Breaking News: Nuclear Weapons Personnel Go Public With Information On UFO Activity At Missle Launch

reply to post by Loadmaster

This is just like proclaiming that the space shuttle has filmed unusual craft. It may have happened recently, but it's no different than when it happened years ago.

true but to have more corroboration from other witnesses wether it's a shuttle ufo case or the Op case is of some importance to some people. not all

one mans trash is another mans treasure.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

thanks Frank for the info

Thanks so much Frank, for that info. It sounds so interesting! They are just comming out of the wood work lately with these sitings. Why do you think that is?

Hi Pammy!

Originally posted by PammyK
Thanks so much Frank, for that info. It sounds so interesting! They are just comming out of the wood work lately with these sitings. Why do you think that is?

In this instance, it's the hard work and diligence of Robert Hastings; his life long research/investigation and focus particularly in regards to UFO's and sensitive military installations, many which possess nuclear armaments . . . these two witnesses are the fruits of his labor.

Cheers,
Frank

Why are some of you jumping on Frank for his opening post when it was done correctly and by the ATS rules?

He posted a snippet of the story in question and presented a link to the full article.

That is what we are supposed to do, or get hit with an excessive quote edit from a Mod which would essentially reduce the article to the same form as Franks opening post.

Any of you confused on the issue should look up the posting guidelines before complaining about how frustrating it is to be subjected to an opening post that actually follows the ATS rule.

That said, thanks for the article.
I look forward to more information on this subject.

Starred and flagged.


- Lee

Evfenin' Seitler,

Originally posted by Seitler
I'm just curious as to how many of you have read the Project Blue Book documentation? As someone that was military, I find the information a little lacking. For instance, just about every year from 1947 - 1965, there were no more than 46 objects to remain a true UFO after studying the information. All but one year, and that was 1952. That year held 303 objects that remained a true UFO.

Project Blue Book, (with the inclusion of its predecessors Grudge & Sign) "officially" began in 1948 and concluded in 1969; there are literally thousands of pages in the reports; the report that you've provided a link to is but a small abstract of the investigation.

Having said that, per Air Force protocol (Bolender memo) "any report affecting National Security wasn't part of the Blue Book system."

Equally important is the fact that numbers presented in the data re "sighting reports" is not an accurate reflection of the sightings that took place; they're only indicative of reports that reached the Air Force, or ones that they chose to investigate that might have received public exposure.

Additionally, the "statistical data" mentioned in the report you reference is erroneous, as by definition those under "insufficient data and or "other" would be classified as a "UFO," which greatly increase the percentage of "unidentifieds."

Does ANYONE know the significance of that year? I'm no good with history, but I am curious why this year spiked so high in parallel to the rest. I know there were a lot more sights that year than all others as well.

I wonder why there is not supporting information pertaining to these, still, unidentified objects.

As stated above, the numbers provided are not accurate; however, 1952 was considered a "flap year"; it was the summer that UFOs flew over the White House, and were pursued by military interceptors . . . to no avail.

Cheers,
Frank

Evenin' nerbot

Originally posted by nerbot
reply to post by Frank Warren

 

You post like John Lear.....

Not an insult, just a comment.

And from the "breaking news guidelines"...

* Use the comment field for your opinion, spin, or other commentary on the news article. One-line posts or short posts simply repeating the quoted snippet are not enough. We want to see what you think of the story or why you think it's important.

So...what are YOUR opinions, or IS this just a hook?

No offense taken, and your point is well taken; however, in this instance I wrote the article, which elaborated on the press release which was exclusive to the UFO Chronicles; the "quoted snippet" was in fact "my own words."

That said, when I initiate a thread, that hopefully inspires intelligent discourse, I stay with it until it peters out . . . so my thoughts, opinions etc., are strewn throughout.

Cheers,
Frank

Evenin' iwannaseethisshipgodown,

Originally posted by iwannaseethisshipgodown
ok first thanks to frank for the post do you know how i can listen over the intrenet coz i'm from england where they do a damn good job of keeping us all in the dark.

Yes; go here to get the details to listen to the show on Sunday.

Cheers,
Frank

reply to post by Shere Khaan

But geez I resent clicking links to your website only to find no more information other than more information will be released on the actual paracast.

This is exactly why I read the member posts before
I click the links...what are they selling....sorry ...but true.
My time is not worth your reading my sig line either
are we even???
did you read it?
Peace

Edit to note : That Frank logged off 2 mins. after i posted this...Frank ....are you our friend?
nevermind ....we get it good night

[edit on 28-3-2009 by Zeptepi]

Hi Frank, I have an off-topic question. Do you have any idea of the amount of ufos in the 60's and 70's had a few flaps. 67 and 77 to be exact. Do you know if these years are true?

Of, and great thread

reply to post by Frank Warren


Frank ..as you know, the world and ATS is changing.
I am the biggest propellant (sic)of the enigma of UFO's...hell I remember when we had too spell it like U.F.O. with the period delineation ..seriously Frank, these kids today aren't buying the old "party line" buy my buick U.F.O. ...anymore. give these kids the credit they havent deserved yet..they are smarter then the stoners of 1979...really they are.


Is this the Petering out...of which you refer?
Peace
your friend
Zep

Thanks Frank for giving these guys a voice.
I've read Robert Hasting's book UFOs and Nukes
He has put in a lot of work over the past twenty years digging out as many witnesses to UFO at missile sites as he can. He interview over 100 ex USAF servicemen and witnesses in writing his book which took him years.
Its only available at his website.
I'd highly recommend it


[edit on 28-3-2009 by Impodog]

reply to post by Xtraeme

Before I even finished reading your post, I got a mental picture of a "POW" situation. Maybe thats what was going on, and thats why its been peaceful, so-far.

Originally posted by Impodog
Thanks Frank for giving these guys a voice.
I've read Robert Hasting's book UFOs and Nukes
He has put in a lot of work over the past twenty years digging out as many witnesses to UFO at missile sites as he can. He interview over 100 ex USAF servicemen and witnesses in writing his book which took him years.
Its only available at his website.
I'd highly recommend it

Unbelievable.

Are you his publisher?

Doesn't surprise me at all.

I wonder if it was thermo-nuclear capability that rekindled their interest - it states "this race is about to embark on somethign big" so they have to take in interest..,

S&F

Some of you guys are incredible...

You are bitching because in some people's minds Frank didn't post this according to the rules? Yes, let's ignore the actual information being presented and focus on a hypothetical technicality - which by the way I'm sure the mods are able and would have enforced if Frank really broke the rules.

I find particularly funny the people saying "nothing to see here, show me the bodies". Yeah, because all the other threads on ATS have solved the UFO phenomena, right?

And the "no new information" thing... are you serious? How many f#cking threads can we have on ATS asking people's opinions on "do you think there's life somewhere else?", "do you think the greys are benevolent?", "why do aliens abduct people?" or discussing a "new" video posted on Youtube of lights in the sky?

And you're acting offended because two new witnesses who have never gone public, who are revealing their true identities, will not make "disclosure" happen tomorrow?

You're right... it's better to keep debating John Lear, Bill Cooper, Phil Schneider, Dan Burisch, Jonathan Reed, and other liars and hoaxers...

What a joke...

Converge, I could not have voiced my own opinion better than the way you've expressed yours on that post - it would seem like the discourse here has devolved to the point where people are either A) In awe of our space brothers here to save us, or B) paranoid about who is making money on UFO hoaxes. Anyone who has listened to The Paracast knows that we work hard to engage folks in legitimate conversations about UFOs and the paranormal in general, asking (hopefully) intelligent questions and calling people on their BS and wild claims. We've exposed charlatans, hoaxers and liars, and will continue to do so, as well as give a platform to some rather insightful, intelligent and provocative guests that might give us a real insight into what's going on. To see the response of many of the people on this thread to the reality that there are some new witnesses, who have provided further corroboration of UFO activity over nuclear missile launch sites, it's just frustrating. No, they don't have photos. Get over it.

Those of you who feel that you are "entitled" to answers, forget about it, you're entitiled to exactly squat in your lives. You want an alien body? You want good, clear photos of UFOs? How would you even know what you were looking at? You feel that UFOs are synonymous with aliens? You're not paying attention, and you're not likely to ever get closer to an understanding of these phenomena if you continue to not acknowledge what is right in front of you. Those who cite the Greer-driven 2001 press conference don't realize that this ended up mixing great witnesses - like Bob Salas - with lunatics and charlatans who pull the whole field down more than a few notches (including some of the heros of the folks who have posted in this thread), and seems to have been done to poison the pool of legitimate witnesses. How many of you know about the Leslie Kean/James Fox-organized press conference of November 2007? Yeah, it was ONLY military witnesses, no charlatans, so it's probably not on your radar. You want instant results? How typical of the instant gratification generation. If it takes some effort, hell, forget it, I want what I want NOW, GIVE ME ANSWERS because I WANT THEM. Folks, you're going to get nothing, nada, zero with that attitude. You have to WORK for insights, you have to STRUGGLE for glimpses of truth, you have to FIGHT for results. That's how REAL LIFE works, folks.

Anyway, don't let me disturb you, there's a new UFO Hunters on, you better go make some popcorn and settle in. Look, it's John Lear, with his bottomless pit of nonsense and idiocy, how much fun is that? People breathing on the moon, but not those mean, bad, lying Apollo astronauts, they didn't go to the Moon, you've been duped. Because, you know, it's just so difficult to handle the truth.

dB

[edit on 28-3-2009 by davidbiedny]

[edit on 28-3-2009 by davidbiedny]

[edit on 28-3-2009 by davidbiedny]

reply to post by davidbiedny


I listen to you and Gene every week and your show is by far the best serious UFO and related show out there.

Those, like you say, are looking at this subject purely from an entertainment point of view will most likely hate The Paracast or find it distasteful that you confront some of the guests you have on, but those (few?) of us who really want to know the answers and debate this rationally and seriously appreciate everything that you do and your position in the field.

And the same applies to Frank who does a great job.

Keep it up, I will be tuning in on Sunday

Mornin' lee anoma,

Originally posted by lee anoma
Why are some of you jumping on Frank for his opening post when it was done correctly and by the ATS rules?

He posted a snippet of the story in question and presented a link to the full article.

That is what we are supposed to do, or get hit with an excessive quote edit from a Mod which would essentially reduce the article to the same form as Franks opening post.

Any of you confused on the issue should look up the posting guidelines before complaining about how frustrating it is to be subjected to an opening post that actually follows the ATS rule.

That said, thanks for the article.
I look forward to more information on this subject.

Starred and flagged.

- Lee

Thanks for the kind words; I have to admit I was taken aback by some of the comments and lack of attention to the theme of the thread and its relevance.

Cheers,
Frank

Mornin' malakiem,

Originally posted by malakiem
Hi Frank, I have an off-topic question. Do you have any idea of the amount of ufos in the 60's and 70's had a few flaps. 67 and 77 to be exact. Do you know if these years are true?

Of, and great thread

Off the cuff, '67 yes, '77 I'd have to check. Years ago, there was a researcher who pointed out that flaps seemed to occur on "5 year" intervals; there were arguments suggesting it had something to do with "distant travel."

Cheers,
Frank

Nice thread Frank.. Interesting subject, but hardly 'breaking news'. Not wishing to advertise an external website (and therefore no link), but has nobody here watched the video of the Disclosure Project press conference that took place in the National Press Club on May 8th 2001?

Keep up the good work!