From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 16:56:38 -0400 (EDT)
Archived: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 17:30:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell Minutiae


>From: Steve Sawyer <stevesaw.nul>
>To: <post.nul>
>Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 21:47:27 -0700
>Subject: Re: Roswell Minutiae

>>From: Viktor Golubik <diverge247.nul>
>>To: post.nul
>>Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 16:10:40 -0400 (EDT)
>>Subject: Re: Roswell Minutiae

>>>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <post.nul>
>>>To: - UFO UpDates Subscribers - <ufo-updates-list.nul>
>>>Sent: Wed, Mar 21, 2012 5:49 am
>>>Subject: UFO UpDate: Roswell Minutiae

>>>Source: Kevin Randle's Blog A Different Perspective

>>http://kevinrandle.blogspot.ca/2012/03/roswell-minutia.html

>>>Saturday, March 17, 2012

>>>Roswell Minutiae

>>>snip

>>>I'm not sure exactly how the question came up, but one of the
>>>Team wondered when the Yearbook had been printed. If it was
>>>early in the year, then many of those pictured might have
>>>rotated out of Roswell by July. Later in the year, then we might
>>>have a good snapshot of the personnel at the base.

>>Kevin,

>>I posed this same question to everyone I interviewed... for the
>>very same reasons.

>>I interviewed many from the Medical Squadron and quite a few
>>told me that these were all taken in June. This is also verified
>>from the Morning Reports since the five nurse pictured are the
>>only ones that were there in June of that year. One that was
>>there in May is not depicted, etc. I also have a pristine copy
>>of the same yearbook as provide to me kindly by James Wolfkill.

>>Kevin, I believe I mentioned this in passing in my e-mail a few
>>weeks ago.


>Hi, Viktor & List

>Don't know if you read this comment by David Rudiak further down
>in the comment thread appended to Randle's blog post or not, but
>it quotes a prior commenter in that thread (Department 47) as
>having stated the Roswell yearbook went to the publisher's in
>August. Here's Rudiak's comment:

>David Rudiak said...

-----

>The mysterious "Department 47" wrote:

>"Since it was sent to the publishers in August, the yearbook
>should provide a fairly accurate snapshot of who was at the base
>at the time of the alleged Roswell event in July. So the
>question is - are there critical people missing from the year-
>book who really should have been in it?"

>One obvious omission are everybody in the intelligence and
>counterintelligence offices at Roswell, with the exception of
>Marcel, shown as the head intelligence officer and one of the
>key officers getting Roswell AAF up to operational status. You
>definitely don't want the counterintelligence CIC people to be
>generally known.

>In Squadron M, or medical, there are only 5 Army nurses
>pictured, even though there were many other nurses at the base
>hospital, a number of them being civilian nurses from town, or
>military nurse trainees, some of them even being Navy.

>Civilian hospital administrative people also are not pictured,
>such as Miriam Bush, secretary to the hospital head, who family
>members testified saw the bodies. This is of course relevant to
>the question of the identity of Glenn Dennis' Nurse X, assuming
>she existed.

>Civilian employees in general are not pictured, and no doubt
>many of the military people never got their pictures taken
>either, probably being unavailable when pictures were taken of
>squadrons. Tom Carey compiled a 60 page table of everybody
>listed in the yearbook, or approximately 3000 people, but I
>think there were maybe 4000 or 5000 military people not to
>mention probably at least a 1000 civilians. Maybe Kevin has more
>exact numbers.

-----


All

For August 31, 1947, for all those assigned to the base as
opposed to just those assigned to the 509th Bomb Group:

Officers  452
Enlisted  3153
Civilians 300

The numbers for July and September will be, of course, different
but this gives the general idea.


Kevin



Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast

At:

http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/

These contents above are copyright of the author and
UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced
without the express permission of both parties and
are intended for educational use only.