As Promised, Alonzo Typer Checking In

reply to post by occrest


I don't want him to reveal himself...I just want to make sure that if he's telling us a really great story-then let it be a story, not a TRUE event. I love being entertained

I will say this: Skepticism is a tool to uncover the truth out of facts and falsities. We are here on this planet to learn about ourselves and our nature. If you are telling me something that is going to change my world view...make it good. Make sure your facts line up. I respect knowledge gained.

I wish Typer all of the best in this world. I have no ill feelings. Just a desire to see other people not be mislead.

Originally posted by DeadSeraph
For those who are attempting to criticize the material presented by Alonzo Typer as being false:

I understand the value you place in skepticism. Rationality and critical thinking are crucial. Skeptics play a fundamental role in both our world and here at ATS, and I respect your vigilance. However, consider for a moment if this person is actually telling the truth? How would you feel if at 90 years of age you were having your life picked apart by people not even half your age who never lived your life or witnessed what you witnessed? If this person is well on in years as he claims, is it not unreasonable for him to neglect to post some of the more tacit details of his WWII experiences? It's clear from the bulk of his first 2 posts in this thread, that he was attempting to set up some back ground in order to get down to the details of what we'd all like to hear.

This isn't to say that I believe or disbelieve the story being presented here. But at the very least, let the man finish his story, and THEN pick it apart as you please. I'm not sure why there is the need to be the first skeptic on page one to debunk a story or claim. Regardless of the veracity of the claims, there will be those who believe them, and those who don't. You needn't prove to the world that you were the first person to call B.S.

Let him finish his story, and then have at it. I for one, would like to hear the whole thing before I draw my conclusions or begin sleuthing and picking things apart (and I'm sure others here would also like to hear the whole story). You aren't doing the community a service by chasing this person off. You can still do the community a service with your skepticism by debunking the contents of the thread long after the OP has come and gone if his claims turn out to be false, but at least let them be made. That is part of what ATS is all about, is it not?

Hello,
I was not originally going to post on this thread as I did a few times defending him on his Intro thread, BUT....I think he is finished with his story.

I stopped reading the OP, as well as a few others, when he mentioned the B-25 mission(s) off a "Yorktown class" carrier.
There was only ONE raid from the Hornet, a Yorktown class CV.
All of the B-25 crashed after their minimal effect (failed) bombing runs on the Japan mainland.

Doolittle Raids, Wiki, but pretty accurate

So, if he was in the Navy, he was NOT a radio operator on a B-25 during the Doolittle Raid. End of story.
ETA: He also said in the paragraph above the B-25 statement he said he was a PILOT???
I am now confused!

He also goes on to say in another post that he was painting and chipping the hull, etc. That is the job of a Boatswain Mate, or as we used call them "Deck Apes". A highly skilled RM would not be chipping the hull or painting the decks.
(BTW: I spent 8 years in the USN, 1971 - 78), Poseidon Missile, (C-3) Tech(SS), USS George Washington Carver, SSBN-656(Gold), now decommissioned and the USS San Diego, AFS-6, surface, ICC, also decommissioned.)

Anyway, maybe I'll go back and read the rest just for the entertainment value.

It has been said that at 90, his memory may misinterpret the actual facts from 70 years ago.
But I submit that I think he would definitely remember the difference between being an Army Air Force Radio operator on a B-25 and a painter of ship's hulls. Don't you?

Thanks and 73's,
Tom

Typer stated:
"I was stationed on a “Yorktown” class carrier throughout much of the War. I was assigned as a radio operator on B-25’s and flew on many successful missions."

Clearly, it has been established that these 2 statements are mutually exclusive.

If part of the "Doolittle" mission, then there would have been Army/AirForce enlisted personnel on board the Hornet in support of B-25's , but assigned to ships company duties as well for maintenance, as all Navy enlisted have to participate in on ship. So, you could have been "In support of the Dolittle raid."

The part about flying missions as a radio operator had to have been done from land, elsewhere, and had nothing to do with the "Doolittle" mission.

So, clear it up typer, or the aviation historians that are on your butt are gonna take you down hard. You were the one that said it.

reply to post by charlyv


Having served in the Navy, I know they have detachments, and that is what might have been the situation. He could have been assigned to the carrier, but sent on a detachment to fly in B25s on naval missions for various reasons. It is very possible.

Also, when you first get to your ship, you are assigned lower level duty until you are sent to your shop, and even then you get sent out to do the dirty work. Chipping paint is something most enlisted people wind up doing in the navy.

It doesn't sound like any of you people ever served.

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by charlyv

 

Having served in the Navy, I know they have detachments, and that is what might have been the situation. He could have been assigned to the carrier, but sent on a detachment to fly in B25s on naval missions for various reasons. It is very possible.

Also, when you first get to your ship, you are assigned lower level duty until you are sent to your shop, and even then you get sent out to do the dirty work. Chipping paint is something most enlisted people wind up doing in the navy.

It doesn't sound like any of you people ever served.

You are wrong: (but Happy St. Valentine's Day)

I take offense to that, please read my post above! I spent 8 years Sub and Surface Navy.
I NEVER chipped paint, I started out as an ET3 out of Advanced Electronics "A" school and then an MT3 out of Polaris/Poseidon "C" school in Dam Neck, VA.

He would NOT have been attached to the B-25 Squadrons, especially as a Radio Operator.
AND there was ONLY ONE Naval mission of B-25's and that was the Doolittle mission!

He would not be chipping paint as a Radioman (RM) especially if he was in the Army Air Force!

Please read my post!!

I defended Mr. Typer on more than one occasion in his Intro post.
I gave him the benefit of the doubt!!
BUT when he starts off with the B-25 stuff. Well.....what can I say?

73's,
Tom

reply to post by tomdham


You were an exception compared to the rest of the fleet where most people only complete A school before going to the fleet, and getting sent out on support jobs is standard. Maybe because you are a submariner,

From what I have read there were Navy crews flying B25s, although only a small number, so yes, he could have been one of those.

How about instead of taking offense, you consider that your experience was different than others, and that WW II was a whole different world.

I understand skepticism, and it definitely has its place on ATS. I also acknowledge that a good portion of ATS members have more knowledge than myself regarding World War II, although I do find it interesting and try to learn as much as I can about it.

That said, I think some members are taking separate sentences and trying to jam them together when they were not meant to be taken in this context. Mr. Typer was attempting to quickly give a brief background as to why he was where he was when he saw the UFOs, which was one of the more popular things many were clamoring for in response to his introductory post. In reading responses to this one, however, these were a few things I went back and checked out:

I did not read anywhere where he claimed his B-25's were launched off a ship. Sorry if I missed that part.

He also did not say that he was exclusively stationed on a ship during the entire war, only that that is where he spent the majority of his time.

Is it possible that he did not mean he took part in THE Doolittle Raid, but meant "the Doolittle Raids as you call it" as a general term for bombing missions late in the Pacific Theatre?

I can't comment to say anything of the "scraping paint" part except that it seems plausible if he was a newer crew member. Things may have been different back then, my great-grand father recalled scrapping paint as a way to pass time on his supply ship during the war one of the few time I got him to talk about it. It also seems plausible that somehow his capabilities with a radio could be discovered and put to better use, especially if there were not many people in the Navy with the inclination for flight at the time.

In his introduction post, Mr. Typer stated that he became a pilot after his service in WWII and that this gave him unique perspective regarding aerospace engineering.

I'm not trying to start arguments, I simply noted that the aspects of the story posters were trying to pick apart were largely amalgams of separate statements I can't be sure were meant to be taken the way they were.

I'm also hope that Mr. Typer is not discouraged by these attempts. Even if all or part of the story is fiction, it is a good read. If you don't think that belongs at ATS then don't read this thread, simple as that. I will even go as far to say that I can understand if some facts get mixed up because at this point by great-grand mother remembers what my great-grand father did in WWII better than he does. I mean no disrespect to Mr. Typer stating this; he seems to more than capable.

I personally am more interested in the "things within the government" he has seen that now give him pause. I hope to read more from him soon... I would also advise Mr. Typer to at least clarify a statement someone has questioned especially if it is taken in the wrong context as I suspect here. Getting frustrated will only fuel those who are trying to discredit you.

reply to post by NuminousCosmos


it is simply impossible for him to be any one of them

just look at his posts / claims - and compare them to the Bio info for the 5 doolittle survivors

none of them [ the doolittle crew ]

joined the navy

ergo walt .......... oops sorry mr typer

was not a doolittle raider

reply to post by ProgressiveSlayer


hi - to save time and cut out the " clutter " of other peoples replies , please read :

the aggregated posts , thread 2

the aggregated posts thread 1

they are the posts of " alonzo typer " - by thread

read them carefully - and shout " walt " when you have noticed a total of 5 from the following :

mutually exclusive statements

blatant contradictions

examples of evasive backpeddling / obsfucation

gross historical inacuracies

in just a few posts - it cannot maintain basic internal consistancy in its tail

Originally posted by AlonzoTyper

As I have previously stated, I am not here to deceive anyone. Only to tell a story

No problem, dear sir. Just post a picture of yourself holding a piece of paper with your nickname and a timestamp, that should be more than enough to silence your detractors (or as they say around here, TOGTFO)

In the meantime, awesome story, brother.

reply to post by SonoftheSun


Here's a video of an interview with Mr. Gordon Cooper that supports Mr. Typers account:

www.youtube.com...


To Mr. Typer: Thankyou very much for your account, and be assured, you have my full respect! Please go on!

Dear Mr Alonzo,

this is an excellent and informative story and the way you describe it makes me feel inside my heart that this is a true story. Since we are on the internet there is no way to proof it though.

In any way, please keep sharing your experience with us, and don't let the nay sayers and derailers get through to you. I greatly appreciate you sharing, and if you don't mind will translate it into my language to share with my country man.

Please take care ... as i also feel that you may draw unwanted attention to you. it may be wise to ask your grand children how to proxy and hide your IP, although it may be to late by now, if it is true what you say.

thank you

Just saying that some self-professed historians here seem to be laboring under the belief that all written history is cast in stone and 100% accurate. For this to be true, those who have written and are writing history would have had to have interviewed every person experiencing and event, would have had to assume they were all telling the event accurately as well, and would have had to believe there was never such a thing as a classified or secret mission. I know firsthand that there are things about WWII that were never written down, either because the chroniclers just never got to the right people or pile of information or because things were intentionally omitted for a variety of reasons.

While some chroniclers of history get damn close, let's also not forget that history can be and often is rewritten and corrected as other information comes to light. As it should be. Perhaps the OP saw or lived things that have never been chronicled before or remembers them a bit differently because he lived them and also because time has passed.

How could anyone living in the world today, especially those who frequent ATS not realize that history isn't always written from all vantage points and isn't always all-inclusive. We witness revisionist history almost daily in our world and "news" today, and part of our quest here is to identify this. So while I absolutely understand the importance of vetting a story and an OP, I don't believe that one has to take the harsh fringe stance of exposing at all costs or rudeness either and should always consider that something like this might possibly be new and might help us paint a clearer picture of events. And frankly, as GEL reminded, sometimes that just a matter of tone and civility.

That's all.

Very interesting story. I hope it continues.

Originally posted by ProRipp
According to AT's profile he's got 204 Flags ????
I count 23 ?
WTF ?
Has he had them all snatched back ?
Summat fishy going on 'ere !


Peace

(story had me riveted though !)

Lol, fail.

Anyhow, i feel that this story has been debunked. The two members on here obviously know their history, and the contradictions, in the OP, just clearly, confirms it for me.

In his introduction post, i said, i would reserved my opinion until more facts have come to light, and he has started to share his experiences, but i must admit, after reading it, and reading into the "Doolittle" debacle, it seems, i have now reached a conclusion.

Yet again, i am dissapointed.

vvv

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
reply to post by ProgressiveSlayer

 

hi - to save time and cut out the " clutter " of other peoples replies , please read :

the aggregated posts , thread 2

the aggregated posts thread 1

they are the posts of " alonzo typer " - by thread

read them carefully - and shout " walt " when you have noticed a total of 5 from the following :

mutually exclusive statements

blatant contradictions

examples of evasive backpeddling / obsfucation

gross historical inacuracies

in just a few posts - it cannot maintain basic internal consistancy in its tail

I did read them all, twice now. Thank you for the compilation of his posts, it made the second time much quicker. Trying not to beat around the bush, I will state this: If your mission is to discredit this man, quote whole or parts of posts to prove this. The majority of what I've seen people pursue as a means to discredit attempt to glean from them more meaning than what is actually there, by, for example, assuming events took place at the same time when no such statement was made. In doing so, contradictions and historical inaccuracies are "discovered" more than stated by Mr. Typer.

I do have some reservations about Mr. Typer's story now that I've seen him deal with some negative posts. Again, I would say to Mr. Typer that it would seem simply clarifying your statements would be much quicker and more satisfying to (some) fellow members than posting long essays about why you don't want to or whether or not you care if you are taken seriously. I will also say, however, that a great amount of detail could make it considerably easier for someone/thing with vast resources to pin down who he is.

And no, I probably won't shout "walt" either way because I'm not exactly sure to what you are referring. This is at the least an interesting thread, I was simply trying to show why I disagree with some of the more recent charges that have been levied since I seem to have taken a different understanding than many from his posts.

reply to post by Peloquin


Hi Peloquin and thanks for the video link !

Mr Cooper - in his latter years - suffered from discredit of his accounts on many levels. Even though he is a National Hero, there are many out there that think that he just made up good stories from hearsay. I am in no position whatsoever to make a judgement on Mr Cooper but there are members here that knew him well.

And I do expect to see them around in this thread at one point or another.

Personally, I was questioning Mr Typer's intro with hard skepticism. I might still be wrong, afterall this is the internet and this could just be good story telling from someone wanting to have a little fun but I now doubt it. If Mr Typer is for real, which I now think he is, then we should sit and listen, with respect.

So far, as far as I'm concerned, he walks the talk. And he has my undivided attention.