Please enable Javascript to use Top Secret Writers to it's fullest. Without it, you will find much of the modern internet doesn't work. I would add a little button hide this message, but that kind of functionality requires Javascript ;)

US Companies to Blame for the “We Need China” Myth?Previous Article
China Is Now Kidnapping Business People - Part INext Article

Robert Hastings: Scam Artist or Ufology Expert Misunderstood?

Line Spacing+- AFont Size+- Print This Article
Robert Hastings: Scam Artist or Ufology Expert Misunderstood?

Robert Hastings has been doing the UFO beat for some time now. Indeed, it would be fair to say that within the “ET’s are real” club, he is one of their most respected researchers.

While his interpretations of some official documents and commentaries are questionable, he has not fallen for many of the bogus documents his contemporaries have.

In my personal dealings, I have found him to be a polite and apparently honest man. He simply believes what he believes about ET visitation.

This is markedly different from the image presented by his main opponent James Carlson of Robert Hastings as an immensely corrupting force in the UFO field. While I ultimately agree with Carlson’s point of view after taking a long look, I do not see Hastings as a calculating schemer, but more of a stubborn son of a gun to the point of his own detriment.

Self-Promotion: Not a Good Idea

Hastings went to a company PRNewswire to publicize a press release concerning UFO’s in 2011. This found its way into the mainstream and Reuters.

Reuters offered the caveat that they could not accept the source’s validity. They should know once something flies on Reuters it regularly goes through the stratosphere.

Sure, some publicity is useful and some friends or fans posting links to your articles are all par for the course. However, using a PR company for a press release is over the top considering that his press release contained many of the same points he has always made in the past, without offering anything new. It also ran contrary to Hastings cool “take it or leave it” stance he had maintained in the eighties and nineties.




Anonymous Sources: Always Dodgy

The researchers I mix with use anonymous sources rarely, if ever. Nonetheless, the UFO scene abounds with bogus invisible witnesses.

Quality control is next to non-existent, and while I sincerely believe Hastings has genuine sources, what are they actually telling him and for what purpose? The situation seems ripe for disinformation and misinterpretation by Hastings.

Hastings’ excuse that during Watergate Woodward and Bernstein also had anonymous sources is disingenuous. There is now evidence that Mark Felt “Deep Throat” was leading the reporters away from other issues to the relatively tame Nixon one. Carlson, in his blood lust, forgot to challenge Bob on this point.

ufo

UFO’s and Nukes

Hastings’ claim to fame has been researching all manner of potential ET goings on in and around U.S. military installations. For the record, he does dig up some decent material concerning Cold War concerns, and his insights into the daily operations of such bases are useful.

However, the benign UFO-ET angle he advocates greatly undermines his efforts. Malfunctions at nuclear weapons facilities are always just cause for alarm. In particular, when the U.S government’s propaganda promotes their weapons systems as infallible and under diligent maintenance. These sorts of screw-ups cost people their jobs if leaked and undermine public faith.

A far better way to cover up incompetence is for counter intelligence to attach a UFO angle and trivialize a serious matter. Nonetheless, incompetence may only explain part of the problem. If Hastings’ witnesses did indeed see a UFO, I believe is far more plausible that they were likely experimental aircraft interfering with weapons systems. This could either be intentional or a by-product of said experimental machines.

Carlson’s refusal to acknowledge these factors in his critiques of Hastings were a serious flaw. Counter intelligence can be a cunning creature, and it is worth noting that Hastings’ benevolent alien line came out at the same time as the Stargate operation. That Carlson and Hastings overlook this potential manipulation or potential links here is strange.

Nevertheless, like Carlson, I struggle to see the supposed ET’s benevolent intentions in causing havoc with the U.S and Russian nuclear defense systems.

If they had studied us for any length of time, they would soon note that we humans are not that bright. We are frightful creatures, and we do not take subtle warnings. Their briefly disabling the weapons systems of any super power in clear sight could cause immense human suffering.

Clearly, if they are visiting us as Hastings believes, then the aliens are not very smart. Nuclear weapons, as terrifying as they appear, mask even more sinister mass death devices. If aliens were truly concerned about humanity, they would surely have the technology to look beyond any walls and see what horrors the planets psychotic military super powers are cooking up.

My Final Words on Bob

As said, Hastings believes in what he does and is passionate about it. Mr. Carlson and I agree that Hastings’ publicity methods are questionable, and his overall conclusions are greatly lacking. Nonetheless, Hastings has done some good work in other areas of ufology in the past. This puts him in a tiny minority of Ufologists who have actually contributed anything worthwhile. For that, he has my respect, and I hope that he can find a way to reverse his publicity tactics and weak ET-hypothesis conclusions of today, and get back to doing the sort of solid research that he was doing years ago.


References & Image Credits:
(1) UFO Digest
(2) Stitcher

Originally published on TopSecretWriters.com

  • James Carlson

    Dear Mr. Coogan,

    I thought your article was great — well done. It’s evident you did a lot of digging. There are some points, however, that I believe should be addressed.

    You state, “Hastings’ excuse that during Watergate Woodward and Bernstein also had anonymous sources is disingenuous. There is now evidence that Mark Felt “Deep Throat” was leading the reporters away from other issues to the relatively tame Nixon one. Carlson, in his blood lust, forgot to challenge Bob on this point.”

    For the record, that’s not exactly true. In the comments section to my article “By their works shall ye know them… [Part 1] – Ramifications of the 2011 F.E. Warren AFB UFO Hoax”, published December 19, 2011 at Reality Uncovered [see: http://www.realityuncovered.net/blog/2011/12/by-their-works-shall-ye-know-them-part-1/%5D, I respond directly to Hastings when he raised the very same point:

    “Robert Hastings has tried to paint a picture of valid journalistic methods by comparing his ‘anonymous sources’ to the anonymous sources that were used by the Washington Post in their reporting of Watergate, but this is merely more of his B.S. Washington Post reporters are required to abide by a set and written standard of ethics that their employers insist upon, exactly as Reuters requires of their own reporters. Both companies are willing to place their reputations in the hands of such men, because both companies require higher standards than Robert Hastings could ever possibly establish for himself. For instance, part of the ethical standards the Washington Post requires of their reporters is the establishment of multiple unrelated sources that confirm each other independently. Throughout their Watergate reporting, they are not allowed to utilize anonymous sources unless that qualification had been met. Robert Hastings, on the other hand, is not required by anybody to abide by any standards whatsoever. And, in fact, his anonymous sources are not independently confirmed. He has one anonymous source stating that another anonymous source actually saw a UFO; he only spoke to one man, and that man’s claims do not even apply to what he himself has witnessed. It is ludicrous for anybody with any knowledge of journalism to expect these claims to be published as NEWS by Reuters. And they were not, as Hastings is trying to assert. They were paid for as ‘advocacy group opinions’, and they were not picked up by Reuters on their own merits, as he claims. It is patently obvious that Hastings is once again lying — stupidly I should add, considering the numerous proven lies the man has been telling for so many years now.

    “Reuters does not even consider Hastings’ article to be NEWS. As an advocacy group opinion, it requires no confirmation and no verification of the contents at all, let alone a confirmation of the claims established by an anonymous source. That’s because Hastings utilized PR Newswire, not PR Newswire for Journalists — which is a completely different service, one that provides free distribution of news content. PR Newswire is a public relations service provider — they distribute advocacy group opinions that are essentially ‘advertising’ for their clients; they sell business-oriented media — publicity. And for Reuters to feature that publicity under their brand, they expect to paid. And they are.”

    The reason I found such cause to distrust Robert Hastings’ use of anonymous sources was not merely the abstract quality inherent to anonymity. It had so much more to do with the fact that it was Robert Hastings who was applying that abstract quality. Having already noted how easily he misrepresented, distorted and even lied about the testimony presented to him by three witnesses I had already spoken to in regard to the his claims — three witnesses Robert Hastings had actually named — the fact that he would then resort to the use of sources who could NOT be so easily examined as a result of the anonymity he was evidently willing to apply seemed to me instantly deceitful. Anonymity may very well have been the specific case I wanted to highlight, but it was Robert Hastings’ unethical and irresponsible character that provided the cause. In my opinion, your refusal to examine Hastings’ character in relation to his overt acts — and this may very well be due to unintended naivete — is the primary weakness behind your otherwise well-executed and insightful work.

    Personally, I believe that at some point in his life, Robert Hastings determined that he could not make the claims he wanted to establish nor the resultant legacy that he most desired to earn without his reliance on dishonest and considerable deceit to do so. The following example is only one of his notable attempts to harness his public claims in this manner:

    Around 1980, Paul Bennewitz (of Richard C. Doty fame) was distributing numerous photographs that he insisted were of crashed UFOs, burned wreckage, and hidden entrances to an alien base at Dulce, New Mexico. Everybody else just saw rocks, trees, and a whole bunch of shadows. Robert Hastings spent some time with the man in order to determine for himself the intrinsic value of that collection of films and recordings Bennewitz had put together. By his own admission, Hastings walked away from that opportunity completely disenchanted with Bennewitz’s claims, having discovered to his own satisfaction that the films were hoaxes so crudely and poorly done as to be laughable in any other field of interest. “It was quite obvious that one film was of several birds in flight,” he reported. Bennewitz, he said, had claimed that the birds’ flapping wings were in reality alien spacecraft “force fields” moving up and down, possibly under the influence of an antimatter negative gravity propulsion system or some such thing. Another film “looked like Bennewitz had thrown it on the floor and walked on it.” This film was nothing more than a series of smudges, hair and other debris seemingly framed in crooked, improperly placed holes punched and warped by the improperly placed 8 mm film spokes. A third film that was alleged to be an example of the type of “green fireball” phenomenon was merely a drawing sketched out on the underside of the film strip with a green magic marker. In Hastings’ mind, it was a shameless display typified by either hubris or the drug-addled insanity of a man already long past the point of either self-control or mere indulgence.

    Bennewitz, it seems, also presented Hastings with numerous pages of complete and utter nonsense, wordless series of letters and numbers that had no meaning whatsoever except to Paul Bennewitz, who insisted that they were transcripts of conversations sent to him by the aliens. He promptly translated it for Hastings, explaining that the aliens had tracked his arrival to and entrance through the front door and had decided they “liked” him, and wanted to meet with him later that night at a quiet, remote location. Unfortunately, Hastings had other plans and was unable to make the appointment. This was probably a good thing. After all, even APRO, the organization Bennewitz was regularly reporting to, believed sincerely that he was probably a deluded paranoiac. His own family concurred, having repeatedly hospitalized him so he could be treated for mental illness. Hastings, while evincing sympathy, had nonetheless destroyed the man’s reputation and credibility in public, refusing to accept Bennewitz’s claims as anything other than the symptoms of a severe mental disorder. Well, that is until he could actually use the man’s claims to support his own.

    In response to researcher Robert J. Durant’s October 2005 article, “Doty and the Body Snatchers”, published in October 2005 in the journal “International UFO Reporter”, Robert Hastings wrote to Durant, asserting that “I am of the opinion that Bennewitz may have actually photographed and filmed bona fide UFOs over the Manzano Weapons Storage Area (WSA), which is located just east of Kirtland AFB. It was this nuclear weapons depot, now decomissioned, which directly bordered Bennewitz’ subdivision, Four Hills. If you are familiar with some of the nuclear weapons-related UFO sightings — including those at ICBM sites and weapons research labs — then you may also be aware that a few of those sightings have occurred at WSAs.”

    Once again, Hastings showed himself willing to subvert anything — fact or fiction — to press his own claims in relation to his “UFOs and Nukes” obsession. This is hardly the act of “a polite and apparently honest man” who has responded in some way typical of a man who “simply believes what he believes about ET visitation.” When it comes to the claims of Robert Hastings, it’s not entirely a UFO-related issue. It’s an issue of character dressed in a cloak of dishonesty, failure, and the belief that self-promotion and ceaseless attacks on the credibility of his critics is sufficient to the task of establishing his UFO “legacy.” Primarily, it’s a moral issue. because his primary strategy is specifically designed to ignore facts!

    Hastings attempts to destroy credibility all too often reveals his hubris and consistent inability to tell the truth — he is the worst kind of liar: one who relies on the lie first without even giving a single thought to its possible effect on his claims. I’m still waiting, for instance, for him to answer a list of 50-questions I asked him to respond to. Had he been able to answer those questions, his own credibility would have notably increased, and for this reason, he insisted publically that he would do so on his way to Alaska. This was in 2010 and he has yet to provide anything at all to support his claims.

    Hastings wrote a number of emails to the owners of Reality Uncovered in the hopes of persuading them not to publish the conversations I had with Walt Figel — his only witness in regard to Echo Flight. These were very liberal lies that were immediately discounted by simply asking Figel about his communications with Hastings. These weren’t little mistakes of an investigator on the wrong page of history; they are the desperate attempts of a man who sees a tidal wave of proof showing the true extent of the “legacy” he’s trying to preserve.

    He insisted for 6-7 months that he would present recent transcripts of his March 2010 conversation with his Echo Flight witness Walt Figel supporting his UFO claims. He repeatedly insisted that this interview he allegedly conducted would feature Figel denouncing all of the claims my father has made in regard to Echo Flight — “100%.” as he put it. Instead, Figel insisted that everty point my father addressed was true, and insisted that Hastings distorted his claims to suggest the existence of a UFO that wasn’t there. Figel also insisted that he had pointed out numerous errors Robert Hastings’ book that Hastings merely ignored, just as he’s ignored over 95% of the available evidence — all of which refute his UFO claims.

    In response to my making these matters public, Hastings began reporting that I have never even communicated with Walt Figel, while insisting as well that every statement I’ve ever made on the topic was a complete lie. He did this while in possession of an email I asked Figel to send him outlining exactly what he had already detailed for me and Reality Uncovered.

    He’s certainly not limited to discussing aspects of the case he wants to make. He’s always been willing to go so much deeper than that. He’s also suggested that I use illegal drugs, another unsupportable accusation that he resorted to in his reprehensible attempts to discredit my arguments. Not once, on the other hand, has he ever introduced valid evidence to refute the documents and the interviews that I’ve produced

    These petty strategies of his represent little more than delusional garbage, but it’s remarkably well documented that his first response to any issue questioning his veracity is to tell a lie to get out of it, many instances of which are still available for review on the internet. The truth is, he isn’t even very well versed on any of the March 1967 cases he has championed. For this reason, Robert Hastings refuses entirely to discuss the matter in detail or answer any questions regarding witness testimonies, preferring instead to attack the integrity and credibility of those publically raising such issues. He refuses to offer anything substantial in the way of evidence, and fails entirely to explain the details of his claims or to answer any of the valid questions raised by this insistence. What he has done is rely on the craven use of blatant lies and baseless insults in regard to his critics without once managing to refute or even discuss their actual criticisms.

    When Hastings discovered that I have epilepsy, his first response was to invent entirely the titles and contents of various non-existent books relating epilepsy to paranoia and mental illness in order to suggest that I couldn’t be trusted. Incredibly, he has also publically defamed both my father and me by insisting in a vicious lie that my father had “told him” about a nervous breakdown I supposedly suffered that was apparently an ongoing crisis in my family for over three years! Even worse, he insisted that he would post the actual telephone audio recordings of my father making these claims, this whole insulting rhetoric. None of this is true, which my father has also affirmed. Hastings never did post those recordings because they don’t exist. He did, however, publish these pathetic lies liberally across the interent, and even sent them to active duty personnel at Malmstrom AFB who had asked him about the claims he’s made. These are moral issues, not honest impressions. Meanwhile, he still refuses to answer necessary questions regarding his numerous, proven lies, and has neglected as well to defend his own theories against numerous accusations of massive fraud and profiteering on a scale UFO proponent communities have only rarely been subjected to.

    All of these matters can be easily confirmed. I don’t know what kind of man Hastings was years ago, but today he is a jaded, irresponsible, and immoral crap artist whop will literally say and do anyting to convince people that his UFO claims are valid. They are not. He’s just a cheap liar and a fraud. These are the primary issues as I see them. I wanted to outline them for you in context with your article, not because I think your conclusions are invalid, but because I thought you may have missed such an important aspect of Hastings’ claims. He may very well be “a stubborn son of a gun to the point of his own detriment”, as you put it. But he is also a very deceitful man who has consistently relied on the very worst character of his personality in order to press the issues and claims that he wants the world to believe. As I’ve asserted above, he is an unethical agent of his own hubris, and will not back down from using every blanketing tactic he can possibly apply as a result of his dishonest nature and his desperate ego. It has already been confirmed that this is normally his first response to adverse assessments, and I didn’t want these inborn qualities to be completely ignored.

    In general, I admire your article, and I sincerely appreciate your decision to examine this particular topic.

    All the best,
    James Carlson

  • Hey James – thanks for the feedback. I was wondering how you would feel about the article while I was editing – and my take is the same as yours. It felt like a balanced review of each side of the debate (albeit much more brief than the debate itself!). You know what’s funny? I just realized your comment is nearly 3 times longer than the article itself. You’re an animal James. 🙂

  • Seamus Coogan

    Oh God lol. What have I unleashed?

  • Seamus Coogan

    Oh God lol. What have I unleashed?

  • Tim Hebert

    Mr. Coogan,

    Interesting take on Robert Hastings, but perhaps I interacted with a different Hastings than what you have described for you readers.

    Robert and I first interacted on a missilier’s forum some years back and commenced to have a dialog based on his theories, hypothesis, assumptions, etc, concerning nuclear weapons and UFOs. Let’s say that the said dialog was generally one way as the concept of polite debate and disagreement is not in his nature.

    To be sure, if one agrees with Robert, then he is the most affable fellow around. I’m reminded of Robert’s thought process with someone’s disagreements as I had entered into an email “conversation” some years back, as I found him arrogant with a trace of narcissism that appeared to be boundless, yet there was air of paranoia on his part.

    Did I mention paranoid? Yes, Robert appears uncomfortable dealing with ex-military members that offer an alternative view point…especially with those that dealt with the very same nuclear weapons that were supposedly being manipulated by UFOs/ETs. We were simply dismissed as disinformation agents and so forth with the sole purpose of discrediting him and those former military personnel whom Hastings would cart out for public display.

    In closing, Robert’s stories involving nuclear weapon systems exist precariously on the single thread of anecdotal stories and anonymous sources…and that’s his research methodology. Interesting stories to be sure, but flawed when viewed from close up.

    Sincerely,

    Tim Hebert
    Former SAC Missile Crew Commander

    PS: Hey James and Ryan!

  • Tim Hebert

    Mr. Coogan,

    Interesting take on Robert Hastings, but perhaps I interacted with a different Hastings than what you have described for you readers.

    Robert and I first interacted on a missilier’s forum some years back and commenced to have a dialog based on his theories, hypothesis, assumptions, etc, concerning nuclear weapons and UFOs. Let’s say that the said dialog was generally one way as the concept of polite debate and disagreement is not in his nature.

    To be sure, if one agrees with Robert, then he is the most affable fellow around. I’m reminded of Robert’s thought process with someone’s disagreements as I had entered into an email “conversation” some years back, as I found him arrogant with a trace of narcissism that appeared to be boundless, yet there was air of paranoia on his part.

    Did I mention paranoid? Yes, Robert appears uncomfortable dealing with ex-military members that offer an alternative view point…especially with those that dealt with the very same nuclear weapons that were supposedly being manipulated by UFOs/ETs. We were simply dismissed as disinformation agents and so forth with the sole purpose of discrediting him and those former military personnel whom Hastings would cart out for public display.

    In closing, Robert’s stories involving nuclear weapon systems exist precariously on the single thread of anecdotal stories and anonymous sources…and that’s his research methodology. Interesting stories to be sure, but flawed when viewed from close up.

    Sincerely,

    Tim Hebert
    Former SAC Missile Crew Commander

    PS: Hey James and Ryan!

  • James Carlson

    Well, Ryan, I do try to be fair, regardless of what some folks may believe. I’ve got to admit, however, that I find it particularly difficult to convince others (on both sides of the fence) that this whole dispute I have with Robert Hastings (and Robert Salas — I wouldn’t want to leave him out of the loop and bearing no responsibility) is primarily a character issue. It’s his actions that I find most offensive, not his claims. If he had the courage to make a case on the basis of facts alone, I sincerely doubt that I would have anything more to add to this issue. Unfortunately, I had no idea who Hastings was or how trustworthy and industrious he may have been in his “green years,” so to speak, having first encountered him — on his own instigation — in 2008-9. From what I’ve had the displeasure to observe, he’s never been anything less than how I’ve portrayed him, so I can’t possibly see him today as a man who has “actually contributed anything worthwhile” to the field of UFOlogy. From my point-of-view he’s always been a deceitful, vicious, and completely reprehensible dick. I find it very hard to consider his current personality and acts with anything near the regret that Seamus Coogan discusses in his article. Of course, I can understand it in theory, but my experiences prevent me from feeling anything more than contempt. It has to be said, though, that Coogan’s article is by far the most balanced and responsible examination that I’ve seen in a very, very long time, and that without any doubt requires recognition and appreciation. The fact that it was technically a very well written piece is just icing on the cake. Tasty, tasty icing with those little sugar letters and rose-shaped candies on the top spelling out your name and offering up some really sweet best wishes. On your birthday. On your birthday a good twenty years ago. And it’s all on a big angel food cake. Anyway, you get the idea.

    Feel free to offer up my best wishes to the author. Probably no need to mention that I’m now drooling so much that I have to get away from the keyboard or risk a nasty shock

    Cheers!
    James

  • James Carlson

    Well, Ryan, I do try to be fair, regardless of what some folks may believe. I’ve got to admit, however, that I find it particularly difficult to convince others (on both sides of the fence) that this whole dispute I have with Robert Hastings (and Robert Salas — I wouldn’t want to leave him out of the loop and bearing no responsibility) is primarily a character issue. It’s his actions that I find most offensive, not his claims. If he had the courage to make a case on the basis of facts alone, I sincerely doubt that I would have anything more to add to this issue. Unfortunately, I had no idea who Hastings was or how trustworthy and industrious he may have been in his “green years,” so to speak, having first encountered him — on his own instigation — in 2008-9. From what I’ve had the displeasure to observe, he’s never been anything less than how I’ve portrayed him, so I can’t possibly see him today as a man who has “actually contributed anything worthwhile” to the field of UFOlogy. From my point-of-view he’s always been a deceitful, vicious, and completely reprehensible dick. I find it very hard to consider his current personality and acts with anything near the regret that Seamus Coogan discusses in his article. Of course, I can understand it in theory, but my experiences prevent me from feeling anything more than contempt. It has to be said, though, that Coogan’s article is by far the most balanced and responsible examination that I’ve seen in a very, very long time, and that without any doubt requires recognition and appreciation. The fact that it was technically a very well written piece is just icing on the cake. Tasty, tasty icing with those little sugar letters and rose-shaped candies on the top spelling out your name and offering up some really sweet best wishes. On your birthday. On your birthday a good twenty years ago. And it’s all on a big angel food cake. Anyway, you get the idea.

    Feel free to offer up my best wishes to the author. Probably no need to mention that I’m now drooling so much that I have to get away from the keyboard or risk a nasty shock

    Cheers!
    James

  • Hey Tim!

    Of everything you’ve described, it’s the trying to explain away ex-military members with opposing points of view as “disinformation agents” that always bothered me the most. It’s the quickest cop-out argument for someone unwilling to incorporate uncomfortable truths into their fragile hypothesis.

    Cheers and thanks for your comment!
    -Ryan

  • Hey Tim!

    Of everything you’ve described, it’s the trying to explain away ex-military members with opposing points of view as “disinformation agents” that always bothered me the most. It’s the quickest cop-out argument for someone unwilling to incorporate uncomfortable truths into their fragile hypothesis.

    Cheers and thanks for your comment!
    -Ryan

  • Seamus Coogan

    I take it the other way as well. Whats not to say the guys going along with Bob aren’t disinformation themselves.

  • James Carlson

    Well, there’s no calling it back now. Might as well grab yourself a cappuccino, sit down and enjoy the show!

    Best,
    James

  • Philip Moore

    Mr. Coogan, I enjoyed your article even though I don’t agree with all of it. As one of Robert’s sources and an advisor to him on ICBM technical issues for several years, I can testify that what I reported did indeed happen and he was honest in its inclusion in “UFOs and Nukes”. After working with him, I believe the other incidents in his book are just as honest. Whether or not you or anyone else believes everything Robert reports is up to you. I’ve read numerous UFO books & Robert’s has the most detailed research of all. He backs up his writings especially well. I wore Air Force blue for 28 years (not counting cadet time) to do my part to help you express your opinions and I respect them (as I said, I actually enjoyed them). My military service required my background to be investigated in the gov’t’s most thorough process, so I’m completely vetted. I have no agenda and get no gain from my association with Robert. I simply tell it like it is. As for Carlson; I’ve read his stuff and in my opinion he has an agenda, thus has zero credibility with me.
    Sincerely,
    Philip Moore
    LtCol, USAF (ret)

  • Martin Willis

    You are correct that Hastings has not and will not buy into the bogus documents, reports and people in the field. I have known Robert to be one of the most upstanding, cautious people in UFOlogy and I have the highest respect for him. I do not see him as a man with an agenda, as you portray him to be. I see him as a solid researcher working hard doing thorough investigative research.

    As far as anonymous sources, I cannot think of any research in this field where witnesses would want to remain more anonymous, than military personal around these weapons, think about it.

    What basis do you have that it is likely that it is experimental aircraft? If they were, wouldn’t it make sense that they would know that there would be affects on the warheads by using the technology? If witnessed, wouldn’t they be debriefed about what they observed?

    As far as ETs, if that is what they are and their intentions, it is anybody’s guess, Robert is the first to admit that.

    Thank you.

  • ken kern

    robert hastings is a long time ufo researcher with a solid reputation for being a straight shooter. are you posting this to get attention?

  • ken kern

    robert hastings is a long time ufo researcher with a solid reputation for being a straight shooter. are you posting this to get attention?

  • Ken – in recent years, Hastings has misrepresented a few of his sources – which James, myself, Steve Broadbent and others (mostly James) proved over at RealityUncovered.net. In this article Seamus acknowledges Hastings’ earlier solid research and reputation. The goal of this article was to hint to Hastings that his more recent approach at using Press Releases for old info, and misrepresenting source statements – is a bad approach. His earlier approach was better, and going back to that would be a good idea. Seamus actually made statements like you’ve made here, and I edited it down because of Robert’s more recent activities that make it not quite as honest to say that he still has a solid reputation. His recent tactics have actually tainted his reputation somewhat.

  • Ken – in recent years, Hastings has misrepresented a few of his sources – which James, myself, Steve Broadbent and others (mostly James) proved over at RealityUncovered.net. In this article Seamus acknowledges Hastings’ earlier solid research and reputation. The goal of this article was to hint to Hastings that his more recent approach at using Press Releases for old info, and misrepresenting source statements – is a bad approach. His earlier approach was better, and going back to that would be a good idea. Seamus actually made statements like you’ve made here, and I edited it down because of Robert’s more recent activities that make it not quite as honest to say that he still has a solid reputation. His recent tactics have actually tainted his reputation somewhat.

  • I appreciate your feedback and even more-so your willingness to put your name on it. That’s honorable and very appreciated.

    What’s odd to me about Hastings most recent activities however is his level of paranoia about “spooks” tracking or intercepting his emails (I have personal emails from him from 2009 showing this odd belief). From Hastings in 2009 to me:

    “I would like to know the answer. Please forward this to Steve and please = act as an email intermediary for us, if the spooks are indeed playing = games.”

    That isn’t the behavior of someone I’d personally associate with being a level-headed and thorough researcher. It’s the sort of behavior most often associated with someone quickly losing touch with reality.

  • James Carlson

    What basis do you have that there was anything at all at Echo/Oscar Flight? With the exception of one deluded man, every other witness has come out very strongly, stating that he manipulated their actual testimonies to suggest the presence of a UFO that was not there. He has repeatedly lied in public about me and my family, and those claims have been repeatedly verified. There was no craft — period. They were not debriefed by anybody, and there was no UFO sighting or report. If you want to figure out the political ramifications or motives of the pilots, go ahead. You should probably establish first, however, that there was a craft for them to pilot.

    Anonymity isn’t even an issue — honesty is, and Hastings has repeatedly proven himself to be completely dishonest and unreliable. The man is a liar and a fraud — nothing more, and this is a conclusion based on the man’s acts, not rumors or innuendo. And he didn’t merely have anonymous sources here — he had one anonymous source making the claims of another anonymous source. If you don’t find that problematic, than you don’t understand the issues.

  • Terry Hansen

    The author of this piece seems to be arguing that the connection between UFOs and nuclear weapons is tenuous and forced by Robert Hastings.

    However, this point of view is solidly refuted by the long and well-documented history of the UFO phenomenon, a fact with which the author seems unfamiliar. As long ago as 1956, Air Force Project Blue Book’s Edward Ruppelt wrote, “UFOs were seem more frequently around areas vital to the defense of the United States. The Los Alamos-Albuquerque area, Oak Ridge, and White Sands Proving Ground rated high. Port areas, Strategic Air Command bases, and industrial areas ranked next.”

    Los Alamos scientists were well aware that they were being watched and made quiet efforts to identify these mysterious intruders.

    The on-going interest of UFOs in our ICBM fleet has also been extensively reported by many leading western newspapers and other media, though with less detail than in Robert Hastings’ book, “UFOs and Nukes.”

    As for the shop-worn suggestion that the UFOs were some type of secret military technology (which evidently has remained secret for over 60 years), the well-known 1952 “Chadwell memo” to the CIA director made it clear that UFO sightings were “not attributable to known types of aerial vehicles.”

    One might question whether the beings behind ‘flying saucers’ are benevolent but there seems little question that they have been watching our development of nuclear and other weapons for some time. This is simply too well documented to be questioned by any rational student of the subject. It no doubt partially explains why the U.S. military has been so evasive when questioned about such events.

    Finally, I see no reason to attack Hastings for use of modern public-relations methods which are routinely used by writers and publishers everywhere. This is a red herring.

    Terry Hansen
    (author of “The Missing Times: News media complicity in the UFO cover-up”)

  • Terry – while you have some excellent points, your comments are also somewhat disingenuous in that they gloss over many facts from the history of the UFO phenomenon that refute your conclusions on the connections between UFOs sited over military areas. Just one single case in point is the recent release of documents on Area 51 and just how many UFO sightings were caused by U-2 testing. http://www.topsecretwriters.com/2013/08/declassified-u-2-files-reveal-area-51-ufo-truths-skeptics-have-always-known/

    You write as though it’s a foregone conclusion that UFOs are ET in nature and were not secret military technology, even though more and more evidence surfaces to support the premise that they are likely military technologies.

    Additionally, Hastings PR tactics are to distribute a press release utilizing old news – most writers and publishers use press releases to distribute actual news…a.k.a. *new* information.

    -Ryan

  • Terry Hansen

    The claim you cite (about UFOs and spy planes) comes from the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency — hardly a reliable source given its officially sanctioned propaganda mission! To make matters worse, though, the CIA’s claims were refuted by none other than Lt. Col. (Ret.) Robert Friend, head of Project Blue Book from 1958 to early 1963. Friend has stated that he could not recall a single UFO report from that period that was attributed to the U-2 or other secret spy plane.

    This makes perfect sense for many reasons: The number of spy planes was far too small to account for the tens of thousands of UFO reports recorded at the time. Second, spy planes don’t share the reported flight characteristics of UFOs. Finally, spy planes are designed and operated to be essentially invisible to ground observers. That is the whole point.

    So this theory fails spectacularly on many levels.

  • Actually – it’s your logic that fails. No one would have attributed the sightings in any Project Blue Book reports during that period to the U-2, because it was a highly classified project that few knew about. They also wouldn’t have attributed it to a secret spy plane because most people back then wouldn’t have believed than any craft made by humans could fly above 70,000 feet. What the declassification of the project now proves, however, is that, as explained by the report: “High altitude testing of the U-2 soon led to an unexpected side effect – a tremendous increase in reports of unidentified flying objects (UFOs).”

    There were not “tens of thousands” of authentic reports. As anyone familiar with Project Blue Book knows, the vast majority of those were nutcases, or easily explained phenomenon. During an interview, Dale Graff, who worked briefly with Project Blue Book investigators at Wright-Patterson, told me of one case where one woman reported that a paper had been dropped by the aliens from a UFO….Dale told me how he held the evidence up to the light and saw, quite clearly, that the paper was branded – made by human hands. He said there were countless cases like this. Anyway – of the remaining cases that couldn’t be explained, there were hardly “tens of thousands” – and they could very well be re-examined today and I’m sure many could now be connected with the test flights of the U-2 or other spy planes of that era and others.

    It was a side-effect that was welcomed by the folks associated with the secret research, of course. Unfortunately, the remaining modern-day side-effect is that folks like you and Hastings remain unwilling to face the reality that it is much more plausible that UFO sightings were experimental military craft than the idea that they are anything related to ET.

  • James Carlson

    You write: “The author of this piece seems to be arguing that the connection between UFOs and nuclear weapons is tenuous and forced by Robert Hastings.”

    Have you forgotten or failed to understand the fact that every primary witness (besides Robert Salas) in regard to the Echo/November/Oscar Flight claims has stated outright that there was no UFO sighting, no UFO reports, and that Hastings has distorted their testimony to suggest the presence of a UFO where there was no UFO? If Hastings’ case is so great, why does he refuse outright to answer any detailed questions in relation to those same Echo/November/Oscar Flight claims? Why is it that his only defense of those claims is to attack the credibility of those presenting such evidence with vicious slanders and blatant lies? If you don’t find that these strategies suggest a “tenuous and forced” character, perhaps you should look a little closer. You might start with Dr. David Clarke’s article at http://drdavidclarke.blogspot.com/2010/11/flat-earth-nukes.html.

    You write: “However, this point of view is solidly refuted by the long and well-documented history of the UFO phenomenon, a fact with which the author seems unfamiliar. As long ago as 1956, Air Force Project Blue Book’s Edward Ruppelt wrote, “UFOs were seem more frequently around areas vital to the defense of the United States. The Los Alamos-Albuquerque area, Oak Ridge, and White Sands Proving Ground rated high. Port areas, Strategic Air Command bases, and industrial areas ranked next.”

    The “history of the UFO phenomenon” is a history of failure — the failure to prove a point with anything except a bunch of witness testimony. Your argument, however, isn’t even relevant. We’re discussing Robert Hastings, not a bunch of old UFO reports that couldn’t be proven then and can’t be proved now. That’s another problem most UFO proponents have — you think that every discussion contrary to specific UFO claims is an attack on all UFO reports. The scope of Cooper’s article isn’t anywhere near what you’re approach has defined. Do you think Hastings has chronicled every UFO report ever? Of course not, so quit trying to make such a case. We’re talking about Robert Hastings, not Ruppelt — and Robert Hastings is a cheap liar and a fraud.

    You write: “Los Alamos scientists were well aware that they were being watched and made quiet efforts to identify these mysterious intruders.”

    Irrelevant, unproven, and unexamined in the same frame as Ruppelt’s opinions.

    You write: “The on-going interest of UFOs in our ICBM fleet has also been extensively reported by many leading western newspapers and other media …”

    Irrelevant, unproven, and unexamined.

    You write: “… though with less detail than in Robert Hastings’ book, “UFOs and Nukes.”

    It’s the details that prove his dishonesty. That’s why he refuses to answer detailed questions. And since all of your defenses of Hastings’ work also lack details, being general and therefore inconclusive, they are also fairly easy to dismiss.

    You write: “As for the shop-worn suggestion that the UFOs were some type of secret military technology (which evidently has remained secret for over 60 years), the well-known 1952 “Chadwell memo” to the CIA director made it clear that UFO sightings were “not attributable to known types of aerial vehicles.”

    You might try reading the above article with a focus on comprehension. The author has written, “If Hastings’ witnesses did indeed see a UFO, I believe is far more plausible that they were likely experimental aircraft interfering with weapons systems”. Plausibility is the issue. You seem to be stating as well that UFOs being ” some type of secret military technology” can’t be properly addressed, because such technology “evidently has remained secret for over 60 years”. That suggestion assumes that the “secret military technology” is the same now as it was 60-years ago, which is a convoluted, and illogical argument. As for the Chadwell memo, how exactly does it apply to most of the cases that Robert Hastings has tried to establish? How does it apply to ANYTHING reported throughout the 1960s, 1970s, 1980s, oh well, you get the point. It doesn’t!

    Here’s something to ponder — in a CIA document discussing the original U-2 program, much of which was approved for public release 07/08/2004, the following paragraphs by Gregory W. Pendlow and Donald E. Welzenbach in “The CIA and the U-2 Program, 1954-1974” discuss military technology in the context of UFOs:

    “High-altitude testing of the U-2 soon led to an unexpected side effect — a tremendous increase in reports of unidentified flying objects (UFOs). In the mid1950s, most commercial airliners flew at altitudes between 10,000 and 20,000 feet and military aircraft like the B-47s operated at altitudes below 40,000 feet. Consequently, once U-2s started flying at altitudes above 60,000 feet, air- traffic controllers began receiving increasing numbers of UFO reports.”Such reports were most prevalent in the early evening hours from pilots of airliners flying from east to west. When the sun dropped below the horizon of an airliner flying at 20,000 feet, the plane was in darkness. But, if a U-2 was airborne in the vicinity of the airliner at the same time, its horizon from an altitude of 60,000 feet was considerably more distant, and, being so high in the sky, its silver wings would catch and reflect the rays of the sun and appear to the airliner pilot, 40,000 feet below, to be fiery objects. Even during daylight hours, the silver bodies of the high- flying U-2s could catch the sun and cause reflections or glints that could be seen at lower altitudes and even on the ground. At this time, no one believed manned flight was possible above 60,000 feet, so no one expected to see an object so high in the sky.

    “Not only did the airline pilots report their sightings to air-traffic controllers, but they and ground- based observers also wrote letters to the Air Force unit at Wright Air Development Command in Dayton charged with investigating such phenomena. This, in turn, led to the Air Force’s Operation BLUE BOOK. Based at Wright-Patterson, the operation collected all reports of UFO sightings. Air Force investigators then attempted to explain such sightings by linking them to natural phenomena. BLUE BOOK investigators regularly called on the [Central Intelligence] Agency’s Project staff in Washington to check reported UFO sightings against U-2 flight logs. This enable the investigators to eliminate the majority of the UFO reports, although they could not reveal to the letter writers the true cause of the UFO sightings. U-2 and later OXCART flights [The A-12 OXCART was developed by the Central Intelligence Agency as a successor aircraft to the U-2. OXCART saw little operational use before the program was canceled in 1968 after the US Air Force deployed a fleet of similar aircraft, a military variant of the A-12 called the SR-71] accounted for more than one-half of all UFO reports during the late 1950s and most of the 1960s.”

    So tell me, is the military technology defining the U-2 program above the same military technology that might be mistaken for a UFO at Malmstrom AFB today? Of course not — it’s a silly argument to make, suggesting you’ve failed to examine your own case in any detail. And Chadwell doesn’t apply to any of this either.

    You write: “One might question whether the beings behind ‘flying saucers’ are benevolent but there seems little question that they have been watching our development of nuclear and other weapons for some time. This is simply too well documented to be questioned by any rational student of the subject. It no doubt partially explains why the U.S. military has been so evasive when questioned about such events.”

    You’re apparently easy to convince. Having repeatedly assessed the many lies told by Robert Hastings in his defense of his missile claims from March 1967, I assure you that the suggestibility you’re a victim of is a handicap. It causes you to accept as valid far too many alleged UFO incidents that you’ve failed to examine. You’re just accepting the validity of claims on the basis of their existence alone. I would say that’s the very definition of “biased”.

    Given the extremely high number of UFO hoaxes over the past 60-years, the proven capacity of humans to hallucinate, lie, gain pleasure from the creation of hoaxes, and the motivation of many to invent claims for a profit by duping the most gullible men and women on the planet, this handicap of yours is one that makes you a victim, not an open-minder arbiter of truth. Your belief that there’s “little question that they have been watching our development of nuclear and other weapons for some time” is only acceptable if you believe Hastings’ claims — and even then, it’s a silly assessment that you can’t possibly prove, and that you’ve decided to apply without any attempt to realistically examine the cases that have convinced you to adopt this conclusion. Given his proven reliance on lies and attacks on his critics, most level-headed folks would find it pretty easy to dismiss Hastings’ claims outright. After all, he’s proven nothing except his apparent willingness to say and do anything to make his claims seem credible. I’ve spoken to three of Hastings’ primary witnesses, and they tend to believe he’s a fraud. They say that his errors of fact were outlined for him, and he ignored every one. They agree as well that Hastings has ignored the contrary testimony of his witnesses, and has published only those bits and pieces that support his claims when taken out of context.

    How many of his witnesses have you talked to, anyway? There must have been a lot if you’re going to accept every claim of his as proven. Also, he claims to have spoken to 120-plus military veterans who have supported his UFO claims; why is it that he’s only been able to get 7-8 to make public claims? You do know that LTCOL Walt Figel is his ONLY witness in regard to the Echo Flight incident, and that he was ten minutes away from the Sept. 27, 2010 press conference that Hastings put together, right? Maybe you can tell me why Figel wasn’t even invited to discuss his claims? I wonder how many of his remaining witnesses were also uninvited, because their claims simply don’t meet the standards that Hastings has applied to them? If you’ve examined all of these claims, perhaps you can answer that question.

    Your decision to ignore all of this suggests more about YOU than it does about Hastings. You’ve put your faith in a proven liar, and that is most definitely a handicap.

    You write: “Finally, I see no reason to attack Hastings for use of modern public-relations methods which are routinely used by writers and publishers everywhere. This is a red herring.”

    He published the claims of one anonymous witness who told him about the claims of another anonymous witness, and you call it a red-herring? Does the fact that he has presented a case that NOBODY can possibly examine sound to you like a red-herring? How about the fact that he did so not long after interviews with witnesses he HAS named proved his duplicity in a UFO hoax? Have you decided to ignore completely the fundamental deceit that this line of reporting indicates? Or what about the fact that Robert Hastings has maintained very publically that Reuters picked up and reported his claims on their merits alone, when in actuality he PAID them to distribute his claims through their public relations service that requires no confirmation of claims? How is his patterned behavior of clear deceit so similar to “modern public-relations methods which are routinely used by writers and publishers everywhere”? Do other “writers and publishers” also insist that their application of PR is actually a worthy news item judged by one of the most respected journalist-oriented wire services in business today as a confirmed news coup distributed on the grounds of its merit alone? You are aware, aren’t you, that the PR Newswire Hastings uses isn’t even called NEWS by Reuters?

    Deceit is the only issue here — not your assessment of public relations in general. What Hastings has done is NOT public relations, and it’s not a “red-herring.” It is a lie that you’ve apparently decided not to examine very closely. And that, too, is a handicap.

  • James Carlson

    I just saw your comment after I had posted my own. I promise, it’s just a case of “great minds think alike” — I wasn’t trying to steal your commentary, as it wasn’t up when I started writing my own.

    Best,
    James

  • No problem – we simply made the same case using a different volume of words. Well done. 🙂

  • Bruce Fenstermacher

    Mr. Coogan:

    I enjoyed your article. I have spent time (about 20 hours total) with Robert Hastings on three different occasions over the past several years and find him to be a very honest individual with outstanding character. I also find his research extensive and – as far as I can tell – accurate.
    Fifteen or so years ago I worked with a very strange technician (in a telecommunications company) that shared his interest in Area 51. At his request, several area 51 documents were declassified and at his request I read some of the material (hundreds and hundreds of pages). It was clear that most of what was seen above the skies of area 51 was U-2s – and later SR 71s. I did not share with him my Air Force background that reinforced a lot of the documentation.

    I also have spent time with Bob Salas and find him to be an honest person with good character.

    I watched the Larry King show in July of 2008 and after 6 months or so I contacted Robert Hastings to share my story. I was VERY concerned about going public with it and at first came forward anonymously but eventually used my real name – Bruce Fenstermacher.
    I will not bore you with my story but it was about 10 years after Bob Salas’s and at FE Warren AFB in Wyoming. I do not have any other people that care to come forward although a few have talked to me “off the record”.
    Anyway, I would trust Robert and Bob with my life.
    Bruce Fenstermacher

  • Bruce Fenstermacher

    Mr. Coogan:

    I enjoyed your article. I have spent time (about 20 hours total) with Robert Hastings on three different occasions over the past several years and find him to be a very honest individual with outstanding character. I also find his research extensive and – as far as I can tell – accurate.
    Fifteen or so years ago I worked with a very strange technician (in a telecommunications company) that shared his interest in Area 51. At his request, several area 51 documents were declassified and at his request I read some of the material (hundreds and hundreds of pages). It was clear that most of what was seen above the skies of area 51 was U-2s – and later SR 71s. I did not share with him my Air Force background that reinforced a lot of the documentation.

    I also have spent time with Bob Salas and find him to be an honest person with good character.

    I watched the Larry King show in July of 2008 and after 6 months or so I contacted Robert Hastings to share my story. I was VERY concerned about going public with it and at first came forward anonymously but eventually used my real name – Bruce Fenstermacher.
    I will not bore you with my story but it was about 10 years after Bob Salas’s and at FE Warren AFB in Wyoming. I do not have any other people that care to come forward although a few have talked to me “off the record”.
    Anyway, I would trust Robert and Bob with my life.
    Bruce Fenstermacher

  • Phil Meade

    I’m not going to spend any time trying to refute, rebut, or support any of the particular points made in this thread. I just want to offer my own perspective on Robert Hastings’ character and intentions, in light of my own interactions with him and my own experiences.

    It was I that actually contacted him several years ago, out of the blue, before “UFOs and Nukes” was published. Not long prior to contacting Robert, I had encountered my own first UFO witness. Prior to my contact with that witness, I had been a lifelong skeptic on the topic of UFOs and had not really given the topic a second thought. I had even been a subscriber to “The Skeptical Enquirer” for a number of years.

    When I first contacted Robert, I was still in that “What the heck is going on?” phase, and was trying to make sense of what I’d been told by a 1st-person military witness of my own (not nukes-related). Robert had written something interesting about the Big Sur case that I had run across – I think it was a CUFOS article – that made me think he was credible. We struck up a correspondence that continues to this day, and we’ve met on the phone and in person, face-to-face.

    As to whether he’s sincere and well-intentioned, and not intentionally distorting or fabricating anything, I’d bet my life on it. As to whether he’s correct in his positions, to wit, the idea that a non-human intelligence is monitoring and interfering with our nuclear weapons, I agree with him wholeheartedly but am unable to offer any additional proof.

    If there’s anywhere I part company with Robert, it’s in my attitude toward “Disclosure.” I completely endorse and admire his attempts to bring about a public disclosure of what the government knows. I’ve just given up, personally, on trying to make that happen, because of my own experiences with friends and family.

    Since first contacting Robert, I’ve accumulated several 1st-hand witnesses of my own, some military, some DoD civilian, some civilian with no military/DoD connection, and I’ve shared what I’ve learned from them with friends and family closest to me.

    The odd thing, from my perspective, is that although my friends a family believe what I’m telling them – or at least say they do – not a one of them wants to hear or learn more information on the topic. This even includes friends and family who’ve had their own sightings!!! As Winston Churchill famously said, they want to “pick themselves up and hurry along as if nothing had happened.”

    So anyway, I think the person who first brings along definitive proof of the UFO phenomenon will be made to drink hemlock, a la Socrates. John and Jane Q. Public are simply not ready for their fantasy football, reality TV, and sitcoms to be rendered insipid and irrelevant.

    In the meantime, I pursue my own answers, but at the same time I strongly support Robert in what he’s trying to do, hoping that at the end of the day I’m wrong, and that a dent can be made in public opinion.

    Phil Meade
    LCDR, USN (Ret.)
    Reston, Virginia (I’m in the book)

  • Seamus Coogan

    Dear Mr Moore thank you so much for your reply. I like Bob Hastings. I think he has some very good stuff outside of his UFO angles. I do not think he is a liar either, he simply believes what he does. Though I found Mr Carlson’s conclusions agreeable. I disagreed with much of how he got there. As said I think that Bob is in the select few Ufologists, who have provided anything of real value to research in other areas.

  • Terry Hansen

    I stand by my earlier post!

  • James Carlson

    Of course not. Blue Book didn’t have the security clearance for U-2 flights. Try reading the book instead of guessing at an explanation. As for your garbage about reported flight characteristics about UFOs, most of the 1950s and 1960s flight characteristics were little lights in the sky, so quit with the BS. And while many of the U-2 reports were made by pilots, U-2 flights could also be seen from the ground — did you not bother to read the reference at all? God, you people are all the same — you never bother to research anything, which is why you’re so willing to believe anything. In any case, as i stated above, it isn’t RELEVANT, because we’re talking about Robert Hastings — a well known liar and a fraud. But I suppose like everything else, you don’t want to discuss a topic you have no argument against, which is why you keep bringing up subjects that have nothing to do with the topic of discussion.

  • Terry Hansen

    Like any good disinformation ploy, the secret-military-aircraft explanation sounds plausible to those unfamiliar with the reported facts.

    There is no evidence UFO sightings spiked as a result of secret spy-plane flights. This is asserted by some in the intelligence community but not supported by any objective evidence. And it has been refuted by Blue Book’s Col. Friend, as I stated earlier.

    Just because the CIA says something does not make it true. The agency’s long record in the lie-telling department is damning.

    I invite readers of this blog to revisit the many classic books on this subject, such as John G. Fuller’s ‘Incident at Exeter.’ If they do, it will become immediately apparent that what people were reporting in the 50s and 60s had nothing whatsoever to do with high-altitude aircraft.

    Another serious problem with this explanation is that it fails to account for the many documented UFO cases recorded prior to the existence of the U-2 and SR-71. Once again, a novice would not know this and could be taken in by intelligence-community disinformation. See, for example, Keith Chester’s ‘Strange Company: Military encounters with UFOs in World War II.’

    I rest my case!

  • You’re resting an invalid case. The secret-military-aircraft explanation sounds plausible to those who are familiar with the historical, documented facts. It is only implausible to those who ignore those facts in favor of the much more implausible – and utterly ridiculous explanation that ETs are to blame.

  • James Carlson

    John G. Fuller as a reliable source? Good God, you really will believe anything, won’t you? Try reading non-fiction for a change — it might just change your life!

  • James Carlson

    You may be right that “Hastings has not and will not buy into the bogus documents, reports and people in the field,” but that’s only because he’s amongst the little group that writes them!

  • James Carlson

    IRT: “The claim you cite (about UFOs and spy planes) comes from the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency — hardly a reliable source given its officially sanctioned propaganda mission!”

    When your precious Disclosure comes about, how many of those allegedly eye-opening reports do you think may have been written by the CIA? So, tell me, don’t you really mean that the CIA is an unreliable source only when the classified documents released via FOIA agree with your suppositions and conclusions?

    Here’s another point to ponder: what reason would anybody have to attempt the distribution of “officially sanctioned propaganda” by classifying it, and thereby distributing it to an extremely low number of people? Propaganda doesn’t work when you limit its distribution to those who not only have the security clearance necessary to access the materials, but must prove as well the requisite “need-to-know”. Propaganda, disinformation, or whatever you want to call it requires the widest possible distribution. Classified documents can’t possibly work as propaganda or disinformation, because by definition those documents have to be accessible to those who can establish “need-to-know” and clearance, which in turn necessitates an honest and truthful application of fact. Have you bothered to even examine the case you’re trying to affirm?

    Also, how exactly do you support the existence of “tens of thousands of UFO reports recorded at the time,” when not even Blue Book comes close to such a figure? What are you using — fractions? The only spectacular failure here is your failure to examine in any detail your highly flawed position, claims, and the conclusions you’ve reached on their basis.

    The following query is just to satisfy my own curiosity: what makes you believe that the immanent Disclosure of classified materials that UFO proponents consider to be some kind of holy grail is going to support some kind of assessment different from that defined in the FOIA documents already released?

  • Phil Meade

    I’m laughing too hard at your hype to possibly get angry.

  • James Carlson

    I’m not a bit surprised — you’ve already shown a marked reluctance to examine anything outside of your own beliefs. It’s sad, but it’s also common. Unfortunately, it makes it very easy to dismiss your assessments completely with the same bias and prejudice you’ve shown by not even attempting to explain away the dozens of anomalies you’ve decided to ignore.

  • James Carlson

    We probably wouldn’t be here if Hastings had done that instead of resorting to slander. Anyway, I’m glad you find things like that amusing. I hope nobody ever starts doing the same thing to you and your father — you might feel less amused. As for calling it “hype,” I’m nowhere near the hype UFO proponents can reach — you guys actually expect to be paid for your pathetic stories.

  • Seamus Coogan

    Dear Phil thanks for the input. If he would like to have a respectful debate sometime let him know I am keen to talk to him on here or out there.

  • Seamus Coogan

    Cheers Bruce. Thanks for taking the time to post. I remember Bob being on King.

  • Seamus Coogan

    Not necessarily please check out my article at CTKA concerning MJ-12. I give Bob some massive ups, and you will find the preambles very important.

  • Seamus Coogan

    That’s not true James. Stick to the issues I’m not going to have anyone smear BH with that.

  • Yeah – I actually disagree with Seamus that he Hastings doesn’t buy into them, but I’m pretty sure he doesn’t actually create them in the way that people like Rick Doty do.

  • James Carlson

    No offense, Seamus, but you’re wrong. For years, Robert Hastings insisted that LTCOL Walt Figel was witness to a UFO at Echo Flight on March 16, 1967, and in recognition of that, NICAP lists UFO sighhtings and reports for March 16, 1967 at Malmstrom AFB.

    During the very first conversation I ever had with Walt Figel, he insisted that there never was a UFO sighted or reported, whiich is exactly what my father, the Commander of Echo Flight, has been stating since 1996. When I asked Walt Figel to write a clear statement of the events that occurred, he wrote, “I have always maintained that I do not nor have I ever believed that UFOs exist in any form at any place at any time. I have never seen one or reported that I have seen one. I have always maintained that they had nothing to do with the shutdown of Echo flight in Montana.”

    Since Hastings had repeatedly insisted that Figel had logged reports of a UFO, he cleared that up as well: “The event at Malmstrom has a hand written log from me that was turned in just like all the other logs that I wrote over several years. I would think that if I wrote something like that in the log, there would be copies, it would have been classified at the beginning and then released along with the classified SAC messages and base reports. Nothing in that urgent SAC message even hints of UFOs at all and I think that it would if the official logs or telephone calls had referenced that fact.”

    Robert Hastings has repeatedly reported that Walt Figel and my father were interrogated for hours about the alleged UFOs, and were forced to sign statements swearing that they wouldn’t discuss the alleged UFO. Figel wrote, “It was just another day with a unexpected event in our lives. It was rather underwhelming at the time. No one rushed out to see us, no one made us sign any papers, no one interrogated us for hours on end.”

    Walt Figel is the only witness to an Echo Flight UFO on March 16, 1967 that Robert Hastings has ever discussed. The UFO reports currently listed by NICAP for that date are entirely a result of Hastings’ 2006 claims. That is the issue here, and it isn’t smearing him, it’s a point of fact that you can look up anytime you like. God knows, he’s plastered it all over the internet enough. Nobody has been smeared here except my father — and that is also all over the freaking internet.

    I have been sticking to the issues, Seamus, and I note that hardly anybody else has. There’s a whole crowd of well-wishers here trying to build up the mighty trust ratio for Hastings, but I note that not one of them has offered anything substantive in the way of an explanation for Robert Hastings’ behavior, his numerous slanders, the lies he has published liberally all over the internet and in his book. THAT is the only issue, and a lot of people here seem to want that issue to disappear so much that they’re trying to change the subject with almost every paragraph.

    How can we trust the CIA?

    U-2 flights can’t be seen from the ground.

    My military service required my background to be investigated.

    I completely endorse and admire his attempts to bring about a public disclosure.

    I strongly support Robert in what he’s trying to do.

    I’m laughing too hard at your hype to possibly get angry.

    I also find his research extensive and — as far as I can tell — accurate.

    For God’s sake, gimme a break! When is someone here going to get specific? Can you explain his behavior? Because I’d like to hear it if you can. Explain to me why he’d tell so many lies on public forums. Why did he repeatedly lie to Ryan, Stephen, and everybody at Reality Uncovered just to convince them not to examine the research I had done, and to ignore all the happy little testimony Walt Figel provided. Why would he repeatedly insist to anybody who would listen that I had never even spoken with Walt Figel — a claim he knew was a lie, because he received at my request exactly the same commentary that Figel sent me! Why did he insist for some 6-7 months that he would publish (any day now) his own interview with Figel — an interview that, according to Hastings, would prove that my father was lying about UFOs at Echo Flight, that my claims in regard to Figel’s actual testimony was 100% wrong, and would satisfy the entire world that a UFO took out ten missiles at Echo Flight? Those aren’t funny little comments he made, Seamus, they are LIES that were intended to have a measured effect on the credibility of his critics.

    You think I’m smearing this clown? Robert Hastings has been smearing my entire family for almost four years! Try explaining that with your cautious denials about his moral failings. That irresponsible and ignorant old flake told people that my protests about his claims and the numerous lies he was so willing to tell just to keep people from believing that his HYPE was just a repugnant fiction must be a genetic deficiency, since my father had refused since 1996 to go along with his creepy little UFO goals. You seriously don’t know what smearing is, Seamus. What I’ve been doing is nothing more than telling the truth.

    Will someone please say something specific that actually answers some questions? Because all I’m getting out of this is what a great guy Hastings is while everybody tries very hard to ignore the wretched beast in the corner of the room.

    “Hastings has not and will not buy into the bogus documents, reports and people in the field.” Well, NICAP’s reports of UFOs at Malmstrom AFB on March 16, 1967 didn’t write themselves. And only Robert Hastings has been screaming about Walt Figel’s so called UFO since 2006. He’s the one who wrote out Figel’s alleged memories about a UFO that Figel insists — wait, what did he say? “I have always maintained that I do not nor have I ever believed that UFOs exist in any form at any place at any time. I have never seen one or reported that I have seen one. I have always maintained that they had nothing to do with the shutdown of Echo flight in Montana.”

    If you think Robert Hastings is as honest as the day is long, perhaps you can explain the following assessment by Walt Figel — it speaks directly about his honesty:

    “I am not a fan of Salas, Hastings, or the whole UFO crowd
    I have never seen one and flatly don’t believe they exist at all
    I just want you to be clear of my position on UFOs
    They make good science fiction – nothing more

    “I have read both of their books
    There are many inaccurate statements and events in the books
    I have told them both that
    For instance, Oscar flight NEVER had any problems and Salas was NEVER involved in any of them at all just for starters.”

    Figel said he reported to them the problems in Hastings’ book and in Salas’. He said they ignored him. Do you really think he doesn’t fake claims to satisfy his desire for UFO reports? That’s all he’s ever done in regard to Echo Flight. Have you ever wondered why he has depended so often on written reports by his witnesses, and why he has never presented such a document in regard to Echo Flight? Can you honestly say that the “audio testimony” he’s provided for Walt Figel in place of a written report has not been edited? When evidence of prior editing of his audio reports was mentioned to Hastings, he said he edited the recordings to provide “clarity.”

    And you demand that I should “Stick to the issues”? Robert Hastings’ dishonesty IS the issue! If you haven’t noticed that, you should perhaps look a little closer. EVERYTHING he has claimed on behalf of Walt Figel is a betrayal of trust, and testimony to his dishonesty.

    When I published notes in regard to my first discussion with Walt Figel, the very first thing Robert Hastings did was call Salas. The two of them made plans to call Figel in the next couple of days. After Hastings’ talk with Figel, he wrote the following communication to the owners of Reality Uncovered:

    “I re-interviewed Walt Figel on Monday evening. Salas re-interviewed him on Tuesday evening. We have both conversations on audiotape and we are currently transcribing them. We asked Figel to address James Carlson’s interpretation of his statements and position on various things. James will not like what Walt had to say.

    “Figel has given Salas and me permission to publicize his statements as we see fit. I will post a comprehensive rebuttal to James’ flawed claims in the next few days, providing verbatim excerpts from the conversations. I may even make key portions of the original audio tape available online.”

    I immediately got in touch with Figel and asked him about Hastings’ call. This is what Figel wrote back:

    “I guess you must have posted something somewhere that got Hastings attention
    He did call and we did speak for a bit, so did Salas.
    You should know that both calls were very cordial as was ours. …

    “… I reasserted that I personally never did see a UFO at any time.
    I do not personally “believe” that UFOs had anything to do with Echo flight shutting down that year.
    I repeated that I never heard about an incident at November or Oscar flight and have no knowledge that they ever happened and that I doubted they did.
    That is obviously a personal opinion as I can not prove the negative.
    I repeated that Colonel Dick Evans was at the alternate command post at Kilo which is in the same squadron as November and Oscar and he never mentioned anything about a shutdown at either of these two flights.
    If it did happen, I personally don’t know anything about it.

    “One of their books said I had a personal log – I did not.
    The only log I ever filled out was the official log that all flights kept and that I do not and never did have a copy of that log. Obviously I can not remember what I wrote that morning.

    “One of the books says that the flight shut down in “seconds” – that is not an exactly accurate statement.
    It obviously took some time for your dad and I to run the appropriate checklists and make all the calls that we had to make to the command post and maintenance. We were near the end of the checklist when the second missile shut down and shortly threafter the rest of them followed suit.
    That sequence of events took several minutes not seconds, but that is all a very minor point in fact and doesn’t change the facts of the overall sequence of events that morning.

    “I told him that when someone mentioned UFOs, I just laughed it off as a joke and assumed someone was just kidding around. I never took it seriously.
    I also told them that no one from any UFO office in the Air Force ever interviewed/deriefed your dad and/or me and that I do not remember ever signing any papers about anything.
    In fact, I told them that until he mentioned it, I did not even know there was an office that monitored sightings of “UFOs” in the Air Force.

    “When your dad and I came topside the next day – no one ever said anything about UFOs and there was no “large gathering” of people on site that morning.
    There may have been later that afternoon, but I would have no knowledge of that as we were long gone back to the base as usual.

    “I did not know the targeting office’s name or even know that he was there.

    “I did say there was a VRSA recording reporting a “Channel 9 – NO GO” reported.
    They said that the maintenance crews had no such report at the LF.
    I told him that I did not know how the system worked at the missile site so that I do not know if that is possible or not.

    “I have always maintained that I do not personally believe in UFOs.
    I am not convinced that November or Oscar ever happened.
    But these are obviously personal opinions and I can not state them as facts or prove them – they are my personal beliefs.

    “I also believe these statements are accurate.
    I also believe that is what I said 2 years ago, but I don’t have recordings. …

    “… As you can see, I cc’d Hastings so that you both have the same piece of paper. I don’t think that there are any inconsistencies in what I said to either of you. If there are, I’m sorry, that is not my intention at all.”

    This detailed accounting is the conversation that Hastings was referring to when he told folks he had Figel’s claims on tape, and that those tapes proved my deception, and how Figel’s story “completely contradicts” the claims my father had made in 1996. You want to know how much I trust Robert Hastings? He told Reality Uncovered, “I will post a comprehensive rebuttal to James’ flawed claims in the next few days, providing verbatim excerpts from the conversations. I may even make key portions of the original audio tape available online.” I trust Hastings so much that I believe he would have done EXACTLY that had I not published Figel’s letter first. The fact that Hastings would have had to FAKE “key portions of the original audio tape” in order to do so is not a step he would refrain from taking. For the record, he has published NOTHING from that conversation, even though he spent six months promising to do so. He promised, in fact, that those recordings would not only prove that Walt Figel’s testimony about a UFO would contradict in every way the claims my father had advanced when he was first asked about the subject, but would prove as well that Robert Salas’ claims about Echo Flight were 100% confirmed by Figel. Oh, and he also insisted that once he released those recordings, it would prove that I had never even interviewed Walt Figel — and he made that lazy little claim while in possession of Figel’s communication to me — the one in which Figel writes “As you can see, I cc’d Hastings so that you both have the same piece of paper.”

    Instead of the generalized garbage his fan club has been detailing to you lately, I’d like someone to explain to me in very specific terms exactly how he can be such a trustworthy wretch with a history of manipulative dishonesty so patently clear. I can give you pages of insulting garbage like this, so your accusations that I’m smearing this piece of human flotsam will just have to fall on deaf ears. You don’t demand that I adjust my behavior to these ignoble crackpots. If you want to understand Robert Hastings, you need to ask intelligent questions, not insist that I treat him with the respect he has never earned.

    He is a deceitful old man who has sacrificed his own decent conduct to leave behind a legacy of lies and foolishness, and I have no intention allowing people to forget it, just so they can dance with his silly dreams of a nuclear-free human and alien alliance. Robert Hastings is a wretched liar who has done everything he could to advance claims that he knows are empty. THAT is the issue. And it’s also the truth.

  • James Carlson

    Whoa .. and here I was thinking the issue was Robert Hastings’ honesty or lack thereof. Silly me. Nobody’s smearing BH; it’s a simple statement of fact that his claims established a March 16, 1967 UFO via witness Walt Figel — a claim he knew was false. I’d say that’s entirely on issue. You’re wrong, Seamus — it is true. He repeatedly made claims about a UFO at Echo Flight that he knew was wrong. I’d say his proven dishonesty is absolutely buying into bogus reports. He’s been doing it in regard to Echo Flight for years. And if Hastings’ dishonesty isn’t the issue, why does your title mention “scam” in the first place? Nobody’s smearing Hastings — he did it all himself. And if you’re going to refuse any consideration to examine the facts, your conclusions will be based on an incomplete record of events. Closing your eyes to it doesn’t mean it’s there.

  • James Carlson

    I have to disagree, Ryan. Hastings continuously reported a UFO at Echo Flight after his only onsite witness established that there was no UFO. For 6-7 months, he committed himself to this lie by making claims Figel had already disproven, and he tried to protect this UFO report during the entire period by making a series of claims regarding Figel’s testimony that he absolutely knew were false. The fact is that NICAP includes a UFO in their database for March 16, 1967 that NOBODY ever saw, reported, or investigated, and that Hastings — since 2006 — has championed and protected in every way he could. He continued to assert these cynical acts even after Figel told him he was wrong. Given that Figel was Hastings’ only witness at Echo Flight, I’d say his continued insistence and reporting of these claims qualifies as a bogus UFO report. If he was unaware of its status, there would be no reason to tell so many egregious lies to prevent any real examination of his claims.

    It was Hastings who convinced Salas and Jamison to change the date of their UFO claims at Oscar Flight to March 24, 1967. After that, he instigated a group effort among his “witnesses” in order to create a series of single reports that would contain no contradictions or conflicts within the group. They abandoned old stories in order to establish new claims. This speaks directly to a causal act intended to remove all of the faults and holes in his witnesses’ original claims. During this little exercise, he was fully aware that LTCOL Lewis D. Chase had drafted a contemporary memo stating very clearly that there were no equipment failures at Malmstrom AFB on March 24, 1967. It’s shameful that Hastings has decided to simply ignore all of this. He hasn’t even attempted to defend himself, an act that immediately suggests he cannot do so.

    Hastings again committed himself to the lie by reporting widely that Frederick Meiwald had confirmed a UFO at Oscar Flight, supporting Salas’ claims “100%”, and doing so even after Meiwald told him directly that he didn’t remember anything about a UFO being involved in a missile failures incident at Oscar Flight. Even after Meiwald clearly refused to confirm this UFO, Hastings continued to report that Frederick Meiwald HAD confirmed said UFO at Oscar Flight. All of these incidents were initiated by Hastings alone. Hastings instigated the date change; Hastings arranged a rewriting of testimony; Hastings insisted upon these rewrites to make them seem more convincing, and to establish confirmative testimony where such testimony did not exist.

    The issue here is Robert Hastings’ dishonesty — nothing else. More to the point, nobody is smearing Robert Hastings. He’s done all of this for himself.

  • James Carlson

    I wrote a series of articles including a 357 pg. book that I’ve been giving away for free so I wouldn’t have to keep saying the same crap over and over again — the fact that you haven’t even bothered to look at any of it suggests that you don’t care much for looking things up for yourself Google; and that suggests you don’t care much about substantive evidence — you just listen to garbage and believe it without looking at it twice. Frankly, I’m not a bit surprised. It’s a quality you share with a large number of UFO proponents. You hear something you like, and belief is automatic. The sad part is that it’s automatic on the same level of automatism as a trained puppy when you offer him a bowl meat scraps. It doesn’t matter where the meat came from, and it doesn’t matter that it tastes just like oatmeal. All that matters is that you’ve got your face in a bowl of something you’ve been told is grade A beef.

    If you wish to know exactly what happened in 1967, and why the missiles at Echo Flight actually failed, and why the Oscar Flight claims asserted by Hastings and Salas are so pointless, I encourage you to examine following narratives:

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/26641522/Americans-Credulous-by-James-Carlson

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/42303580/Echo-Flights-of-Fantasy-Anatomy-of-a-UFO-Hoax-by-James-Carlson [this one is a fairly complete examination of the issues for those unfamiliar with the case who don’t want to examine the 350-or-so pages in the manuscript above — “Americans, Credulous”]

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/49495918/The-Bunny-s-Retort-by-James-Carlson

    http://www.realityuncovered.net/blog/2011/08/strategic-editing/

    http://www.realityuncovered.net/blog/2012/04/how-to-demand-redress-by-shooting-yourself-in-the-foot/

    http://www.realityuncovered.net/blog/2012/10/the-aggressive-pursuit-of-ignorance/

    I would also recommend that you examine the numerous interviews and articles at the Reality Uncovered website: http://www.realityuncovered.net/. Many of the articles discuss the events at Echo Flight and Oscar Flight in March 1967, and include interviews with both the commander and the deputy commander at Echo Flight on March 16, 1967 that were either conducted or written up by Ryan Dube. To this day, Robert Salas insists that both men discussed therein confirm his claims of UFO interference, which both men deny strongly. According to them, they’ve denied it strongly since first asked about the issue in 1996.

    Robert Hastings, you might note, refuses entirely to discuss these matters in any real detail or to answer any detailed questions regarding the testimonies of these two men, preferring instead to attack the integrity and credibility of those publically raising such issues — such as me, for example. He refuses to offer anything substantial in the way of evidence, and fails entirely to explain the details of his claims or to answer any of the valid questions raised by his insistent fact-free claims. What he has done is rely on the craven use of blatant lies and baseless insults in regard to his critics without once managing to refute or even discuss their criticisms. He’s even gone so far as to publically defame both me and my father by repeatedly insisting that my father told him I was suffering from a mental illness brought on by a nervous breakdown, and that none of my claims should be believed for that reason. It doesn’t matter that my mother had to read about on the internet, and that it was the first time she had ever heard about it — a matter that supposedly had my whole family distrubed for three years! It doesn’t matter either that my father has insisted that his claims are untrue. What does matter is that Robert Hastings included these nasty little lies in letters to active duty USAF personnel who were stationed at Malmstrom AFB and wanted to ask him about the issue. What matters is that he used these baseless lies in response to others who asked about it on internet forums and at his little lectures. What matters is that he told everyone he had tape recordings of this nonexistent telephone conversation with my father when he toldf him this little bit of garbage and that he would post it “soon” on his website when he posted all of the delicious recordings of Walt Figel stating that my father was lying about Echo Flight, and confirming in full Robert Salas’ pathetic little bit of fiction in the process. For the record, none of these recordings have ever been released, because they DON’t EXIST. It was just another load of crappy fiction from a man who apparently doesn’t understand what a FACT is. What does matter is that Walt Figel has repeatedly come out to insist that my father’s claims in regard to Echo Flight were completely true. What matters is that Walt Figel — instead of stating that my father has lied about these claims, as Hastings wants the world to believe — has instead come out and said that my father did not lie, and that he personally didn’t think my father was even capable of lying.

    This is the man whose words you apparently accept as honest proclamations without even a second’s worth of examination. How many of his alleged “witnesses” have you talked to? Have you ever tried to confirm ANYTHING that you now seem to believe are words of gospel? Do you normally believe EVERYTHING you hear without bothering to even check out the timeline? What Hastinbgs has doen is protect a hoax, because that’s his LEGACY. When people like you buy into it without looking at it too deeply, he applauds your effort, so congratulations on that end.

    A lot information regarding these incidents at Echo Flight and Oscar Flight can be found at the Reality Uncovered forum, in particular the Echo Flight Incident thread: http://www.realityuncovered.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=1688&sid=fb3fd24f098c0f3bc35595ea1b41a146. Every single detail, digression, discussion or subject of argument asserted by both men has been explained and discussed in great detail in the documents and on the websites you’ve been directed to. Not one question has been left unanswered, a statement that neither Hastings nor Salas can honestly affirm. Both men, in fact, are proven liars who have created fiction and called it fact, something anyone willing to actually do the research can determine very readily for himself, as the events — contrary to the claims of Hastings and Salas — have been declassified since before 1980. All anybody ever had to do was ASK for it.

    Tim Hebert, an ex-USAF missileer himself, has also written some enlightening articles regarding the case on his blog at: http://timhebert.blogspot.com/. You should take the time to read them. Tim, in fact, is a retired missileer himself, and he can discuss these matters with a level of authority that neither I nor Hastings can come near to. He tends to offer Hastings and Salas a lot more credit that I’m willing to give, but his conclusions are pretty much the same, and they’re based on the very same materials so many others (but not you) have been willing to examine. If you decide to ignore them, you’re doing yourself a disservice. To be frank, on the other hand, ignoring all of it is pretty much what I expect from people who tend to accept outrageous claims on the basis of their existence alone, but I’ve come to the conclusion as well that people who demand Disclosure on their basis are particularly handicapped, because they’re demanding a political solution to an issue they don’t understand, have faled to examine, and can only defend with a handful of crap. They’ve already given up reasoning in favor of rhetoric.

    Dr. David Clarke, for many years an accepted expert regarding the British military forces’ investigations of the UFO phenomenon, has also discussed this case in the context of the “UFO and Nukes” connection asserted by Robert Hastings and Robert Salas. You can read his article on the subject at http://drdavidclarke.blogspot.com/2010/11/flat-earth-nukes.html.

    The folk tales currently being spread by Hastings and Salas have not merely been dismissed as one possible interpretation of their claims; they have been repeatedly dismantled and shredded — proven as lies by witness testimony and documented evidence. There is no doubt whatsoever that they created this case outright. There were no UFOs involved — it is a lie, and nothing more. Witnesses that both men have presented to the public have actually come forward to dispute the claims these men have made. They insist that their statements were taken out of context and distorted purposely in order to suggest the presence of UFOs where no such presence could otherwise be established. Salas and Hastings have perpetrated a UFO hoax of the worst sort, and have attempted to destroy the reputations and career service of better men than themselves.

    The commander of Echo Flight on March 16, 1967, CAPT (Ret.) Eric D. Carlson, has released the following definitive statement:

    “Let me start by stating that, as best as I can recall, my only contact with Salas and Hastings has been on the phone. I did tell Salas that he could release my name to whomever he wished, don’t know why he needed my permission. I have talked to a newspaper writer in Great Falls, several years age, and a TV producer from one of those UFO shows. With both these individuals I denied any knowledge of any UFO’s at Malmstrom. In addition, I stated that there was no, repeat no, incident at Oscar flight as Salas maintains. The man is either lying or delusional.

    “My only contact with Hastings was a call I received from him regarding his book. I stated that his book sounded interesting and he later sent me a copy which I read and gave away …. At no time did I mention anyone’s mental status; yours, mine, his, or Salas’, although in retrospect I could comment on Salas’.

    “My memory is quite good regarding the events at Malmstrom and there is no doubt in my mind that there were no reports of UFO’s and no incident at Oscar flight. I will be willing to discuss this with anyone who is truly interested in the facts.”

    His deputy commander at Echo Flight, COL (Ret.) Walter Figel, Jr., has insisted as well that UFOs were not involved, and adds that his version of this event has been distorted by both Robert Salas and Robert Hastings in order to give the impression that an actual UFO was involved. He asserts very strongly that no UFOs were involved, nor were UFOs ever reported. Regarding the comments made on your website by Robert Hastings, COL. Figel has never, throughout the years I’ve known him, accused me of lying, and has, in fact, been refreshingly open and definitive in regard to the events of March 1967, and has repeatedly confirmed all of the aspects of this story that I’ve made available and that my father, Eric Carlson, has repeatedly confirmed. It’s all just more of Hastings’ pathetic nonsense.

    Walt Figel has released numerous comments regarding the incidents of March 1967, including the following definitive statement:

    “James,

    “First – your dad has not lied about anything nor do believe that he is even capable of lying about anything at all. He was, is, and always will be an honorable man. You should remember that always – I will.

    “Second – Bob Salas was never associated with any shutdown of any missiles at any time in any flight and you can take that to the bank. Just think about this for a split second. He is a person wrapped up in UFOs to the Nth degree. Yet he could not remember he was not at Echo. Then he thought he was at November – wrong again. Then he thought he was at Oscar – wrong again.

    “Third – There is no record about anything happening at November or Oscar except in people’s minds that are flawed beyond imagination. Salas has created events out of the thin air and can’t get the facts straight even then. My best friend to this day was the flight commander of the 10th SMS at the time. He and I have discussed this silly assertion in the past couple of years – he thinks it is all madeup nonsense for sure. I put both Salas and Hastings in touch with him and he has told them both that an incident at November or Oscar never happened. In addition he was subsequently stationed at Norton AFB where the engineers tested the possible problems. No little green men were responsible.

    “Fourth – I have always maintained that I do not nor have I ever believed that UFOs exist in any form at any place at any time. I have never seen one or reported that I have seen one. I have always maintained that they had nothing to do with the shutdown of Echo flight in Montana.

    “Fifth – The event at Malmstrom has a hand written log from me that was turned in just like all the other logs that I wrote over several years. I would think that if I wrote something like that in the log, there would be copies, it would have been classified at the beginning and then released along with the classified SAC messages and base reports. Nothing in that urgent SAC message even hints of UFOs at all and I think that it would if the official logs or telephone calls had referenced that fact.

    “Sixth – When it happened, neither your dad nor I were “visibly shaken” by the events. It was just another day with a unexpected event in our lives. It was rather underwhelming at the time. No one rushed out to see us, no one made us sign any papers, no one interrogated us for hours on end.

    “There is no Air Force “cover-up” [of the events of March 1967]; it just did not happen the way Salas and has portrayed the course of events. I am sorry that you are all caught up in a pissing contest with these people, I really am. They are just not going to let go no matter what you say or do. He has made a 15 year career pandering about the country talking about things he has no knowledge about. I am not at all interested in taking them on – it’s not worth my effort – I have more important things to do with my life. I much rather just stay out of it.

    “Hopefully, we can move on. I did read about a briefing on the 27th here in DC. I am here in VA about 10 miles away. Interesting. Hopefully this helps you and confirms to you at least that your dad is a straight shooter and does not lie to anyone.”

    Robert Salas’ commander at Oscar Flight, Frederick Meiwald, insists that he doesn’t even believe in UFOs — a strange comment to make in light of Salas’ insistence that a UFO took out the missiles at Oscar Flight during an incident that resulted in an injury to one non-commissioned officer, requiring that man to be evacuated from the site by helicopter. When interviewed by Robert Hastings, he stated unequivocally that he doesn’t remember anything at all about a UFO. In fact, Robert Hastings himself has written:

    “Meiwald then elaborated and said that he couldn’t support everything Salas has said about the incident because he had been resting/sleeping when the first missile or two dropped offline -— which occurred moments after Salas received a report from the Oscar Flight Security Controller about a UFO hovering over the Launch Control Facility’s front gate.

    “Although Salas had quickly told Meiwald about that telephone conversation, Meiwald says that he can’t remember it.”

    In another interview conducted by Hastings, Meiwald is equally clear:

    “RH: Okay. Now, when Bob, I think moments [after] he woke you up, or you got up and sat down at the commander’s consol—he of course had received a call from the Flight Security Controller, saying that there was a bright red, oval-shaped object hovering over the security fence gate—my understanding is that is what he told you as soon as you were at your consol, that he had received this call and, uh, that of course coincided with the missiles beginning to malfunction. Do you recall him telling you that?

    “FM: I really don’t remember that portion of it, relative to the bright object. I remember an unusual condition [but] as far as the details, uh, I can’t elaborate on that.”

    The following exchange is also revealing:

    “RH: Okay. He of course has also said that you two were, uh, when you were back at Malmstrom, you were debriefed by OSI and required to sign non-disclosure statements. Do you remember that?

    “FM: I remember being directed to do that. But that was no problem. I’ve been one of these people, when told to forget something, I forget it—eventually [inaudible].

    “RH: Right, well, is that a polite way of saying that you really don’t want to discuss this, even though you know more than you’re saying?

    “FM: No, I’m saying I don’t remember.”

    For nearly ten years Salas was using Meiwald as confirmation of the events at both November Flight and Oscar Flight, stating that either my father or someone else called Meiwald on March 16 and told him all about Echo Flight. When interviewed by Hastings, Meiwald stated, “Whatever happened over at Echo, I have no idea.” He has rebuffed completely the attempts by Hastings and Salas to establish confirmation for the UFOs they’ve invented.

    Meiwald has also clearly stated in other interviews with Salas that only 3-4 missiles failed during the one missile failures event he has recalled; he’s NEVER stated outright that the UFO story he told Salas in 1996 had anything at all to do with missile failures; it’s never even been mentioned in context.

    My father, the commander of Echo Flight in March 1967, was present when all ten missiles were taken off of strategic alert by an electronic noise pulse generated internally at the launch control facility. This pulse interfered with the normal operation of the logic coupler on the guidance and control module for that facility, causing thereby the failure of the missiles, which were, in effect, simply turned off. The incident was very well documented and was thoroughly investigated, and every word that Robert Salas and Robert Hastings have ever said on the subject has been repeatedly discounted or proven outright to be little more than lies and embellishments created for the purpose of making money from the sales of their books, the sales of associated videos, and the speaking fees they charge as a matter of course when retelling their ridiculous little folk tales.

    I’m not asking you to believe these points I’ve outlined. It isn’t necessary, as they’re already included in the public record and can be examined by anyone who’s interested in the subject. I do ask, however, that you give some further thought to claims you’ve discussed. You should be aware that there is another point of view in regard to this matter — one that has been repeatedly confirmed by those men who were actually involved with this singular event in USAF history, has been very well-documented through the years, and was very thoroughly investigated by the USAF for some months after the incident itself.

    There were only two witnesses at Echo Flight in March 1967: the commander of the flight, CAPT Eric D. Carlson, and the deputy commander, COL Walter Figel, Jr. Both men have publically affirmed that there was no UFO. Robert Salas and Robert Hastings are both merely agitators — one a liar and the other a fraud — who have repeatedly misrepresented the claims of the men involved in these incidents. They started utilizing these methods years ago, found out that it made their claims convincing to a few ignorant people, and continued this path of slander and disruption as a result of their minor and isolated successes. They are petty con-men and fraudulent hucksters — nothing more.

    People like you are dangerous, because you’re demanding a political solution to a problem that doesn’t even exist, and that political solution necessitates conviction — the conviction of those making the demands that their government cannot be trusted, the military that defends them and upholds their Constitution is formally dishonest and irresponisble and is maliciously hiding a secret vital to the interests of the entire planet. Except when it comes to proving your case, you cannot do it; the fact is UFO proponents have been tagged with this failure of their’s for 60-years now. It is because of this failure that people like Robert Hastings and Robert Salas have detemined for themselves that dishonesty is now necessary. Disclosure will NOT happen without more evidence, and that evidence does not exist. And that means it has to be created. Haven’t you wondered for even a moment why the only organized system of UFO advocacy that can be seen as “organized” or “professional” or insistently “public” is a review of OLD CASES being raised by self-acclaimed witnesses? Because it’s the only means available that corrects what these UFO proponents inisist is unjustified failure. They assume that if they can only bring about full Disclosure, they can turn this failure around — they can finally say “you see, we were right and everybody else was wrong.” Unfortunately, that will never happen without convincing a whole Hell of a lot more people that it’s necessary, and nobody is going to be convinced by the historical record. And that means yoiu have to change the record, even if the only way to do it is by lying about it and then defending that lie. Well, when you start defending your lies by destroying the reputations and the honor of good men, you’ve gone way too far. You don’t deserve respect, you don’t deserve gracious politesse, and you don’t deserve to make your silly claims without the immediate disclosure of your dishonesty. Those are Robert Hastings’ and Robert Salas’ only issues. They are liars and they are frauds. Period. And frankly, whether or not they were honest purveyors of the truth twenty-some years ago isn’t even relevant. The fact is, they can no longer make that claim, and that ‘s the only concern I have.

  • James Carlson

    I wrote a series of articles including a 357 pg. book that I’ve been giving away for free so I wouldn’t have to keep saying the same crap over and over again — the fact that you haven’t even bothered to look at any of it suggests that you don’t care much for looking things up for yourself Google; and that suggests you don’t care much about substantive evidence — you just listen to garbage and believe it without looking at it twice. Frankly, I’m not a bit surprised. It’s a quality you share with a large number of UFO proponents. You hear something you like, and belief is automatic. The sad part is that it’s automatic on the same level of automatism as a trained puppy when you offer him a bowl meat scraps. It doesn’t matter where the meat came from, and it doesn’t matter that it tastes just like oatmeal. All that matters is that you’ve got your face in a bowl of something you’ve been told is grade A beef.

    If you wish to know exactly what happened in 1967, and why the missiles at Echo Flight actually failed, and why the Oscar Flight claims asserted by Hastings and Salas are so pointless, I encourage you to examine following narratives:

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/26641522/Americans-Credulous-by-James-Carlson

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/42303580/Echo-Flights-of-Fantasy-Anatomy-of-a-UFO-Hoax-by-James-Carlson [this one is a fairly complete examination of the issues for those unfamiliar with the case who don’t want to examine the 350-or-so pages in the manuscript above — “Americans, Credulous”]

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/49495918/The-Bunny-s-Retort-by-James-Carlson

    http://www.realityuncovered.net/blog/2011/08/strategic-editing/

    http://www.realityuncovered.net/blog/2012/04/how-to-demand-redress-by-shooting-yourself-in-the-foot/

    http://www.realityuncovered.net/blog/2012/10/the-aggressive-pursuit-of-ignorance/

    I would also recommend that you examine the numerous interviews and articles at the Reality Uncovered website: http://www.realityuncovered.net/. Many of the articles discuss the events at Echo Flight and Oscar Flight in March 1967, and include interviews with both the commander and the deputy commander at Echo Flight on March 16, 1967 that were either conducted or written up by Ryan Dube. To this day, Robert Salas insists that both men discussed therein confirm his claims of UFO interference, which both men deny strongly. According to them, they’ve denied it strongly since first asked about the issue in 1996.

    Robert Hastings, you might note, refuses entirely to discuss these matters in any real detail or to answer any detailed questions regarding the testimonies of these two men, preferring instead to attack the integrity and credibility of those publically raising such issues — such as me, for example. He refuses to offer anything substantial in the way of evidence, and fails entirely to explain the details of his claims or to answer any of the valid questions raised by his insistent fact-free claims. What he has done is rely on the craven use of blatant lies and baseless insults in regard to his critics without once managing to refute or even discuss their criticisms. He’s even gone so far as to publically defame both me and my father by repeatedly insisting that my father told him I was suffering from a mental illness brought on by a nervous breakdown, and that none of my claims should be believed for that reason. It doesn’t matter that my mother had to read about on the internet, and that it was the first time she had ever heard about it — a matter that supposedly had my whole family distrubed for three years! It doesn’t matter either that my father has insisted that his claims are untrue. What does matter is that Robert Hastings included these nasty little lies in letters to active duty USAF personnel who were stationed at Malmstrom AFB and wanted to ask him about the issue. What matters is that he used these baseless lies in response to others who asked about it on internet forums and at his little lectures. What matters is that he told everyone he had tape recordings of this nonexistent telephone conversation with my father when he toldf him this little bit of garbage and that he would post it “soon” on his website when he posted all of the delicious recordings of Walt Figel stating that my father was lying about Echo Flight, and confirming in full Robert Salas’ pathetic little bit of fiction in the process. For the record, none of these recordings have ever been released, because they DON’t EXIST. It was just another load of crappy fiction from a man who apparently doesn’t understand what a FACT is. What does matter is that Walt Figel has repeatedly come out to insist that my father’s claims in regard to Echo Flight were completely true. What matters is that Walt Figel — instead of stating that my father has lied about these claims, as Hastings wants the world to believe — has instead come out and said that my father did not lie, and that he personally didn’t think my father was even capable of lying.

    This is the man whose words you apparently accept as honest proclamations without even a second’s worth of examination. How many of his alleged “witnesses” have you talked to? Have you ever tried to confirm ANYTHING that you now seem to believe are words of gospel? Do you normally believe EVERYTHING you hear without bothering to even check out the timeline? What Hastinbgs has doen is protect a hoax, because that’s his LEGACY. When people like you buy into it without looking at it too deeply, he applauds your effort, so congratulations on that end.

    A lot information regarding these incidents at Echo Flight and Oscar Flight can be found at the Reality Uncovered forum, in particular the Echo Flight Incident thread: http://www.realityuncovered.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=1688&sid=fb3fd24f098c0f3bc35595ea1b41a146. Every single detail, digression, discussion or subject of argument asserted by both men has been explained and discussed in great detail in the documents and on the websites you’ve been directed to. Not one question has been left unanswered, a statement that neither Hastings nor Salas can honestly affirm. Both men, in fact, are proven liars who have created fiction and called it fact, something anyone willing to actually do the research can determine very readily for himself, as the events — contrary to the claims of Hastings and Salas — have been declassified since before 1980. All anybody ever had to do was ASK for it.

    Tim Hebert, an ex-USAF missileer himself, has also written some enlightening articles regarding the case on his blog at: http://timhebert.blogspot.com/. You should take the time to read them. Tim, in fact, is a retired missileer himself, and he can discuss these matters with a level of authority that neither I nor Hastings can come near to. He tends to offer Hastings and Salas a lot more credit that I’m willing to give, but his conclusions are pretty much the same, and they’re based on the very same materials so many others (but not you) have been willing to examine. If you decide to ignore them, you’re doing yourself a disservice. To be frank, on the other hand, ignoring all of it is pretty much what I expect from people who tend to accept outrageous claims on the basis of their existence alone, but I’ve come to the conclusion as well that people who demand Disclosure on their basis are particularly handicapped, because they’re demanding a political solution to an issue they don’t understand, have faled to examine, and can only defend with a handful of crap. They’ve already given up reasoning in favor of rhetoric.

    Dr. David Clarke, for many years an accepted expert regarding the British military forces’ investigations of the UFO phenomenon, has also discussed this case in the context of the “UFO and Nukes” connection asserted by Robert Hastings and Robert Salas. You can read his article on the subject at http://drdavidclarke.blogspot.com/2010/11/flat-earth-nukes.html.

    The folk tales currently being spread by Hastings and Salas have not merely been dismissed as one possible interpretation of their claims; they have been repeatedly dismantled and shredded — proven as lies by witness testimony and documented evidence. There is no doubt whatsoever that they created this case outright. There were no UFOs involved — it is a lie, and nothing more. Witnesses that both men have presented to the public have actually come forward to dispute the claims these men have made. They insist that their statements were taken out of context and distorted purposely in order to suggest the presence of UFOs where no such presence could otherwise be established. Salas and Hastings have perpetrated a UFO hoax of the worst sort, and have attempted to destroy the reputations and career service of better men than themselves.

    The commander of Echo Flight on March 16, 1967, CAPT (Ret.) Eric D. Carlson, has released the following definitive statement:

    “Let me start by stating that, as best as I can recall, my only contact with Salas and Hastings has been on the phone. I did tell Salas that he could release my name to whomever he wished, don’t know why he needed my permission. I have talked to a newspaper writer in Great Falls, several years age, and a TV producer from one of those UFO shows. With both these individuals I denied any knowledge of any UFO’s at Malmstrom. In addition, I stated that there was no, repeat no, incident at Oscar flight as Salas maintains. The man is either lying or delusional.

    “My only contact with Hastings was a call I received from him regarding his book. I stated that his book sounded interesting and he later sent me a copy which I read and gave away …. At no time did I mention anyone’s mental status; yours, mine, his, or Salas’, although in retrospect I could comment on Salas’.

    “My memory is quite good regarding the events at Malmstrom and there is no doubt in my mind that there were no reports of UFO’s and no incident at Oscar flight. I will be willing to discuss this with anyone who is truly interested in the facts.”

    His deputy commander at Echo Flight, COL (Ret.) Walter Figel, Jr., has insisted as well that UFOs were not involved, and adds that his version of this event has been distorted by both Robert Salas and Robert Hastings in order to give the impression that an actual UFO was involved. He asserts very strongly that no UFOs were involved, nor were UFOs ever reported. Regarding the comments made on your website by Robert Hastings, COL. Figel has never, throughout the years I’ve known him, accused me of lying, and has, in fact, been refreshingly open and definitive in regard to the events of March 1967, and has repeatedly confirmed all of the aspects of this story that I’ve made available and that my father, Eric Carlson, has repeatedly confirmed. It’s all just more of Hastings’ pathetic nonsense.

    Walt Figel has released numerous comments regarding the incidents of March 1967, including the following definitive statement:

    “James,

    “First – your dad has not lied about anything nor do believe that he is even capable of lying about anything at all. He was, is, and always will be an honorable man. You should remember that always – I will.

    “Second – Bob Salas was never associated with any shutdown of any missiles at any time in any flight and you can take that to the bank. Just think about this for a split second. He is a person wrapped up in UFOs to the Nth degree. Yet he could not remember he was not at Echo. Then he thought he was at November – wrong again. Then he thought he was at Oscar – wrong again.

    “Third – There is no record about anything happening at November or Oscar except in people’s minds that are flawed beyond imagination. Salas has created events out of the thin air and can’t get the facts straight even then. My best friend to this day was the flight commander of the 10th SMS at the time. He and I have discussed this silly assertion in the past couple of years – he thinks it is all madeup nonsense for sure. I put both Salas and Hastings in touch with him and he has told them both that an incident at November or Oscar never happened. In addition he was subsequently stationed at Norton AFB where the engineers tested the possible problems. No little green men were responsible.

    “Fourth – I have always maintained that I do not nor have I ever believed that UFOs exist in any form at any place at any time. I have never seen one or reported that I have seen one. I have always maintained that they had nothing to do with the shutdown of Echo flight in Montana.

    “Fifth – The event at Malmstrom has a hand written log from me that was turned in just like all the other logs that I wrote over several years. I would think that if I wrote something like that in the log, there would be copies, it would have been classified at the beginning and then released along with the classified SAC messages and base reports. Nothing in that urgent SAC message even hints of UFOs at all and I think that it would if the official logs or telephone calls had referenced that fact.

    “Sixth – When it happened, neither your dad nor I were “visibly shaken” by the events. It was just another day with a unexpected event in our lives. It was rather underwhelming at the time. No one rushed out to see us, no one made us sign any papers, no one interrogated us for hours on end.

    “There is no Air Force “cover-up” [of the events of March 1967]; it just did not happen the way Salas and has portrayed the course of events. I am sorry that you are all caught up in a pissing contest with these people, I really am. They are just not going to let go no matter what you say or do. He has made a 15 year career pandering about the country talking about things he has no knowledge about. I am not at all interested in taking them on – it’s not worth my effort – I have more important things to do with my life. I much rather just stay out of it.

    “Hopefully, we can move on. I did read about a briefing on the 27th here in DC. I am here in VA about 10 miles away. Interesting. Hopefully this helps you and confirms to you at least that your dad is a straight shooter and does not lie to anyone.”

    Robert Salas’ commander at Oscar Flight, Frederick Meiwald, insists that he doesn’t even believe in UFOs — a strange comment to make in light of Salas’ insistence that a UFO took out the missiles at Oscar Flight during an incident that resulted in an injury to one non-commissioned officer, requiring that man to be evacuated from the site by helicopter. When interviewed by Robert Hastings, he stated unequivocally that he doesn’t remember anything at all about a UFO. In fact, Robert Hastings himself has written:

    “Meiwald then elaborated and said that he couldn’t support everything Salas has said about the incident because he had been resting/sleeping when the first missile or two dropped offline -— which occurred moments after Salas received a report from the Oscar Flight Security Controller about a UFO hovering over the Launch Control Facility’s front gate.

    “Although Salas had quickly told Meiwald about that telephone conversation, Meiwald says that he can’t remember it.”

    In another interview conducted by Hastings, Meiwald is equally clear:

    “RH: Okay. Now, when Bob, I think moments [after] he woke you up, or you got up and sat down at the commander’s consol—he of course had received a call from the Flight Security Controller, saying that there was a bright red, oval-shaped object hovering over the security fence gate—my understanding is that is what he told you as soon as you were at your consol, that he had received this call and, uh, that of course coincided with the missiles beginning to malfunction. Do you recall him telling you that?

    “FM: I really don’t remember that portion of it, relative to the bright object. I remember an unusual condition [but] as far as the details, uh, I can’t elaborate on that.”

    The following exchange is also revealing:

    “RH: Okay. He of course has also said that you two were, uh, when you were back at Malmstrom, you were debriefed by OSI and required to sign non-disclosure statements. Do you remember that?

    “FM: I remember being directed to do that. But that was no problem. I’ve been one of these people, when told to forget something, I forget it—eventually [inaudible].

    “RH: Right, well, is that a polite way of saying that you really don’t want to discuss this, even though you know more than you’re saying?

    “FM: No, I’m saying I don’t remember.”

    For nearly ten years Salas was using Meiwald as confirmation of the events at both November Flight and Oscar Flight, stating that either my father or someone else called Meiwald on March 16 and told him all about Echo Flight. When interviewed by Hastings, Meiwald stated, “Whatever happened over at Echo, I have no idea.” He has rebuffed completely the attempts by Hastings and Salas to establish confirmation for the UFOs they’ve invented.

    Meiwald has also clearly stated in other interviews with Salas that only 3-4 missiles failed during the one missile failures event he has recalled; he’s NEVER stated outright that the UFO story he told Salas in 1996 had anything at all to do with missile failures; it’s never even been mentioned in context.

    My father, the commander of Echo Flight in March 1967, was present when all ten missiles were taken off of strategic alert by an electronic noise pulse generated internally at the launch control facility. This pulse interfered with the normal operation of the logic coupler on the guidance and control module for that facility, causing thereby the failure of the missiles, which were, in effect, simply turned off. The incident was very well documented and was thoroughly investigated, and every word that Robert Salas and Robert Hastings have ever said on the subject has been repeatedly discounted or proven outright to be little more than lies and embellishments created for the purpose of making money from the sales of their books, the sales of associated videos, and the speaking fees they charge as a matter of course when retelling their ridiculous little folk tales.

    I’m not asking you to believe these points I’ve outlined. It isn’t necessary, as they’re already included in the public record and can be examined by anyone who’s interested in the subject. I do ask, however, that you give some further thought to claims you’ve discussed. You should be aware that there is another point of view in regard to this matter — one that has been repeatedly confirmed by those men who were actually involved with this singular event in USAF history, has been very well-documented through the years, and was very thoroughly investigated by the USAF for some months after the incident itself.

    There were only two witnesses at Echo Flight in March 1967: the commander of the flight, CAPT Eric D. Carlson, and the deputy commander, COL Walter Figel, Jr. Both men have publically affirmed that there was no UFO. Robert Salas and Robert Hastings are both merely agitators — one a liar and the other a fraud — who have repeatedly misrepresented the claims of the men involved in these incidents. They started utilizing these methods years ago, found out that it made their claims convincing to a few ignorant people, and continued this path of slander and disruption as a result of their minor and isolated successes. They are petty con-men and fraudulent hucksters — nothing more.

    People like you are dangerous, because you’re demanding a political solution to a problem that doesn’t even exist, and that political solution necessitates conviction — the conviction of those making the demands that their government cannot be trusted, the military that defends them and upholds their Constitution is formally dishonest and irresponisble and is maliciously hiding a secret vital to the interests of the entire planet. Except when it comes to proving your case, you cannot do it; the fact is UFO proponents have been tagged with this failure of their’s for 60-years now. It is because of this failure that people like Robert Hastings and Robert Salas have detemined for themselves that dishonesty is now necessary. Disclosure will NOT happen without more evidence, and that evidence does not exist. And that means it has to be created. Haven’t you wondered for even a moment why the only organized system of UFO advocacy that can be seen as “organized” or “professional” or insistently “public” is a review of OLD CASES being raised by self-acclaimed witnesses? Because it’s the only means available that corrects what these UFO proponents inisist is unjustified failure. They assume that if they can only bring about full Disclosure, they can turn this failure around — they can finally say “you see, we were right and everybody else was wrong.” Unfortunately, that will never happen without convincing a whole Hell of a lot more people that it’s necessary, and nobody is going to be convinced by the historical record. And that means yoiu have to change the record, even if the only way to do it is by lying about it and then defending that lie. Well, when you start defending your lies by destroying the reputations and the honor of good men, you’ve gone way too far. You don’t deserve respect, you don’t deserve gracious politesse, and you don’t deserve to make your silly claims without the immediate disclosure of your dishonesty. Those are Robert Hastings’ and Robert Salas’ only issues. They are liars and they are frauds. Period. And frankly, whether or not they were honest purveyors of the truth twenty-some years ago isn’t even relevant. The fact is, they can no longer make that claim, and that ‘s the only concern I have.

  • Seamus Coogan

    So what he believes what he wants to. Please tell me anywhere James that RH has tampered with and forged documents.

    He may misinterpret them, or be dogged however. Either front up with forged documentation that Hastings has or step off.

  • Joey Navis

    after reading thru all forty eight comments i have come to a few conclusions. as a sincere skeptic, i am more inclined to side with those who find terrestrial explanations for questionable phenomena. that being said, mr. carlson’s angry diatribes against mr. hastings and his sarcastic and seemingly mean snippets against anyone who sees anything positive about mr. hastings are off putting at best. seriously, do u bring anyone who is on the fence over to ur side using this approach?? to paraphrase the Buddha,,, holding on to anger is like holding a hot coal with the intention of throwing it at someone,,, u r the one who gets burned. ease up, mr. carlson, life is short.,

  • Joey Navis

    after reading thru all forty eight comments i have come to a few conclusions. as a sincere skeptic, i am more inclined to side with those who find terrestrial explanations for questionable phenomena. that being said, mr. carlson’s angry diatribes against mr. hastings and his sarcastic and seemingly mean snippets against anyone who sees anything positive about mr. hastings are off putting at best. seriously, do u bring anyone who is on the fence over to ur side using this approach?? to paraphrase the Buddha,,, holding on to anger is like holding a hot coal with the intention of throwing it at someone,,, u r the one who gets burned. ease up, mr. carlson, life is short.,

  • James Carlson

    I didn’t say he forged anything. I said he made false reports, and I gave examples in the my response to you and in my response to Ryan. As for tampering, what would you call it when Hastings changes the date and has his “witnesses” rewrite their accounts to limit internal contradictions, or to decrease any holes in claims made? He did all of this in full knowledge that his claims were false. There was no “misinterpretation.” He lied — repeatedly — to protect the claims he already knew were false. If he were merely “dogged,” why would he lie about an issue in order to protect it, and to convince others not to examine his claims too closely? The truth doesn’t ordinarily require protection like that.

  • James Carlson

    Hi, Joey;

    A few thoughts: you don’t like my anger? Tough. It keeps me focused, which is exactly what it’s supposed to do. I’m not here to make a bunch of friends, and I’m not here to offer you a few keen, fair-minded facts to change your mind about whatever it is you might believe as a “sincere skeptic”. If you’ve read all of the comments here, than you should know that I have more than a few damn good reasons to be angry at both Robert Hastings and Robert Salas. If you don’t like it, you don’t have to read it. Suffice to say that I am angry for a number of very good reasons, not least of which is the organized slander and disorganized testimony that Robert Hastings has brought to the table of discussion. The fact that he has decided to let a few of his friends defend him this time around doesn’t alter the fact that the points they are making are untrue.

    That being said, if you’re a “sincere skeptic” as you insist, than you should be angry, too, because these clowns are telling lie after lie after lie in order to convince people to demand full disclosure of all classified materials that mention UFOs. Now that is just NOT going to happen until they get a whole lot more support, and that means that they’re going to be telling a whole lot more lies, just to make large numbers of people not only certain that their government is denying them knowledge of the single greatest and most astonishing secret in all history — a secret that they already believe is vital to our ultimate survival as a species — but also discontented, pissed off, paranoid, resentful, unfaithful, and nearly traitorous towards their own nation and the military that protects that nation and works very hard to uphold its Constituition. Given those parameters, it’s only a matter of time before someone gets the great and bright idea to forcibly take from the Pentagon those secrets that they’ve been unable to get using more ethical means. As a result of the big FU the USAF tossed off at them when they determined that UFOs were primarily a waste of manpower and money with very little payback, and therefore required no further study or investigation by the military, they are pissed off, they are committed, and they have decided that dishonesty is the only option left to them. Now, on the surface, you may not care about that a whole lot. But you should, and it should make you angry as well. A lot of people who believe this crap are also willing to assert that the U.S. Department of Defense is hiding the most important secret of all time from them just to protect its interest in nuclear-based technologies. Now most of these guys aren’t too bright, but they are American, and a lot of them do vote. They are decidedly NOT contented, and keeping them that way is the whole point.

    Now, if you don’t care about any of that, fine — but I do, and I intend to do what I can about it, while feeling completely justified. People who see something positive about Mr. Hastings are mistaken, and they are stupidly so, because it doesn’t take much research to see what kind of a man he is. Granted, people who make obviously stupid assessments do not deserve to be victimized by “sarcastic and seemingly mean snippets”. They deserve to be educated. But if you had bothered to notice the names of those men who see “anything positive about mr. hastings”, you’ll have noticed that they are his personal friends — men who have accompanied him on his little network tours and therefore have some invested interest in maintaining these fictions. They’re just another collection of men who have consciously determined to assist Hastings to meet his goals in UFOlogy, and as such, they deserve in full all of the disdain, the sarcasm, and the mean little snippets that I have the patience to offer them. Usually, Robert Hastings will defend himself, but this time, the massive response that this one article generated is decidedly remarkable due to his absence. Having dealed with Hastings a great deal in the past, I can assure you that this is not an accident. I have no doubts whatsoever that the whole character of these responses is due entirely to Hastings’ own request, and I have no intention of treating any of these tools with the respect YOU think they might deserve. They are offering very generalized support of a man I happen to know is a mean and vicious liar and a fraud, and although I have been very specific in my charges, not one of them has bothered to respond in kind. There has been no attempt to explain any of the many faceted behavioral problems that typify Hastings’ existence, just as there has been no attempt to justify or even explain all of the many dishonest and blatantly hypocritical things he has written and tried to establish as factual. If you don’t like it, tough — you should learn more about the subject before jumping in with your irresponsible and meaningless opinions.

    As for your apparent doubts that my methods didn’t “bring anyone who is on the fence over to ur side using this approach,” perhaps you should look a little deeper. It’s pretty obvious you don’t know what you’re talking about. For God’s sake, doesn’t anybody use Google anymore? I’ve convinced plenty of people, because I use facts that can be checked. I may be angry, but I also possess a great deal more knowledge than the Bobs have exhibited in regard to these issues; I’m also completely honest, and if you haven’t figured that out, you haven’t been looking very hard.

    In regards to the Buddha, I have no comment, because he’s dead and has no bearing on the issues. I’ve been doing this for years, I’ve made very convincing arguments, I remain strong with conviction, I’m honest, and I’m angry because being angry focuses my intent, and to date, those efforts have rewarded me with remarkable success fully in line with the the goals and methodology I set for myself years ago. I have not gotten burned. I have repeatedly proven my point, and have convinced many people who are NOT sincere skeptics that the claims addressed by Robert Hastings and Robert Salas are utterly ridiculous, and have no basis in fact. Perhaps you should conduct a little more research before reaching conclusions that also have no basis in fact. If yoiu have indeed read “thru all forty eight comments,” you must have come across all of the URLs I have offered for those who are ignorant of the more detailed nuances to these issues. If not, I’ll post them for you again so that you can relieve yourself of that ignorance at your leisure.

    If you wish to know exactly what happened in March 1967, why the missiles at Echo Flight actually failed, why the Oscar Flight claims asserted by Hastings and Salas are so pointless, and how both men have managed to spearhead a collection of lies and insult in order to profit from the egregious ignorance of others, I encourage you to examine (without cost, and I hope you’ll note that I’m the only one in this controversy who is actually giving away his research and the things he’s taken the time to write for free) the following narratives:

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/26641522/Americans-Credulous-by-James-Carlson

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/42303580/Echo-Flights-of-Fantasy-Anatomy-of-a-UFO-Hoax-by-James-Carlson [this one is a fairly complete examination of the issues for those unfamiliar with the case who don’t want to examine the 350-or-so pages in the manuscript above — “Americans, Credulous”]

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/49495918/The-Bunny-s-Retort-by-James-Carlson

    http://www.realityuncovered.net/blog/2011/08/strategic-editing/

    http://www.realityuncovered.net/blog/2012/04/how-to-demand-redress-by-shooting-yourself-in-the-foot/

    http://www.realityuncovered.net/blog/2012/10/the-aggressive-pursuit-of-ignorance/

    I would also recommend that you examine the numerous interviews and articles at the Reality Uncovered website: http://www.realityuncovered.net/. Many of the articles discuss the events at Echo Flight and Oscar Flight in March 1967, and include interviews with both the commander and the deputy commander at Echo Flight on March 16, 1967. To this day, Robert Salas insists that both men confirm his claims of UFO interference, claims that both men deny strongly.

    Robert Hastings, you might note, refuses entirely to discuss these matters in any real detail or answer any questions regarding the testimonies of these two men, preferring instead to attack the integrity and credibility of those publically raising such issues — such as me, for example. He refuses to offer anything substantial in the way of evidence, and fails entirely to explain the details of his claims or to answer any of the valid questions raised by his insistence. What he has done is rely on the craven use of blatant lies and baseless insults in regard to his critics without once managing to refute or even discuss their criticisms. He has also publically defamed my family by insisting that my own father “told him” about a nervous breakdown that has apparently been an ongoing crisis in my family for over three years! Hastings has even gone so far as to invent entirely the titles and alleged contents of various non-existent books relating epilepsy to paranoia and mental illness in order to suggest that I shouldn’t be trusted because of the epilepsy I’ve been afflicted with. Hastings has also publicly suggested that I’m a drug addict, and has suggested that my father has Alzheimer’s disease. He’s even insisted on one side that my father has been lying to everybody, including our entire family, for over 40-years, and on the other side that I have lied to the entire world in regard to the very clear statements that he has made to me. Hastings has even insisted that the numerous interviews I’ve conducted to support the facts I have presented simply did not take place! That’s a nice denial, but it sure as Hell doesn’t amount to much of a knowledgeable rebuttal, not when every aspect of the claims he has made has been repeatedly proven to be untrue by the very same witnesses he once touted as the apex of honesty, integrity and courage. Meanwhile, Robert Hastings refuses to answer necessary questions regarding his numerous, proven lies, and has neglected to defend his theories against numerous accusations of massive fraud and profiteering on a scale UFO proponent communities have only rarely been subjected to.

    If you decide to eventually look around a bit, you’ll soon discover that between the two Bobs and me, I’m the only person involved in this discussion who is willing to answer any and all questions somebody may have in regard to these issues. Robert Hastings and Robert Salas refuse to do so completely, preferring instead to merely lecture without the apparent “rudeness” associated with open discussion and debate. I’ve even published my email address ( jtcarl@yahoo.com ) for those who want to ask their questions in a more private arena. Nobody has ever claimed that I’ve backed away from a confrontation because I didn’t want to answer embarrassing questions. Such claims in regard to Hastings and Salas, however, represent an epidemic of supposition stemming forth from their pathetic silence.

    A lot of information regarding these incidents can be found at the Reality Uncovered forum, in particular the Echo Flight Incident thread: http://www.realityuncovered.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=1688&sid=fb3fd24f098c0f3bc35595ea1b41a146. Every single detail, digression, discussion or subject of argument asserted by both men has been explained and discussed in great detail in the documents and on the websites you’ve been directed to. Not one question has been left unanswered, a statement that neither Hastings nor Salas can honestly affirm

    Both men, in fact, are proven liars who have created fiction and called it fact, something anyone willing to actually do the research can determine very readily for himself, as the events — contrary to the claims of Hastings and Salas — have been declassified since before 1980.

    Tim Hebert, an ex-USAF missileer himself, has also written some enlightening articles regarding the case on his blog at: http://timhebert.blogspot.com/. You should take the time to read them. If you’re interested in the truth, they are important.

    Dr. David Clarke, for many years an accepted expert regarding the British military forces’ investigations of the UFO phenomenon, has also discussed this case in the context of the “UFO and Nukes” connection asserted by Robert Hastings and Robert Salas. You can read his article on the subject at http://drdavidclarke.blogspot.com/2010/11/flat-earth-nukes.html.

    I don’t hold onto anger, Joey. I use it. And it’s been very beneficial to me, and has contributed remarkably to the primary goals I set for myself 3-4 years ago. Before I set my anger to focus my intent on the issues I was most interested in, Robert Salas’ (and Robert Hastings’) claims in regard to the March 1967 Echo Flight and Oscar Flight UFO incidents was considered by a large number of well-recognized experts in the field of UFOlogy to be one of the top ten UFO incidents supported by the best evidence available, including FOIA documents and witness accounts. Due to my efforts, and the efforts of those who were originally “on the fence,” this is no longer true. We have managed to destroy these two incidents as UFO cases, and in the process have proven that both Roberts have liberally lied in order to press claims regarding UFOs that they invented from nothing. In my opinion, my efforts have been remarkably successful, and one of the reasons responsible for that success is my very justifiable and well-focused anger.

    You’re right about life; it is short. Given that, I fully intend to meet my goals before it’s over.

  • While I find myself agreeing with you most of the time James, I think Joey’s feedback is the same as a lot of other level-headed skeptics I’ve come across who’ve said the same thing to me – your goals would be achieved sooner and more effectively if you could find a way to change the anger into calm focus, and shorten your missives to a volume that people could digest in under 5 minutes. 🙂

  • James – if you can ease off on the length/intensity of the missives, I can put you on a white list. As it stands I have to filter for any potential vulgarity…lol. Sorry.

  • James Carlson

    Sorry – I’ll try to keep it down a bit.

  • John Earnshaw

    I am one of Roberts’ sources for Nukes and UFO’s and believe my contribution, small and unexpanded upon as it is, is true to the best of my memories. I know him to be an intense, modest researcher and trust what he has discovered in his efforts to dissect fact from fancy as credible evidence. What the evidence shows is not crystal clear, but little in the field is. What is clear, as attested to by grownups and other professionals, is that the incidents HAVE taken place. Interpretations are as good as the interpreters…and Robert has done the footwork.
    What will come of all the efforts is also unknown. I prefer to believe in a benign intelligence behind all the fancy curtains, bells, whistles and flashy fireworks… it remains to be seen.
    Roberts’ willingness to place his researches above everything else (including health and wealth) speaks well of the motivation he has for determining the meaning of all this.
    I’m a retired teacher and military officer, active Flight nstructor, father, grandfather, church-going conservative, business hardhead and am not prone to flights of fancy.
    For the record, I cannot endorse the conceit that believes we are alone in the Universe.

  • Robert Hastings

    Robert Hastings’ response to all of this is at:

    **Personal Link Removed**
    **Editor’s Note: If you want to respond, you can respond here. Thanks. -Ryan

  • James Carlson

    Robert Hastings uses hit and run tactics like this all the time. It makes it easier for him to respond when he has no intention of actually discussing his cases. If he were to actually start a conversation, he’d eventually have to explain all of those points of fact that prove he’s got his head up his a** ; he has no answers because he doesn’t understand the technology or the issues he wants to concentrate on. He just has a few stories some otherwise insignificant people told him, that he has refused to actually confirm or study. He’s not stupid — he just doesn’t try very hard, because he’s only interested in the number of stories he’s collected. “True” and “false” are simply never examined, because he just doesn’t care about it.

  • Jess Hansen

    “He simply believes what he believes about alien visitation.” To laugh! I simply believe what I want to believe about gravity, touch football, cutlery drawers a d hub cap collections.

Stories from the Web

Will Amazon Use Whole Foods to Pilot an Automated Grocery Store?

Will Amazon Use Whole Foods to Pilot an Automated Grocery Store?

From automated checkouts in supermarkets to self-driving cars, automation is everywhere. Could we be about to witness a fully automated grocery store, paving its way to new controversy and doubt [...]

“The thing about the truth is, not a lot of people can handle it.” -Conor McGregor

Top Secret Editors

Ryan is the founder of Top Secret Writers. He is an IT analyst, blogger, journalist, and a researcher for the truth behind strange stories.
 
Lori is TSW's editor. Freelance writer and editor for over 17 years, she loves to read and loves fringe science and conspiracy theory.

Top Secret Writers

Gabrielle is a journalist who finds strange stories the media misses, and enlightens readers about news they never knew existed.
 
Sally is TSW’s health/environmental expert. As a blogger/organic gardener, she’s investigates critical environmental issues.
 
Mark Dorr grew up the son of a treasure hunter. His experiences led to working internationally in some surprising situations!
 
Mark R. Whittington, from Houston, Texas, frequently writes on space, science, political commentary and political culture.

Join Other Conspiracy Theory Researchers on Facebook!

Get a Top Secret Bumper Sticker!

Look like a spy with cool new shades

Comment on Breaking Stories

Powered by Disqus