode our rights (via some form of hoaxed event), is something often discussed in ufological circles.<br /><br />Newman's book is undoubtedly a novel, but he moved in official, espionage-based circles, and it'ss interesting that if you read his fictional tale (of 1950), you'll see it contains many themes that did not become commonplace in Ufology for decades (psy-ops to create faked crashed UFO stories; a secret cabal operating separate to the mainstream government etc).<br /><br />So, in other words, the mere fact that RAND chose to prepare a classified report for the USAF that referenced the "scarecrow" story, may still have had some effect on its usage - true or not.<br /><br />Sometimes, fiction can inspire reality in very strange ways.Nick Redfernhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07199813303416083671noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894698457228353216.post-44919725521949836032010-09-29T00:22:12.981-07:002010-09-29T00:22:12.981-07:00Oh dear. As much as I hate to - er, rain - on this...Oh dear. As much as I hate to - er, rain - on this parade, checking the site through the second link at the bottom of the Wikipedia article (http://www.maskelynemagic.com/), it would appear that Maskelyne's veracity is indeed questionable. Not only was he a self-mythologizer, but his ghost-writer, a 'hack-for-hire', was prone to pad his work with pure fiction. The writer of the articles, Richard Stokes, was able to confirm this with Maskelyne's son, Alistair. Many official and nonofficial reports have taken his memoirs on faith.NickJoneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04692930261848771802noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894698457228353216.post-3037953601596335712010-09-28T09:57:09.575-07:002010-09-28T09:57:09.575-07:00It is as well to remember that the book MAGIC-TOP ...It is as well to remember that the book MAGIC-TOP SECRET (ghost written by Frank S. Stuart) was published in 1949 and is not considered (by most) to be historically reliable in certain instances. More is claimed than Maskelyne actuually DID.<br /><br />Nonetheless---he did a LOT.<br /><br />And if you'd like to research Maskelyne's career for yourself you can begin here: http://www.channel4.com/history/microsites/R/real_lives/jasper.html<br /><br />and here: http://dictionaryofwar.org/node/672<br /><br />And Seymour Reit's book MASQUERADE: The Amazing Camouflage Deceptions of WWII is well thought of. SOME used copies (and ojne collectible edition) are available from Amazon.com http://www.amazon.com/Masquerade-amazing-camouflage-deceptions-World/dp/0801549310<br /><br />And Bookfinder.Com shows some 55 copies available from various sellers http://www.bookfinder.com/search/?isbn=0801549310&st=xl&ac=qr&src=dir<br /><br />I mesn, if that's any help.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894698457228353216.post-32595746510387939652010-09-28T08:01:27.986-07:002010-09-28T08:01:27.986-07:00Nick:
Coincidentally, I have spent a few hours in...Nick:<br /><br />Coincidentally, I have spent a few hours in the last few days chasing down as much as I can on Maskelyne. I don't have photos of the Scarecrow yet, but I do have dozens of images of some of the other faked contraptions he worked on, such as faked tanks, trucks etc.<br /><br />I doubt he simply made it up on his say-so, however, as he had a respected, proven background in this field with the military.Nick Redfernhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07199813303416083671noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894698457228353216.post-11403530738557321712010-09-28T01:18:23.074-07:002010-09-28T01:18:23.074-07:00Just a bit of a tangent: are there any extant phot...Just a bit of a tangent: are there any extant photos of the WWII 'scarecrow'? Are there independent witnesses to the scarecrow, or are we just going by Maskelyne's say-so? (and wasn't there a character with a similar name in Pynchon's <i>Gravity's Rainbow</i>?)NickJoneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04692930261848771802noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894698457228353216.post-37158613987400849212010-09-27T14:45:11.512-07:002010-09-27T14:45:11.512-07:00And Shadowcass concludes:
I should add that both ...And Shadowcass concludes:<br /><br />I should add that both SPACE PATROL (starring Ed Kemmer who had been a POW in the camp featured the movie THE GREAT ESCAPE) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wymYaJcTrTA and Tom Corbett, Space Cadet (starring Frankie Thomas) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imMb8vXEYc8&feature=related were both all over radio, television, comic books, comic strips, lunch boxes and everything else in 1952 so the reaction of the kids should not be surprising.<br /> <br />And the Flatwoods Monster IS immortal. It is the description of this creature that inspired the appearance of Colonel Bleep, the first COLOR cartoon series ever produced for television http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7iyb3qzx9Qk<br /> <br />CassNick Redfernhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07199813303416083671noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894698457228353216.post-7075680452147718592010-09-27T14:43:05.470-07:002010-09-27T14:43:05.470-07:00Shadowcass continues her latest comment:
THEN thr...Shadowcass continues her latest comment:<br /><br />THEN three children (ages 13, 12 , and 10) see "something" land on Mr. Fisher's farm. "I think that was a FLYING SAUCER!" cries Ed May (who is the oldest). "So do we!" chime in the others. And off they go to tell Kathleen May (mother of Ed and his brother, Fred) and instead of saying "Oh, you boys and your imaginations!" SHE immediately starts off for the farm with the three boys, two OTHER children, and a 17 year old National Guardsman named Gene Lemon. And Gene's dog who, reportedly, is the first to flee the "Thing." (The dog reportedly died two days later---but there are also people who claim it was still alive several YEARS after the encounter).<br />All the local reporter found the next day were tracks which he said were signs of a saucer landing but which later turned out to belong to Max Lockard's 1942 pick-up (he had been out looking for the flying saucer a few hours earlier).<br /> <br />Now, let's go back. There WAS a meteor that night which crossed three states and finally crashed into a hill about 12 miles away from Flatwoods. There were normal objects present which COULD have been "misidentified" due to increased adrenalin flow in the witnesses (aircraft beacons with flashing red lights and so on).<br /> <br />Kathleen May herself has said that what they saw was a "covert US Government aircraft" (not a flying saucer) which may be possible. As for the sickness the witnesses reported afterwards---this could have been to due the after-effects of the initial "panic" created by the belief that they were encountering a flying saucer and its inhabitant (adrenaline exhaustion and so on). OR it could have been some "relatively" harmless gas used by the pilot of the "covert craft" to scare away members of the public while repairs were being made---OR it could be that robots from space are hazardous to your health.<br /> <br />The truth is that we will probably never KNOW what really happened or didn't happen. What we DO know is that "Mr. Yeti" Ivan T. Sanderson took soil samples in 1952. He never made the results public. Now, we all loved Ivan but this is all of a piece with his "thunderbird picture" which he either loaned to some people (he could never remember who) or just plain lost. In other words, sometimes Ivan played a little fast and loose with the truth. I mean, he was a great guy...but there was a little P. T. Barnum in his soul, you know?<br /> <br />He didn't reveal the results because, in all likelihood, the results had nothing to reveal. It was just dirt.<br /> <br />But the Braxton County Incident remains a terrific story and I can understand why people might want to cling on to it---whether it's true or not.Nick Redfernhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07199813303416083671noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894698457228353216.post-25740705789439687422010-09-27T14:39:54.546-07:002010-09-27T14:39:54.546-07:00Shadowcass has had problems leaving comments here ...Shadowcass has had problems leaving comments here today (the usual tech stuff, it seems), so I'm (Nick) posting the following for her:<br /><br /><br /><br />On the question of "Could the eyewitnesses to the 'Flatwoods Monster' have been mistaken the answer is a resounding 'YES!'"<br /> <br />Case in point: "The Night that Panicked America". You've heard about it, I'm sure. It was October 30, 1938 and Orson Welles was presenting an adaptation of "The War of the Worlds" by H. G. Wells.<br />Many people who heard the broadcast fled their homes. There were some reported suicides. AND there were people who saw AND SHOT AT the "Martian Machines."<br />It has been established that what they saw and shot at were water towers and silos that they had seen on every day of their lives...but on THIS night they saw them as "alien machines."<br /> <br />Now...September 12, 1952. The Braxton County Incident.<br />What, if any, are the similarities? When Orson did his broadcast back in 1938 Hitler had already invaded Austria taken the Sudetenland (Czechoslovakia). Tojo was made "Minister of War" for Japan in July of that year and tensions were high world-wide. Everyone (with the possible exception of Neville Chamberlain) could see that war was coming,<br /> <br />In 1952 the Cold War was escalating. McCarthy's "Red Hunt" is in full swing---as is the war in Korea. And school children are being exposed to "educational films" like "Atomic Alert" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pUqJ8XYYliA and "Duck and Cover" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvChsvdPGjA&feature=related<br /> <br />and EVERYBODY was seeing crap like THIS: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9V47Qs9Eyus&feature=fvw<br /> <br />In other words, there was (again) an underlying current of fear.Nick Redfernhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07199813303416083671noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894698457228353216.post-21387316576366245362010-09-27T05:07:56.924-07:002010-09-27T05:07:56.924-07:00I beg your pardon "SpiralDance," but any...I beg your pardon "SpiralDance," but any mention of one James Carlson —a fellow seemingly created out of the whole cloth of "daddy issues" and klasskurtxian air to inconsistently crap on Hastings' stalwart initiative— is, for my money, abundantly countered on Frank Warren's very cogent site, _UFO Chronicles_, line, sheet, and toggle.<br /><br />http://www.theufochronicles.com/2010/09/echooscar-witch-hunt.html<br /><br />...And my apologies, Nick, but I've always found "Rich Reynolds" to be singularly underwhelming as a contributer where he is not laughably dubious with regard to a hard anthropomorphic and self-centering cant. There are other issues.<br /><br />I suppose it must be a case of one man's cheese being another's rotten milk. <br /><br />Say, perhaps Mr. Reynolds would like to debate the quality of his contribution with me... well... anywhere in cyber space where words can be tinkered on an electronic page, eh? Of course, there are prerequisite issues we'd have to wade through first, but I'm betting anybody you'd interview for substantive commentary would be up to it.<br /><br />All that said, I wonder what Edward Ruppelt could have meant when he wrote on page 61 of his _The Report On UFOs_, "There have been other and more lurid duels of death."Alfred Lehmberghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02028589165474437987noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894698457228353216.post-41938386692574249132010-09-26T15:48:02.536-07:002010-09-26T15:48:02.536-07:00"The USAF DID NOT know what the so-called &qu..."The USAF DID NOT know what the so-called "Flatwoods Monster" actually<br />was...That is why Leavitt was ordered to take samples from the site."<br /><br />No? IF this were a psychological study on the effects of fear (a la Major Maskelyne and his gang of tricksters---(incidentally, anyone who bothered to read Paul gallico's classic novel TOO MANY GHOSTS (1961) has known about the good Major's efforts for years) the government would NATURALLY take the "usual steps" to add verisimilitude to the incident in hopes that suggestible people would then say ""The USAF DID NOT know what the so-called "Flatwoods Monster" actually<br />was...That is why Leavitt was ordered to take samples from the site."<br /><br />Sorry, ALF, but one theory is as good as another in an incident this old.<br />Whether it was giant owls, robot scarecrows, an alien visitor, or hallucination has yet to be demonstrated.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894698457228353216.post-66367320358655545902010-09-26T08:52:33.661-07:002010-09-26T08:52:33.661-07:00Alfred:
Yes, I don't deny that Flatwoods coul...Alfred:<br /><br />Yes, I don't deny that Flatwoods could indeed have been alien. However, there is something I have noticed in certain significant cases - namely, that a genuine UFO event is then made more confusing by the insertion of a psy-op to confuse the affair.<br /><br />Take Rendlesham Forest, for example, where we have some incidents that seem truly anomalous, but then made more confusing by the insertion of stories of mind-manipulation of some of the witnesses etc.<br /><br />Same with the Contactees: I'm convinced that some of them may have had real experiences with something anomalous, but there's also data strongly suggesting a psy-op link to some of those cases.<br /><br />On broadly this same topic, when I interviewed Rich Reynolds for my "Contactees" book, he told me that with respect to the French and Italy-based sightings of dwarf-like UFO entities in the 1950s: "...I don't think those cases were set-up or contrived by the government at all. But the CIA didn't know how things might go from there, with the Italian and French cases and other ones, and how they should deal with it if there might have been an invasion. So, they set up people in a UFO contrivance and studied the witness response, and probably studied the public and the media's response too."<br /><br />And this is something I'm finding more and more - real cases, but that are confused by the addition of a psy-op element.<br /><br />And maybe that comes into play with Flatwoods and the 1952 cases: real events coupled with a psy-op to further study public perception.Nick Redfernhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07199813303416083671noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894698457228353216.post-28136362656046860822010-09-25T19:19:18.478-07:002010-09-25T19:19:18.478-07:00Any mention of Hastings requires reading James Car...Any mention of Hastings requires reading James Carlson's expose on Hasting's research -- newly updated at realityuncovered.net<br /><br />Indeed the two primary witnesses Hastings relies on -- Figel and Carlson -- both state that there was no ufos at the nuke sites. These are recent correspondences with Figel and Carlson. James Carlson's book, freely readable online, details exactly why the nukes went offline and also why there were no ufos witnessed.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894698457228353216.post-49131884666953340022010-09-25T13:58:16.388-07:002010-09-25T13:58:16.388-07:00That's a relief, Nick, as I've always coun...That's a relief, Nick, as I've always counted you as one of the good guys in this "thing," — a real asset for my money... a true contributor, if I may. That said:<br /><br />A solidly done data driven study of the whole "summer of saucers" affair only _culminating_ at Flatwoods, suggests, as I said before, a secret and undeclared air-war with ET. The fabric of the story is made from vetted cloth and there are no apologies, especially given the recent activities of Lesley Kean and Robert Hastings, that the ironic immediacy of these half- century events... is an ETH so far up the observer's nose one feels alien knees scrubbing ones top lip, eh?Alfred Lehmberghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02028589165474437987noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894698457228353216.post-22239396539896994412010-09-25T10:37:45.527-07:002010-09-25T10:37:45.527-07:00Hey Alfred
No need for any apologies, as there wa...Hey Alfred<br /><br />No need for any apologies, as there was no insult. I see it as a debate on a matter that is worthy of debate, and where people may have differing opinions - and that's all. <br /><br />Cheers<br />NickNick Redfernhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07199813303416083671noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894698457228353216.post-70826349964346144562010-09-25T10:31:47.400-07:002010-09-25T10:31:47.400-07:00"The USAF DID NOT know what the so-called &qu...<i>"The USAF DID NOT know what the so-called "Flatwoods Monster" actually<br />was...That is why Leavitt was ordered to take samples from the site."</i><br /><br />And I lean to agree with that. But we have also need to keep this in mind: the different agencies conforming the US National Defense System <b>did not</b> work as a coherent unified group. For most of their history they have worked as independent factions, carrying their own secret covert ops.<br /><br />While the USAF was the "public" face for UFO federal investigation, the CIA was conducting UFO research on their own —with file cases that MANY times never reached the hands of Ruppelt and Blue Book. And in the mean time, Old Man Hoover was also instructing his agents to keep an eye on the UFO problem.<br /><br />The idea that the Flatwoods monster was some kind of psy-ops experiment intended to test the civilian reaction to an alien threat does sound preposterous, <b>had it been orchestrated by the Air Force</b>, who were indeed trying to "put the lid" on UFOs.<br /><br />But, if it had been performed by the CIA's Office of Scientific Investigation unit —who months later were instrumental in the Robertson panel's conclusion that the public needed to be reeducated about UFOs— well, it kind of sounds more plausible. <br /><br />The Robertson Panel's agenda seemed to be more concerned with public paranoia than the actual threat UFOs might represent. Maybe the Flatwoods monster case was part of this conclusion.<br /><br />Anyway, Nick's hypothesis has been great food for thought :)Red Pill Junkiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14738203580562140501noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894698457228353216.post-41849689832816434292010-09-25T10:20:58.947-07:002010-09-25T10:20:58.947-07:00"It's entirely feasible that there is no ..."It's entirely feasible that there is no connection. But, whether there is or not, there are some intriguing parallels, which suggest to me we would be wise to study further."<br /><br />_Entirely_ collegiate, I suspect Feschino must stand in agreement with you, only he'd likely add that one might also avail themselves more fully of the pointed study already done. Avail themselves, especially, given the bulk of the evidentiary audit trail comes _first_ from official Government documents, then the written accounts of state and local periodicals... and only _then_ the accounts of first person witnesses.<br /><br />See if you were told that the Map —linked to above— reflected bona fide UFO activity in the area over ...a whole decade... it would still be impressive. Though, when one discovers that the map reflects bona fide activity over a mere 21.5 hour period... well... the old jaw has to drop and _bounce_, eh?<br /><br />Feschino, while _not_, I suspect, trying to put words in your mouth, has been "burned" by Docca Nickel's roc-sized and wholly insulting "barn owls." He's going to be a little "shy" with regard to moving robot scarecrows, I submit.<br /><br />...Apologies up front, Nick, for any insult you may have perceived. It's not there or was not remotely intended.Alfred Lehmberghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02028589165474437987noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894698457228353216.post-29356863553352919832010-09-25T09:52:14.289-07:002010-09-25T09:52:14.289-07:00Frank:
Had I known the first book was incorrect t...Frank:<br /><br />Had I known the first book was incorrect then I would have read the correct one instead, and will now do so.<br /><br />You state: "Why would the USAF send a large flaming craft over the nation's Capitol with a scarecrow in it, if it were trying to cover up UFOs from the American public?"<br /><br />They wouldn't! I'm not saying that at all. Why would you assume that even if this scenario was real, that the device would be flown in a vehicle over the nation's capital before being unleashed at Flatwoods? I never even alluded to such.<br /><br />That there were sightings at DC doesn't mean that this implied the device was flown over DC first. They could have been separate events.<br /><br />You'll note that I was not dogmatic about the theory, which is precisely why the blog-post was titled as a question: "Is This The Flatwoods Monster?" Rather than: "This Is The Flatwoods Monster!"<br /><br />The point I was making was that in WWII, we know that the British Army was using a 12-foot-tall construction that was full of lights and that provoked fear, as part of a psychological warfare operation that was targeting little towns.<br /><br />And, the story was published in a 1949 book (Magic Top Secret). <br /><br />We know that Rand prepared a report on this story in the following year, 1950, and that the report was specifically for the attention of USAF psychological warfare planners.<br /><br />Then in 1952, we have this 12-foot-tall thing appearing in a little town, only 2 years or so after the USAF was told about the British psy-op by Rand.<br /><br />It's entirely feasible that there is no connection. But, whether there is or not, there are some intriguing parallels, which suggest to me we would be wise to study further.Nick Redfernhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07199813303416083671noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894698457228353216.post-36145064527549166482010-09-25T09:33:56.488-07:002010-09-25T09:33:56.488-07:00Scaife
You make an interesting point on the Dr. N...Scaife<br /><br />You make an interesting point on the Dr. No angle re the machanized dragon. It's interesting to note that Maskelyne was also involved in creating faked tanks (to fool the enemy) and other vehicle-oddities too!Nick Redfernhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07199813303416083671noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894698457228353216.post-19926897805137432942010-09-25T07:56:04.277-07:002010-09-25T07:56:04.277-07:00Frank Feschino Writes:
Hey Alfred,
A great post...Frank Feschino Writes:<br /><br />Hey Alfred, <br /><br />A great post in response to Redfern's scarecrow story. Yes, he should have read the new book and not the old incorrect one. <br /><br />Just remember what Leavitt stated to me in his interview about what the USAF said about the "Flatwoods Monster."<br /><br />This segment reads how Colonel Leavitt was called and ordered by the USAF to obtain samples from the Fisher Farm:<br /><br />Frank: "Now when these samples were sent out, they were sent to<br />Washington directly. How did that process work."<br /><br />Leavitt: "Air Force people, that's who." <br /><br />Frank: "Now, they contacted you?"<br /><br />Leavitt: "Yeah."<br /><br />Frank: "Through Washington." <br /><br />Leavitt: "Yeah, they wanted to know what it was."<br /><br />The USAF DID NOT know what the so-called "Flatwoods Monster" actually<br />was...That is why Leavitt was ordered to take samples from the site.<br /><br />During the summer of the saucers in 1952, the Air Force was desperately trying to keep a lid on the UFO activity occurring over the United States. The UFO press conference at the Pentagon in July 1952 was proof of that.<br /><br />Now also remember, on Sept. 12, 1952, the damaged/flaming Flatwoods<br />craft actually passed very low over DC heading west and flew<br />approximately 200 miles before it landed on the farm. Over DC, it was<br />seen flying very low by hundreds of witnesses. <br /><br />Why would the USAF send a large flaming craft over the nation's Capitol with a scarecrow in it, if it were trying to cover up UFOs from the American public? Especially when the public was already panicked by the<br />July 19-20 and July 26-27 Washington DC scare only 6 weeks before!!!<br /><br />Furthermore, what about the 102 documented locations where several UFOs were sighted that day!?<br /><br />http://paratopiary.blogspot.com/2010/03/blog-post.html <br /><br />FrankAlfred Lehmberghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02028589165474437987noreply@blogger.com