"Always Telling the Truth Means Never Having to Remember Anything"

-Dennis Balthaser

 

Editorials: Ufology

By Dennis Balthaser

Giving the Public Information about the 1947 Roswell Incident

03/01/99

Credible, according to the dictionary is defined as, "1. capable of being believed; believable: a credible statement, and 2. worthy of belief or confidence ; trustworthy: a credible witness". Volumes could be written merely on that one word as it relates to the 1947 Roswell Incident.

 

Speaking of credible, high on the list would probably be the United States Air Force. After all they have come out publicly with 4 explanations (excuses) for the Roswell Incident. On July 8, 1947, in a press release written by then Lt. Walter Haut, public relations officer for the 509th Bomb Group, under instructions from Col. Blanchard; the next day, (July 9, 1947) General Ramey, Commander of the 8th Air Force, issued a statement; in 1994/95 the Air Force issued a voluminous work entitled "The Roswell Report: Fact vs. Fiction in the New Mexico Desert", and the most recent in 1997, being 231 pages entitled "The Roswell Report: Case Closed". U.S Air Force credibility may well be derived from the fact that they have had ample practice in writing such documents and making statements over the years with other documents such as Project Blue Book, Project Sign,  Project Grudge, etc. My point however is even though the Air Force has had an outstanding reputation over the years (unfortunately, not related to ufology), does the fact that the Air Force makes statements or issues reports on the Roswell Incident, give it credibility as described in the dictionary? Many would say no, and for good reason. Have their reports been trustworthy, believable? Perhaps "Haut's" original press release, authorized by the 509th Commander, Col. Blanchard, as we are all in agreement that "something happened near Roswell, NM, in July 1947". However, the most recent one referring to balloon's dropping anthropomorphic dummies, certainly is not credible. Any researcher can destroy that document from cover to cover.

 

What happens when you don't have or you loose credibility? In the case of the Air Force, their next report, (and surely there will be one), will again be questioned, but today their are enough dedicated researchers and investigators seriously working on the Roswell Incident, to quickly decide if it is credible or not. With people being more educated, more open-minded and more curious, the tactics of fear, disinformation and out right lies that may have worked years ago will no longer suffice. Consequently, for the time being, I will not include the United States Air Force in my list as credible, as it relates to the Roswell Incident, but will give them the opportunity to get on that list in the future, if they so choose.

 

Written statements can usually be considered credible, but again in the Roswell Incident that isn't necessarily true. For instance,one witness, who just within the past few years came forward, had two notarized statements about what he saw and where he saw it, that had different explanations of his experience. Which should we believe?

 

If you look at the sheer number of witnesses that have been interviewed since 1978, the numbers are well into the hundreds of people. Researchers like Freidman, Berliner, Schmitt, Randle, and others, who have devoted years to finding the truth, have documented accounts of these people and their statements. Some are first hand witnesses (they were in Roswell or at Wright Patterson in Ohio, or somewhere else in 1947), while others are spouse's, friends, co-workers, cousin's, neighbors, etc. No lead should go un-investigated. Can we assume all these hundreds of witnesses are credible? Not for a minute. Credibility requires valid documentation, back-up and a tremendous amount of work to prove. For many of them we have that, while for others, they are quickly put into the "dead file" and never heard from again. Contacting possible witnesses, as I have been doing for a few years now, has been one of the most challenging parts of investigative research I've run in to. When you call someone and they answer, you have no idea what type response you're going to get, if any. Many times you learn that the person your attempting to contact is no longer alive. The 51 years since the Roswell Incident allegedly occurred, has taken its toll on many key witnesses, so you attempt to question others that may have known that person, but you've lost that witness forever as a firsthand witness. That's why those of us serious about ufology keep hoping the surviving firsthand witnesses will come forward...soon, with the truth.

 

Some of those firsthand witnesses, that are still alive create problems for researchers also. I've always been a little amazed that some of the guys that were stationed in Roswell in 1947, either elected to remain in Roswell or relocated back to Roswell at some point in time. Could there be a reason for them wanting, or even being asked to live here? People today are much more transient then they were fifty-one years ago. One such witness has admitted to me that he was here to keep "tabs" on things after he was "officially discharged". Keep tabs for who and on what?

 

How many of the witnesses that were directly involved with the "Roswell Incident" are withholding information or giving "disinformation" about their involvement.? I think several, otherwise why would researchers be send on 5 and 6 year `wild goose" chases with wrong information, or told they know nothing more than they have revealed, while some of us suspect very strongly that is not the case, simply because of who they were and where they were in 1947. I assure you, we will seek them out to verify their credibility. Wrong or misleading information is many times worse than no information at all. Again the documentation and verification are essential to determining the validity and credibility of a witness.

 

Another frustrating scenario with firsthand witnesses, are those individuals who tell you, "I promised my government I wouldn't talk, and I haven't and I won't". Credibility in these cases to me is not an issue. I consider them very credible, and have to respect any person that trusted their government or respected their instructions to the point of taking it to the grave with them. What higher dedication can you expect? I think in these cases the government's credibility can be called into judgment for planting fear, loss of pensions, or worse, in these individuals, for over 50 years. These witnesses must be given unconditional immunity, after all, the first three words of the Constitution, I believe still are, "We the People".

 

As one example of a credible witness, Major Jesse Marcel, was the intelligence officer of the 509th Bomber Wing, stationed at Roswell Army Airfield in July 1947, when the alleged Roswell Incident occurred. He was the first individual interviewed by Stanton Freidman in 1978, retired and living in Louisiana. I consider Major Marcel the epitome of credible witnesses, and I'll explain later why I feel that way. Major Marcel's son, Jesse Jr., an 11 year old boy at the time of the Roswell Incident is also extremely high on my credibility list. I never met Major Marcel, but I did meet Jesse Jr., in 1997. Today Mr. Marcel, Jr. is a medical physician in Montana, with explicit credentials.

 

Documents referring to Maj. Marcel's credibility have recently been posted on the www by David Rudiak at <http://www.primenet.com/~bdzeiler/>, that should remove any doubt from the skeptics, debunkers or others who have attempted to discredit Maj. Marcel over the years. The recommendation and commendation letters received by Major Marcel, before and AFTER, the Roswell Incident, verify how good a soldier he was and how well he knew his profession as an intelligence officer. I will quote a few of the names in this article, that issued the extolment's on Marcel and perhaps you will realize that these names carried some weight then and still do today, in the military archives of the United States. At least 12 evaluations, commendations and recommendations are referred to between 30 June, 1946 and 30 July, 1950. His involvement in the Roswell Incident certainly didn't have any adverse effects on the remainder of his military career. In fact when his commission ended, he was recommissioned, transferred to Washington, D.C. in August 1948, assigned first to SAC(Strategic Air Command), as Chief of a foreign intelligence division. Later he was transferred to the Top Secret Special Weapons Project, not exactly the type jobs you would expect would be given to someone that didn't know their intelligence job at Roswell, or what a weather balloon looked like.

 

Lt. Col. James Hopkins, Efficiency Report of Marcel in June, 1946 gave him an overall numerical rating of high excellence. Brig. General Roger Ramey in July, 1946, gave Jesse a commendation for his work in Operations Crossroads, as did Major General W.E. Kepner in August, 1946, and Vice Admiral William H.P. Blandy , in Oct., 1946 recommended Marcel for the Army Commendation Ribbon, which was originally turned down by a review board and again submitted by Blandy, 3 months AFTER the Roswell Incident in Oct., 1947. Three documents are known with Col. Blanchard doing Efficiency reports on Marcel in Jan.,1947, May, 1948 and Aug., 1948, all complimentary to Marcel's efficiency, exceptional experience and diligence. In an Aug, 1948 Evaluation by General Ramey, a year after the Roswell Incident, Ramey remarked that he believed Marcel would eventually become a "Command Officer" based on his past performance and growth. Finally, Col. John D. Ryan , in another Aug., 1948 Recommendation of Marcel, described his work and service as "most exemplary" and "most outstanding". It just so happens that Ryan went on to become Air Force Chief of Staff and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

 

People like Major Marcel and his son, to just name two, give me extreme confidence that those of us searching for the truth will someday prevail. We will find the truth through credibility, documentation and records.

 

•  Back to Editorials: Ufology

 

•  Editorials: Roswell

 

•  Editorials: Area 51, Aztec, etc

 

•  Editorials: Ufology

 

 

Keep up to date with Dennis Balthaser's editorials for the latest in his research and hard-hitting commentary. 11/01/17 TBMs (Tunnel Boring Machines)

 

>>More Editorials

Roswell UFO Tour Itinerary & Tour Reviews

 

Visit key locations of the 1947 Roswell UFO Incident with nationally known researcher, Dennis Balthaser.  >>Learn More

Area 51, Underground Bases, the Great Pyramid at Giza, the Roswell Incident,  FOIA requests,  student reports on UFOs-- all in Dennis' research pages.

>>Learn More

Email Dennis: truthseeker@dfn.com

 

Dennis  Balthaser's research is available on DVDs (PDF)

 

Copyright © 2016, Dennis Balthaser All Rights Reserved