Does "The Day After Roswell" have any remaining credibility?

[rpjmartin]

I feel that Corso's core story was legit.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

I feel that Corso's core story was legit.

The question in my mind, of course, is just what the core story is past the editing problems. Was it just Corso being the bagman for an Army department trying to funnel alleged extraterrestrial technology to private industry?

And how many agencies were really involved? Did the Army just get the bottom of the pile, while the Air Force got there first?

How much of that stuff could, if real, even be back engineered?

 

[rpjmartin]

The question in my mind, of course, is just what the core story is past the editing problems. Was it just Corso being the bagman for an Army department trying to funnel alleged extraterrestrial technology to private industry?

And how many agencies were really involved? Did the Army just get the bottom of the pile, while the Air Force got there first?

How much of that stuff could, if real, even be back engineered?

The book gave me the impression that the Army had got the scrapings from the bottom of the barrel - the references to the filing cabinet full of miscellaneous bits and pieces.

The back-engineering stories, are, as Nick Pope would say, interesting..if true. The crash of an ET vehicle of some kind - plausible. Its recovery by American military forces - plausible. The ability of a secret r&d project to understand the science behind some kind of advanced vehicle and replicate it in 60 yrs - not likely at all.

There are so many basic scientific areas where we would need new theory plus the ability to apply the theory into the development of new materials, energy systems, comms etc etc that I tend to think that if the US military does have a spacecraft in some secret base then they are still scratching their heads at it. Which may explain why it's all still secret.

 

[Kevin Daly]

It didn't have any credibility to start with.

Corso was just a run of the mill rightwing flake - the fact that certain people go weak at the knees at the hint of a uniform is just an embarrassing sideshow.

Forget it people, move on.

 

[Decker]

It didn't have any credibility to start with.

Corso was just a run of the mill rightwing flake - the fact that certain people go weak at the knees at the hint of a uniform is just an embarrassing sideshow.

Forget it people, move on.

Hi Gang, dropped by here and noticed the thread on "The Day After Roswell" and Phil Corso. Normally I wouldn't comment but I saw the above quote by Kevin Daly and quite honestly, it pissed me off.

So, you simply dismiss Corso by calling him a "right wing flake?" A flake?

Now I do not know Kevin at all. I have no idea of his place in society, his job, his age or anything about him. Corso, I do. Kevin's comment "the fact that certain people go weak at the knees at the hint of a uniform is just an embarrassing sideshow" told me realms about Kevin, actually much more than I wanted to know. Why?

When Corso went into the Army, the U.S., Great Britian and free peoples all over this world were at war with one of the most evil political forces ... EVER. The Nazi machine under Adolf Hitler had enslaved all of Europe with the exception of Great Britian, and was in the process of trying to defeat and enslave another enslaved society, the USSR. Now, it can be argued that the USSR under Joseph Stalin was as evil or maybe even more evil that the Nazi's, but because we were at war with Germany we allied with Stalin. Corso went into special operations, in other words intelligence and COMBAT and in Italy hunted and tracked down Nazi's, Gestopo and other assorted undesirables and fixed their little red wagons for them. Corso was a doer, not a talker. Later he served as an adviser to the President, then later still he was sent to Europe where he commanded a nuclear missle component. In the event of war, Corso could have launched nuclear weapons on his own authority. Do you freaken' think that the United States Govt. would have given such a mission to a flake?

Obviously I was not even alive when the Roswell Incident happened, I have no idea what really happened there or Corso's involvement or lack there of. I was not at the Pentagon when Corso claims his commanding officer gave him a file with the Roswell debris in it. But, do I think he was lying? No.

For what it is worth, I knew who Corso was way before his book came out. Not thru Bill Birnes but because of his activities before the Congress on issues of MIA/POWs lost from World War I thru Viet Nam. Later, after his book did come out I had extensive communication with him prior to his death. I am one of those veterans that Kevin Daly seems to disrespect, and I could have very easily been one of those POW/MIA's .... there but by the grace of God.

Right Wing flake? I am tempted to ask Kevin just how old he is, but in the end it doesn't matter. I remember those days of the Cold War, I remember when the Russians invaded Hungary and quashed their freedom movement. I recall Soviet missles in Cuba, I remember South East Asia under communist assault. I was a member of the military that went to Viet Nam to assist in trying to stop communist aggression against South Viet Nam, Cambodia, Laos and the rest. Ask any former South Viet refugee how they feel now about our attempt to stop the communist north.

Corso a "Right Wing flake"? Corso was a dedicated and patriotic American military officer that was anti-communist. I AM ANTI-COMMUNIST. Tell me, does that make me a "Right Wing flake"?

Decker

 

[jritzmann]

Don-
I don't personally see any Vet as a "flake" however there's definitely a "weak in the knees" mentality going on in regard to any military-based accounts of UFOs. Anytime these individuals (the higher echelon the better) "come out" with a story, the research community goes ga-ga for it, as if none of these people could possibly be making it up or have an ulterior motive.

Vets and ex-military deserve our utmost gratitude and respect for their courage and service. However, I cannot resign myself that these people cannot weave a story as good as anyone else.

The other part that bothers me, and I'd like your take on, is this:

For someone like Corso, who was "in the know" and obviously upper echelon as far as this subject goes, the real question for me is *why* to believe anything he says in regard to UFOs. He was (allegedly) a keeper of said secret for decades.

Is it not just as likely a man of his caliber would be called upon by the powers that be to further the UFO/Govt coverup mythos to cover whatever might be hiding behind it? Perhaps in the direction of that the Govt. doesn't truly know what's going on...but makes a concerted effort to appear that way?

These people are or have been, cogs in the wheel that *make* the perceived "coverup", and just as I say about disclosure from a Govt. outlet: why would you ever believe a source that the UFO field claims has lied to them for decades?

 

[TClaeys]

I don't personally like it when people embed more than is needed in their comments. We have "right wing" and "flake". Two different things even though both could be true.

Now just because someone has been in command of a nuclear base and is some military hero doesn't exclude him from being a flake. Either Corso is telling the truth or he is not. He could very well be a nutcase, despite his military career, and this seems to be the opinion of many a researcher. I don't personally know enough to say one way or the other, so I'll have to confess my ignorance on Corso.

But the fact remains that heroism and courage doesn't mean honest or even sane.

 

[Decker]

Don-
I don't personally see any Vet as a "flake" however there's definitely a "weak in the knees" mentality going on in regard to any military-based accounts of UFOs. Anytime these individuals (the higher echelon the better) "come out" with a story, the research community goes ga-ga for it, as if none of these people could possibly be making it up or have an ulterior motive.

Vets and ex-military deserve our utmost gratitude and respect for their courage and service. However, I cannot resign myself that these people cannot weave a story as good as anyone else.

The other part that bothers me, and I'd like your take on, is this:

For someone like Corso, who was "in the know" and obviously upper echelon as far as this subject goes, the real question for me is *why* to believe anything he says in regard to UFOs. He was (allegedly) a keeper of said secret for decades.

Is it not just as likely a man of his caliber would be called upon by the powers that be to further the UFO/Govt coverup mythos to cover whatever might be hiding behind it? Perhaps in the direction of that the Govt. doesn't truly know what's going on...but makes a concerted effort to appear that way?

These people are or have been, cogs in the wheel that *make* the perceived "coverup", and just as I say about disclosure from a Govt. outlet: why would you ever believe a source that the UFO field claims has lied to them for decades?

Okay Jeff, I see your point, and to some extent I agree with it. You stated

However, I cannot resign myself that these people cannot weave a story as good as anyone else.

You are absolutely correct and I point to two guys just off the top of my head ... Cliffy Stone and Billy Cooper. Both former military and in my opinion both full of sh*t when it comes to their military/UFO stories.

As far as Corso goes, here was a fellow with (at least to me) a awe-inspiring background. This man had nothing to gain (my opinion) by weaving a BS story about UFOs. When he was originally working with Birnes the accounts he was discussing for a book had nothing to do with UFOs. They were talking about something completely different that had nothing to do with the UFO subject. I am privy to information about this whole "Day After Roswell" book and I know that Phil Corso didn't make a dime off the book. Prior to his dying he was going to court to sue several people about his not getting any proceeds and that is all I can say at this point. I may be wrong but I think some parts of this are still in the legal system.

When I was in communication with Corso, his last letter to me stated he was on his way to Italy and when he got back he was going to telephone me to discuss a number of things about the book, and his activities during certain episodes detailed in the book. I had several "pointed" questions for him but then he died.

Can I know if he was absolutely truthful about everything he claimed in the book? No, of course not because I was not there. BUT ... my "spider-sense" told me he was not bullshitting me, and over the years I have learned that my gut feelings are fairly reliable. Now we will never know for sure, but knowing this mans background, what he did and what he achieved, it makes no sense to me that Phil Corso simply spun a UFO bullshit story for the fun of it. Why, after all these years would a man like that make claims (that most of the mainstream wouldn't believe anyway) that would make him seem like a nut-case if it wasn't true or rooted in truth?

I don't know about you but in a perfect world a man like that wouldn't. Just my opinion.

Decker

 

[TClaeys]

Wait a minute, he didn't make anything on the book?? Was he supposed to make something on it??

Money, we can probably agree, is a major motivator for all kinds of things. So when we look at possible motivations for such a story money certainly comes to mind. It is indeed puzzling why he would spin such a story for no apparent reward.

 

[AnnetteMarie]

Wait a minute, he didn't make anything on the book?? Was he supposed to make something on it??

Money, we can probably agree, is a major motivator for all kinds of things. So when we look at possible motivations for such a story money certainly comes to mind. It is indeed puzzling why he would spin such a story for no apparent reward.

What I inferred from that post was he was supposed to be compensated for it, but was cheated. So, that means to me, he wrote it intending to be paid.

 

[TClaeys]

Yeah sorry, I need to learn to read. I guess money still could be a motivator even if he wasn't paid.

 

[jritzmann]

Don-
Thanx for that. What about the secondary reasoning: that he was asked or instructed to make up a tale...or that he was provided with one to further the UFO/govt cover-up myth for some reason. Maybe it was nothing but to add more noise, or, maybe it was in effort to seem like the "powers that be" knew or do know more then they really do. In other words, like a reverse disinformation project.

As much as we say that the whole "alien" issue is most likely more complex then we can realize, I think it's likely the "cover-up", if there is one for the reasons we think, is probably vastly more complex as well.

 

[Kevin Daly]

Hi Gang, dropped by here and noticed the thread on "The Day After Roswell" and Phil Corso. Normally I wouldn't comment but I saw the above quote by Kevin Daly and quite honestly, it pissed me off.

So, you simply dismiss Corso by calling him a "right wing flake?" A flake?

Now I do not know Kevin at all. I have no idea of his place in society, his job, his age or anything about him. Corso, I do. Kevin's comment "the fact that certain people go weak at the knees at the hint of a uniform is just an embarrassing sideshow" told me realms about Kevin, actually much more than I wanted to know. Why?

When Corso went into the Army, the U.S., Great Britian and free peoples all over this world were at war with one of the most evil political forces ... EVER. The Nazi machine under Adolf Hitler had enslaved all of Europe with the exception of Great Britian, and was in the process of trying to defeat and enslave another enslaved society, the USSR. Now, it can be argued that the USSR under Joseph Stalin was as evil or maybe even more evil that the Nazi's, but because we were at war with Germany we allied with Stalin. Corso went into special operations, in other words intelligence and COMBAT and in Italy hunted and tracked down Nazi's, Gestopo and other assorted undesirables and fixed their little red wagons for them. Corso was a doer, not a talker. Later he served as an adviser to the President, then later still he was sent to Europe where he commanded a nuclear missle component. In the event of war, Corso could have launched nuclear weapons on his own authority. Do you freaken' think that the United States Govt. would have given such a mission to a flake?

Obviously I was not even alive when the Roswell Incident happened, I have no idea what really happened there or Corso's involvement or lack there of. I was not at the Pentagon when Corso claims his commanding officer gave him a file with the Roswell debris in it. But, do I think he was lying? No.

For what it is worth, I knew who Corso was way before his book came out. Not thru Bill Birnes but because of his activities before the Congress on issues of MIA/POWs lost from World War I thru Viet Nam. Later, after his book did come out I had extensive communication with him prior to his death. I am one of those veterans that Kevin Daly seems to disrespect, and I could have very easily been one of those POW/MIA's .... there but by the grace of God.

Right Wing flake? I am tempted to ask Kevin just how old he is, but in the end it doesn't matter. I remember those days of the Cold War, I remember when the Russians invaded Hungary and quashed their freedom movement. I recall Soviet missles in Cuba, I remember South East Asia under communist assault. I was a member of the military that went to Viet Nam to assist in trying to stop communist aggression against South Viet Nam, Cambodia, Laos and the rest. Ask any former South Viet refugee how they feel now about our attempt to stop the communist north.

Corso a "Right Wing flake"? Corso was a dedicated and patriotic American military officer that was anti-communist. I AM ANTI-COMMUNIST. Tell me, does that make me a "Right Wing flake"?

Decker

Yes, I do.
Corso was obsessed with Reds under the bed, as you appear to be (and the shouty capitals suggest it's starting to affect you adversely).
For God's sake man, to lend credibility to his collection of rehashed Roswell legends and self-aggrandisement (I'm so grateful to him for saving us from the aliens. That was close!) he used a fraudulently obtained (since it was on the understanding the book was simply a collection of war memoirs) forward by Strom Thurmond, a man who (certainly at the time Corso worked for him) was frankly a vile racist (feel free to throw your rattle out of the cot over that characterisation as well, but I stand by it)
He was in the war. So were most men of his generation. It doesn't stop him from being a flake.
And what does it mean to be anti-Communist? Communism includes many beliefs that are either stupid (such as their belief in an inevitable direction to history, or that they could change human nature) or reprehensible (such as the belief that the end justifies the means, also popular apparently with the US military given their fondness for dismissing dead and maimed civilians as "collateral damage")...but Communism was an honest attempt (however misguided) to solve real problems. To be "anti-Communist" does not in itself convey anything. The Nazis were "anti-Communist". It means nothing, other than being a good source of rabble-rousing slogans that avoid the burden of actually having to think. I humbly suggest that it is more useful to define ourselves by what we are for than what we are against.

 

[Trajanus]

I didn't think "The Day After Roswell" had any credibility to begin with. How could a thinking person fall for that utter rubbish? Seriously.......

I agree. I'm no skeptic but that book is worthless. As was pointed out by others, Corso added nothing new, others like Cooper already came up with those claims.
Recently I heard of a new book out, Revealed! The Greatest UFO Secrets. It's just a POD book but a real eye opener, which shows how Corso was a disinfo. agent, and just one of many with essentially the same agenda.

 

[tyder001]

One problem with calling people names such as flake or other things is a casual reader might see that and look no farther. It's an old skeptic trick. Also, used very well by such B.S. spouters as Rush Limbaugh. You simply deride a persons character and then you don't have to look at the context of what the person really believes or says. Now that said I have no firm opinon on Corso or Rosewell. I do recall seeing a website which talked about "kooky" sites. Been a few years but the way they did it was to list a bunch or paranomal and u.f.o. sites by name and simply use an eye roll and a silly little icon. Now we all know there is a lot of sillyness in the field but that was kind of low. I try to look at each person and what they are saying. Everyone has an agenda. Don't ask Patty Robertson about the Budda and don't ask Dickie Dawson about the reality of spiritual experience. Keep an open mind but also keep an eye on the underlying "agenda" of the speaker. Sorry got off topic there.

 

[Schuyler]

Also, used very well by such B.S. spouters as Rush Limbaugh. You simply deride a persons character and then you don't have to look at the context of what the person really believes or says.

OH! You mean like the Dems are doing to Rush now? I'm no fan of Rush and I never listen to him, but that sounds like the pot calling the kettle black. It's a stupid tactic, too. What the Dems should do is IGNORE Rush entirely, 100%. Then he wouldn't be an issue. Too bad...

 

[Gen]

OH! You mean like the Dems are doing to Rush now? I'm no fan of Rush and I never listen to him, but that sounds like the pot calling the kettle black. It's a stupid tactic, too. What the Dems should do is IGNORE Rush entirely, 100%. Then he wouldn't be an issue. Too bad...

I think they tried that during the 1990s and it didn't work out too well.

 

[Gen]

My issue with Corso's book is that he is always the hero of his tales. Whenever an author doesn't allude to their own flaws and shortcomings, it suggests that they're not being honest with themselves or with the reader.

 

[Trajanus]

My issue with Corso's book is that he is always the hero of his tales. Whenever an author doesn't allude to their own flaws and shortcomings, it suggests that they're not being honest with themselves or with the reader.

I believe Friedman showed that his credentials are dubious. Of course there are other issues besides that.

 

[Ron Collins]

I think they tried that during the 1990s and it didn't work out too well.

Only because Big Bill couldn't control Little Bill. Take all that out of the equation and he would be a confirmed nutjob instead of a near diety to the right. There is just something wrong with that guy, other than being slightly more right than Ghengis Khan.