Never Before Published Audio Taped Interviews Affirms UFO Activity at Nuke Missil
Hey, y'all,
Sorry to be absent for awhile but I have been busy interviewing USAF veterans who report UFO activity during test launches from Vandenberg AFB over the years. One well-known case, the Big Sur Incident, has been thoroughly researched. See:
http://www.cufos.org/hastings.pdf
Also, consider this:
On June 17, 1974, the
Hobart (Australia)
Mercury carried the following news item, based on an article appearing the same day in
The New York Times:
HUNTSVILLE, Alabama – Experts at an Army missile base say they are puzzled about strange ‘ghost ships’ picked up by powerful radar scanner in the Pacific during a tracking exercise last summer.
There has been little official comment on what the scientists found during the exercise, but Major Dallas Van Hoose, an Army spokesman, confirmed recently that ‘some unexplained aerial phenomena’ were observed during the exercise last August [1973]. Scientists, many of whom are reluctant to be named in interviews because of general public skepticism over unidentified flying objects, say privately they have been unable to find any explanation for the ‘ghost ships.’
‘We have never seen anything precisely like this before,’ said one ballistic missile defense expert who works for an Army agency here and who is familiar with the advanced radar used to test missiles and warheads. Huntsville houses the Army’s ballistic missile defense systems command which tests in the Kwajelein Atoll region of the Marshall Island Trust Territory held by the U.S.
Last August the Air Force launched a Minuteman ICBM from Vandenberg Air Force base aimed for the Kwajelein missile range which is used by the Army, Air Force, and Navy. The radar experts in the Pacific found they were also tracking an unidentified flying object next to the ICBM’s nose cone. Radar picked up a inverted saucer-shape object to the right and above the descending nose cone and watched it cross the warhead’s trajectory to a point which was below and to-the-left of it before the phantom ship disappeared. The ghost ship was described as being 10-feet high and 40-feet long. Two separate radar systems saw it at the same time which may eliminate the probability that there was a malfunction in one of the radar systems. It was also reported that 3 other identical objects were seen in the vicinity – the same size, shape, and dimensions. One scientist said the data indicated that the phantom ship ‘flew under its own power’ but could not explain what sort of ‘power’ was involved.
So far none of the experts here believe the ghost ship was a natural phenomenon caused by freak weather conditions or echoes commonly seen on radar screens. 25
END OF ARTICLE
So, apparently, the incident described by U.S. Air Force veterans Jacobs and Mansmann was not unique.
(See the link above, re: The Big Sur case.) Regarding the ballistic missile expert’s statement about never having seen “anything precisely like this before”, given that the 1964 Big Sur incident was immediately classified Top Secret—with only a handful of individuals knowing the facts—it would have been unknown to other military and civilian personnel conducting missile tests a decade later. As for the UFO’s apparent shape, I’m unclear as to how radar could have determined it was an “inverted saucer”. This statement seems to be a garbled journalistic description, which inadvertently combined both radar and photographic data, as described by the source.
Researcher Barry Greenwood later reprinted this newspaper story in his co-authored book, Clear Intent (later republished as The UFO Cover-up). He wrote, “When FOIA inquiries were filed with the Army, they denied having any records concerning the sighting. We were referred to Vandenberg AFB, California. Vandenberg responded that ‘in accordance with Air Force manual 12-50 which implements the Federal Records Act, the launch operations records for August 1973 have been destroyed.’ Note that it is not stated that the UFO tracking report was destroyed, only a very general statement is given that ‘launch operations records’ were destroyed. That [records of] such a mysterious event as this would not be kept somewhere for possible future use is incomprehensible. Yet this excuse is offered time and time again to deny access to records…” 26
References:
25. June 17, 1974, the Hobart Mercury (The New York Times)
26. Greenwood, Barry and Fawcett, Lawrence. Clear Intent: The Government Cover-up of the UFO Experience, Prentice-Hall Inc., 1984, pp. 69-70
---------- Post added at 10:53 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:42 AM ----------
Now, regarding trainedobserver's frustration about my failure to respond to his, and other persons' comments on this thread, I will cut to the chase:
No offense, but I can either do research or blog my time away. I am 61 and hear the clock ticking. So, every day I ask myself how much time I should devote to blogging, as opposed to my work. There are hundreds of persons writing about my research on various blogs and I simply don't have time to answer them all. Again, no offense intended.
If one goes to the "UFOs and Nukes" thread and goes back to Page 1, and reviews the other pages as well, one will find that I have posted large excerpts from my book which, I suspect, will answer many of the questions being posed on this thread. If one is truly interested in an in-depth analysis of the subject, one can read those. I will also now post new material on the same thread, as time permits, given my work schedule. I simply cannot re-invent the wheel by restating my findings and conclusions every time someone posts a comment or criticism about them. So, later today, I will post some things at the other thread. I probably won't comment on
this one in the future, except on very rare occasions.
