Ray Stanford has sent out the following to people on his mailing list and has given us permission to post here:
Hello list members,
This is to let you know that
The Paracast posted on Sunday, May 18, an interview with me.
You can hear the interview by going to:
https://www.theparacast.com/podcasts/paracast_140518.mp3
On April 24, this year, we passed the 50th anniversary of the Socorro CE III, so naturally I was asked in the interview about some of my findings on that case, which was the subject of my 211-page 1976 book,
Socorro Saucer in A Pentagon Pantry. IF that interests you at all, please listen to what I said in response, including my account of finding -- with James Fox's encouragement -- a 1964 letter in the National Archive, hand-written by J. Allen Hynek
to the U.S. Air Force's Division of Foreign Technology at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, in which he draws for them the red 'insignia' (or whatever it represented) that Zamora saw on the side of the ellipsoidal vehicle he observed.
Hynek's letter vindicates what I decided to tell the world only after Lonnie Zamora's death (to save him any potential embarrassment), that the arc with a vertical arrow under it, and a line underneath, was
fictional. How does Hynek's letter substantiate that? Well, because in his 1964 letter, Hynek drew the
real item for the USAF Division of Foreign Technology, and
it was simply an inverted V with three lines. -- no arc over an arrow, at all. I doubt Hynek,
their employee at the time, would have been kidding the USAF's Division of Foreign Technology, and believe Hynek's letter should be taken at face value.
The drawing in Hynek's letter confirms what he had told my wife and me when he visited us in San Antonio, Texas, in 1970, about six years after the Socorro event, when he said, "It seems Zamora told me it was just an inverted 'V' with some lines across it." See
page 208, paragraph 3, in Appendix A titled
An Obfuscated Red "Insignia"?, in my 1976 book,
Socorro Saucer in A Pentagon Pantry, Blueapple Books, 1976, US hardcover first edition.
Ironically, even though I was the
officially designated (Richard Hall's letter confirming that is in my files.) NICAP investigator of the Socorro case, and dutifully and quickly supplied Dick Hall with the description of the inverted 'V' with three lines which Zamora had described for fellow police officers who arrived at the landing site quickly after Zamora's radio call, Hall chose to ignore what I reported and without question chose to provide NICAP members (via the NICAP publication) the fictional 'insignia' which Zamora began describing following his Friday night decision to obfuscate the real insignia, as agreed to in a long session with Captain Richard T. Holder, Up-Range commander of the integrated (meaning usage by both army and air force) Holloman-White Sands Range.
O.K., so Hynek's 1964 letter to the USAF Division of Foreign Technology confirms the inverted V with three lines, but some may ask whether I am absolutely
sure it was specifically Captain Holder who persuaded Zamora to, thereafter, replace the actual red 'insignia' with the fictional one?
YES, I am 100% sure of that, and I have a statement from someone who knows for sure, documenting the Holder-Zamora obfuscation, that is strong enough to convince all reasonable persons.
That statement will soon be published, but for now let's leave it at this: the "insignia" that NICAP, APRO, and most other 'UFO organizations' presented as what Zamora saw in red on the side of the ellipsoidal vehicle is pure intelligence-community obfuscation, a mutually agreed fiction, so that any copy-cat hoaxers could he stopped in their tracks and neither the air force, the army, nor the navy need investigate any farther a close encounter claim alleging that an arrow with an arc over it and a straight line beneath was seen on a vehicle.
It's an old police and intelligence ploy, often used to detect falsity being submitted as evidence, and Zamora was patriotic enough to agree to the ploy that was proposed by the person (Holder) who, on Friday evening, April 24, 1964, was in charge of the government's investigation at Socorro. I remember the several police officers who, during my very first investigation in Socorro, kept puzzling and complaining concerning the fact that
after his meeting with Holder, Zamora was describing a very different red "insignia", than the one he described to them within minutes after the object had flown away, directly into a strong wind out of the west-southwest.
Dick Hall of NICAP was not the only UFO group official who fell for the obfuscation, hook, line, and sinker. Jim and Coral Lorenzen, who ran the Aerial Phenomena Research Organization (APRO), came to Socorro before I got there, and Captain Holder invited then out to his house and they were so awed by the White Sands up-Range Commander's personal interest in UFOs and his charismatic friendliness that they bought into the obfuscated 'insignia' that he showed them and never bothered to find out what the Socorro policemen knew to be the actual 'insignia'. The substitute 'insignia' had been implanted into the belief system of a major UFO organization.
Holder suggested the clever ploy, and as a good policeman, Zamora saw the reason and the value of Holder's suggestion, right away.
In closing on the Socorro topic for now: I will soon release a high-quality, full-color copy of Hynek's 1964 letter to the USAF's Division of Foreign Technology, with his drawing of the Socorro object's red 'insignia', along with a statement that in reasonable minds should settle the matter that Captain Holder was the person who got Zamora to agree to the obfuscation.
Now let's move on to another very important and significant UFO case I discussed in detail in my
The Paracast interview, and it's one I'd bet most of you readers have never heard about.
Why so important and significant?
BECAUSE IT INVOLVES THE SEEMING PERMANENT ABDUCTION BY A HUGE UFO, OF A B 52 BOMBER AND ITS EIGHT-MEMBER CREW!
I'm not going to write the detailed account herein, because I don't want to have to type it all out, when you can, listen to my detailed description of it on
The Paracast for May 18, by clicking on:
https://www.theparacast.com/podcasts/paracast_140518.mp3
I had wanted to get into the seeming B 52 abduction case early on in that interview, but it comes only about mid-way because the interviewers naturally wanted me to talk about the Socorro CE III case first, because it's 50th anniversary had just passed.
Please listen to the details I give in the
audio interview before beginning any evaluation of the B 52 disappearance case.
AS SHOWN BELOW: I want you to have larger, more high-resolution, copies of the visuals I provided for that interview.:
First, here's a map showing the areas I mention, along with my drawing of the huge UFO which the whole Smelling & Snelling crew of my co-workers (I think there were seven or eight of us.) and I saw, and which I sincerely suspect probably abducted or was somehow associated with the reportedly instant disappearance of, the B 52 bomber and crew.:
Below is an Associated Press article out of Fort Worth, Texas, providing important details on the B 52's February 28, 1968 disappearance, to which I have added my drawing of the huge UFO that I believe was involved, and illustrating two of the trails of single-engine jet aircraft that made repeated reconaissance runs on the several-miles-across object which our whole Snelling & Snelling personnel placement firm's crew watched for multiple minutes, apparently hovering right where the B 52 suddenly vanished from both radar and communication several hours earlier,
with no warning or distress signals ever received.
Please read the list in the article below, which provides the names, rank, and background of each of the eight crew members who totally vanished in this unprecedented aircraft-and-crew-loss event. Think about the terrible human loss, seemingly caused by a very large UFO.
THE CREW HAS NEVER BEEN HEARD FROM. THEIR AIRCRAFT HAS NEVER BEEN FOUND. The big, eight-engine bomber had over six hours of fuel still aboard when it vanished.
Neither oil slick, nor associated aircraft debris has ever been found.
Then, much to the disgust of Corpus Christi Naval Air Station personnel involved in the search for the vanished bomber, on March 9 a ridiculous and erroneous A.P. report mysteriously came out, suggesting that part of the B 52 had been found 150 miles south of where it disappeared from radar. As you will learn, the report was ridiculous, because what had been found was just the seat pad (with identifying numbers embossed in a metal plate beneath it) from the crash of a small jet trainer from NAS Corpus Christi. BUT PLEASE LISTEN TO THE DETAILS I PROVIDE IN THE INTERVIEW.
A few realistic researchers have warned for years that what some call UFOs could constitute serious dangers to aircraft, even though they may never have heard of this aircraft's disappearance in the context of a sighting, simply because until my reporting of the case, so far as I know, no one has described the huge thing that our whole Snelling & Snelling crew watched, as single-engine jets made repeated reconaissance runs on the object the next morning while
it was hovering over or very near the area where the last radar returns of, and communications from, the B 52 crew had occurred,a few hours earlier.
I have mentioned this case in several interviews over the years, but didn't have the data handy to provide the details I am providing now. For
The Paracast interview, I thought ahead and came prepared with data from my files.
I'm willing to try to answer any questions credible, serious researchers might want to ask on this case. But I only know what our S & S crew saw that morning before 9:00 am, and what has been reported concerning the disappearance of both the bomber and its eight-man crew. The concept that the object we saw was responsible for the aircraft's disappearance is my personal conclusion based on the temporal and geographic proximity of the aircraft's disappearance and the sighting with jets repeatedly making runs on the huge object. I have no way of knowing how long the huge UFO might have been there before I saw it while driving downtown to work and called my co-workers out to watch it from high in our office building, beginning at around 8:45 am. I don't know when or how it disappeared, but only that when I went across the street to a pharmacy, it was no longer there. That might have been around 11:00 am. It was while in the pharmacy that I heard the news of the disappearance of the B 52, and
where that had happened electrified me, because Matagorda Island lay on the azimuth of the hovering object, as confirmed when I went to lunch, by using an azimuth-finding compass and a map, and carefully allowing for magnetic deviation from true north.
I wondered how those pilots flying the reconaissance runs of the huge object might have felt, knowing that the B 52 had disappeared in the area where the huge thing was hovering. We could pretty realistically deduce the distance of the UFO (about 42 miles), because the air was clear, the sky blue, and the jets doing the reconaissance runs were so distant that we could see their rather
short (because the air was dry)condensation wakes, but not the relatively small aircraft, themselves.
Hopefully, one of you reading this will get into this case with FOIA requests (but I'd anticipate much government attempted obfuscation along the way) and see what we can learn about the actual disappearance of the B 52, and what survivors of the men on the aircraft were told about their relatives who disappeared in the disaster,
etc.
What I have described is totally true, to the best of my knowledge. I think this is the most humanly-significant UFO case I've ever encountered, and if the associations I make between the B 52's disappearance and our sighting are valid, I don't see how it could be otherwise. What we saw was not a balloon. I am familiar with the kinds that existed at that time, and the thing was so huge that it would have made a 'skyhook' balloon look like a tadpole. It was not an atmospheric phenomenon. Again, the air was dry and clear. It was not a conventional aircraft of any type. I have no idea what it was, but it was awesome to all of the office staff, who watched in amazement and puzzlement. The jets were unquestionably making REPEATED reconaissance runs on it, as our office's retired Marine Master Sergeant, Roger Lozano, commented several times.
I'd surely like to learn the names of the pilots making the reconaissance runs and talk to them, if they're still among the living. FOIA requests, anyone?
By the way, the highly credible (according to the late Dr. James McDonald) case wherein young Gregory Wells of Ohio was burned by a seeming beam from a UFO, occurred only about ten days after the Matagorda Island B 52 incident. Since it clearly suggests unprovoked hostility, as might the B 52 disappearance case, considering the closeness in time, one might wonder if there were some exceptionally dangerous intruders in our skies at that period.
Thanks for reading this, and now please listen to my account in the interview if you have time and enough interest.
Very seriously,
Ray Stanford
). Between his baffling ability to find dino tracks and fossils and the frankly quite incredible sighting of an enormous UFO, it was (IMO) quite insightful that he would neither jump to the conclusion that BOLs have to be paranormal or alien, neither take the debunker's stance that they are all just misinterpretations of aircraft or car headlights.
