From: RTodd12191@aol.com
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 10:23:35 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 12:13:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General


>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
>Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 15:48:21 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

>>From: Robert Todd <RTodd12191@aol.com>
>>Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 14:58:39 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

><snip>

>>With regard to Dr. Marcel's recollections, why is more weight
>>given to those recollections than is given to the recollections
>>of Bessie Schreiber (nee Brazel)? I contacted her and furnished
>>her with copies of the Roswell photographs. I asked her if the
>>material shown in those photographs looks like the material she
>>helped her father gather up back in July of 1947. She stated
>>that the material depicted in those photographs _does_ look like
>>the material they picked up back in July of 1947. Furthermore,
>>Bessie Brazel wasn't awakened in the middle of the night to view
>>the debris; she helped her father pick it up in broad daylight.
>>Jesse Marcel, Jr., was awakened by his father in the middle of
>>the night.

>>But the promoters of the Roswell myth discount Bessie Brazel
>>Schreiber's statements because her brother, Bill Brazel, claims
>>she wasn't even at the ranch, when in fact the Brazel children
>>_did_ live at the ranch after school let out for the summer,
>>which would have been before the story blew up in July. But the
>>Roswell promoters like Bill Brazel's tales better, because they
>>add more mystery to the story. He claims he picked up bits and
>>pieces of the Roswell debris which were later consfiscated by
>>the Air Force following some loose talk in a bar. Bill Brazel
>>didn't live at the Foster Ranch, but Bessie did after school let
>>out for the summer. But because Bill Brazel's tales are to
>>their liking, the Roswell promoters accept his claims, and
>>reject Bessie's.

>What we have is Bessie Brazel's statements which are in direct
>conflict with a number of others. According to Loretta Proctor,
>Marian Strickland, Tommy Tyree, and Bill Brazel, the family
>remained in Tularosa that summer because they had renters. Bill
>Brazel said that he went down to the ranch after seeing his
>father's name in the paper because he knew there would be no one
>around to help with the chores.

That's all well and good, but the final authority must be Mac
Brazel himself, who told newspaper reporters that his daughter
was on the ranch and helped him pick up the debris. Mr. Randle
and other Roswell promoters reject the newspaper accounts of
what Mac Brazel told reporters because they claim those
statements were made under duress, even though the "evidence"
for this contention is suspect. Yet the part about Bessie Brazel
being on the ranch does not advance the supposed cover-up in any
way, so even by their own standards, there is no reason to doubt
the quote of Brazel regarding the presence of his daughter.
Unfortunately, after the passage of fifty years, the newspaper
accounts still represent the most reliable source of information
for what happened back in 1947.

<snip>

>>And I ask again, why is it we haven't been told what Mrs. Marcel
>>(Major Marcel's wife, and Jesse Marcel, Jr.'s mother) had to say
>>when she was asked about the Roswell debris? As I undestand it,
>>she said the debris was _not_ from an alien spaceship. This is
>>just one of numerous examples where the promoters of the alien
>>spaceship explanation have distoted, misrepresented, or hidden
>>evidence that runs counter to the alien spaceship explanation.

>When I spoke to Mrs. Marcel (Major Marcel's wife, and Jesse
>Marcel, Jr's mother) she said that she had handled material from
>an alien spacecraft. She also said that she had accompanied her
>husband to the debris field. It was clear at the time I spoke to
>her, that she did not have a clear memory of the events and
>nothing positive would be gained from reporting what she said
>then.

Given the fact that Mr. Randle has distorted and misrepresented
so many facts in the past, without corroboration in the form of
a tape recorded interview, I am not willing to rely solely on
Mr. Randle's claims.

>>I have been in communication with Prof. Moore for many years
>>now, and I know him to be a completely honest individual. He
>>certainly is no apologist for the government. He states what he
>>believes is the truth, and it is disgraceful that Mr. Kaeser
>>attempts to inply otherwise. Prof. Moore also is a first-class
>>scientist, and I would recommend that anybody who cares to do so
>>read about some of his scientific accomplishments at:

>> www.nmt.edu/mainpage/alumni/goldpan/moore.html

>Damn, I really hate to have to agree with Mr. Todd about
>anything, but I will on this one point. Prof. Moore has always
>been kind and helpful to me and I don't believe that he would
>intentionally spin the truth to his point of view.

Damn, I really hate it when Mr. Randle agrees with me on
anything. It makes me wonder if I haven't made an error
somewhere in my assessment. If we were talking about anybody
other than Prof. Moore, I would seriously reconsider my
position.

Cordially,

Robert Todd