A different perspective the roswell deception – a review what countries are in central europe

Kevin said: And there are assumptions that are not backed up by evidence. Often, we read about what the Soviet analysts would think about a flying saucer case, or how they would have interpreted certain information, but that is all speculation. At one point, Carrion wrote, “Astute Soviet intelligence analysts would have paid attention to the flying disc news reports quoting the four countries in europe anonymous Cal Tech physicist.” No documentation has been offered to prove that these assumptions are valid, and in some instances, we find them contradicted in later portions of the book.

Kevin said: The theory, according to Carrion, was that the military would be interested in the Pacific Northwest because this was the route that Soviet missiles would take during an attack. By providing an opportunity for someone, anyone, to see these radical new aircraft, in the Pacific Northwest, it would suggest to the Soviets that the U.S.

capability was far superior than it actually was. This would prevent the Soviets from attacking Western Europe and by extension, the United States.

James response: This is the complete opposite of what I stated in my book. The US was expecting a Soviet air attack from the East while the western U.S. was considered an area where the US could conduct countries located in europe its own aerial testing. The Soviets would have used the shortest routes from their existing bases to stage an attack via the East. If something was flying over ther western U.S., the Soviets would have believed it to be purely American and for testing purposes.

Kevin said: The flaw here is that the U.S. had nuclear weapons and the Soviet Union did not. This would seem to be the real deterrent and this aerial deception was unnecessary. If the U.S. could obliterate the Soviet Union with those atomic weapons, that would keep the Soviets in check, at least until they developed their own atomic arsenal. Mutually assured destruction would stay their hand at that point. Carrion suggested how many countries are in european union that we had few actual bombs and that convincing the Soviets that we had a delivery system that they could not defeat was the real purpose.

Kevin said: This seems to negate the idea that Arnold saw something that was part of an aerial deception, which undermines the theory in the book. If it wasn’t an aerial deception, then what Arnold saw has another explanation. Carrion counters by saying that they might have been towing something, though it is difficult to believe that the inherently unstable XB-35 would be capable of towing anything.

James response: I don’t think we can rule anything out pending more research. You thought the N9M was not even flying in 1947 until I showed you newspaper proof to the contrary. I don’t claim what Arnold saw had to be a flying wing. It could have been any number of possibilities, including conventional aircraft with their tails camouflaged as Arnold himself initially thought.

Kevin said: Carrion tells us (page 114), that the deceivers had anticipated that the Arnold story would be a “flash in the pan,” so they began feeding new how many countries are in europe sightings to reporters, which, according to Carrion’s theory, culminated in the Roswell case. This seems to suggest they anticipated Roswell, or had planned it in advance. This would keep flying saucers in the news. But the day after the Roswell crash was reported, the news was that both the Army and the Navy had moved to suppress news stories about flying saucers. Rather than encouraging the proliferation of flying saucer tales, they were trying to keep the media from publishing more about them.

James response: And I don’t see a contradiction in the Roswell balloon deflation story. If it generated news map of all the countries in europe, which both the reveal and the detraction were overwhelming successful at, then it served its purpose based on my theory. I do believe that the timeframe for this deception like the Ghost rocket stories of 1946 were intended to have a limited shelf life.

James response: Yes he would have required authority from Joint Security Control if what was recovered was a potential secret weapon, i.e. if it was an ET crash as UFO proponents believe. Yes, he would also require authority if as Mogulists believe, it was a cover story for Project Mogul. Or do you believe Blanchard to be so incompetent as to mistake a weather balloon for a flying disc?

Kevin said how many countries are in europe union: This review could go on for much longer with these sorts of revelations. The problem for Carrion is that while he supplies links to interesting documentation, he has nothing that proves his case. He does not supply the smoking gun but suggests this lack of evidence is proof of it. He wrote, “The ‘perfect deception’ is a classic example. It is out there somewhere, but like the perfect crime, it manifests itself only in results. It is difficult to prove, and harder to study because quite often the study would attack comfortable beliefs.” (page 214) Which is a way of saying that it must be true because we can’t prove it. We can only look at the results, but the results are inferred from documentation and information that is sometimes vague and sometimes irrelevant. The foundation is very weak and nearly nonexistent.

James response: I present a hypothesis. I don’t claim truth. I ask for critical thinkers to consider the hypothesis with the supporting evidence and decide for themselves. The events of the summer of 1947 did not occur in a vacuum. There is a rationale behind these events. All I have heard from your critique is: Arnold was an unusual sighting, Roswell was something and Maury Island was a hoax. I don’t see them as discreet events, but closely related. There is nothing vague or irrelevant about the supporting documentation I provide.

Kevin list the countries in europe said: But in the end, Carrion admits that he provides a lot of speculation but no real evidence. While he challenges us to “falsify” his theory, to do so, we need access to still classified records of this grand deception. The problem is, such records might not exist and might never have existed. We can’t falsify 5 countries in europe the theory by proving an alternative to it because we need those records to do so.

James response: I wrote this book because I believe that it is a much more plausible explanation for what happened in the saucer summer of 1947 that ET visitation. The problem is not about whether the evidence is out there in a classified archive, the problem is that no one has bothered to look before, too focused on the ET hypothesis that has been peddled by researchers who have come up empty handed. There will be others that will pick up my book and follow the trail and will spend the time in archives, sending FOIA requests and requesting record declassifications and will either add or detract from the hypothesis. Don’t believe me, prove me wrong – but not by saying it can’t be so because of baseless critique but hard evidence to the contrary. You have failed to provide that.

I have neither the time nor the inclination to engage in a protracted discussion of the review. However, as always, there are some points that do require further explanation and I’ll address those. I believe that most of the points were brought out in our radio interviews and that those interested in learning more about this can listen to that.

First, your point about the scholarship of your book that I based on what you thought of insignificant points, might have been a little harsh. I did go back what are all the countries in europe and forth on that for a long time… but my thinking there was that the information was out there to found relatively easily. And, I will note that we all are sometimes guilty of that, even when we try our best to get all the facts first. However, I do think that these issues, and there are others all countries in europe and their capitals, are important to note and let the reader’s judge if I was too harsh in that assessment.

I don’t need to provide evidence that the US was ready to drop bombs. I suggested it was a deterrent because we had demonstrated the capability to lay waste to the Soviet Union with nuclear weapons. We had the technical ability, we had the components and we have the aircraft modified to carry them… Silverplate B-29s. If the Soviets invaded Europe, we had the ability to create many weapons, which was my point.