bert ( a w rvb )

Lt Col Philip Corso and his Critics by Micheal E. Salla, Ph. D from
ExopoliticsInstitute Website.

Exopolitics Journal 1:2 (January 2006)


http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ex...litics_ZZO.htm


In 1997, Col Philip Corso's book, The Day After Roswell, appeared and
quickly rose into the New York Time's best seller list with his revelations
concerning his role in a classified program to seed extraterrestrial
technologies into the private sector. Col Corso had a distinguished career
as a Military Intelligence officer, serving in senior positions during the
Second World War, the Korean war, and under the Eisenhower administration.

It was during his assignment as 'Special Assistant' to Lt General Arthur
Trudeau, who headed Army Research and Development, that Corso became
head of
the newly established Foreign Technology Desk.

During this assignment from 1961 to 1963, Corso claims to have regularly
passed on to various corporations, key 'foreign technologies' that were in
fact, extraterrestrial in origin. This led to breakthroughs in developing
the integrated circuit, night vision technology, fiber optics, super
tenacity fibers, lasers and other cutting edge technologies. Corso's book
details a remarkable case; a former senior military official emerging as a
whistleblower to reveal information about classified projects involving
extraterrestrial vehicles (ETVs) or extraterrestrial biological entities
(EBEs).

Since the publication of his book, there has been much controversy between
those believing Col Corso was blowing the whistle on classified U.S. Army
activities involving seeding extraterrestrial technologies into private
industry, and those believing Corso distorted his distinguished military
service in order to assume a historical role far beyond his actual
achievements. Those most critical of Col Corso believe that he was prone to
embellishing his service record. Most criticism has centered around a
number
of public statements Corso made that appear to be inconsistent with what
can
be verified in public documentation.

The most significant of Corso's claims that have been subjected to intense
criticism are that:

1. he served as a staff member of President Eisenhower's National
Security Council

2. he was head of the Foreign Technology Desk at the Army Research and
Development for two years

3. he disseminated extraterrestrial technologies to private industry

4. he witnessed an extraterrestrial biological entity (EBE) being
shipped overland from Roswell Army Air Force Base to Wright-Patterson Air
Force base

Further criticisms include Corso's claim

*

to having been associated with a covert control group created to
oversee the UFO phenomenon, MJ-12
*

to have served as commander of White Sands Missile range
*

to have concocted an alleged confrontation with the CIA's
director of
covert operations
*

to have been promoted to full Colonel upon retirement

I will discuss each of these criticisms in order to assess their:

*

validity
*

damage to Corso's credibility as a whistleblower
*

discrepancies with available documentation
*

impact on his central claim of having been part of a highly
classified
effort by the U.S. Army to seed civilian industries with extraterrestrial
technologies


Corso's credibility as a distinguished military officer coming forward to
reveal his role in such a classified program shortly before his death,
is at
the center of the debate of whether his claims are valid or not.

Col Corso's claims placed a number of veteran researchers of the UFO
phenomenon in the uncomfortable position of dismissing the testimony of a
highly decorated officer. Documentation does put him in places and
positions
where the events he claims to have witnessed could have occurred as he
described. Nevertheless, there have been some inconsistencies found in what
Col Corso claimed and what can be documented. This has lead to intense
debate between those who consider these inconsistencies to be minor, and
those believing the inconsistencies to be sufficiently significant to
warrant dismissing Corso's credibility and testimony entirely.

Some of Corso's critics have gone as far as publicly dismissing Col
Corso as
a fraud and 'literary hoaxer'.1 Corso's strongest critics include veteran
UFO researchers such Stanton Friedman, Dr Kevin Randle and Brad Sparks who
collectively have expressed their skepticism. Many of the criticisms made
against Corso cross the Rubicon dividing objective criticism and outright
debunking. This invites speculation of the motivations of Corso's critics
who undertake such a concerted debunking effort against a highly decorated
military whistleblower whose revelations do much to clarify the UFO
phenomenon.

Files on Col Corso gained through FOIA include his service record and a
declassified FBI report.2 To assist my evaluation I use statements from an
Italian version of Col Philip Corso's original notes that were published in
Italy as L'Alba di una Nuova Era [Dawn of a New Age].3 These notes have not
been published in English. They comprise Corso's raw beliefs on a number of
UFO issues prior to his collaboration with co-writer William Birnes in The
Day After Roswell.

I examine each of the most significant criticisms raised against Col
Corso's
credibility as a whistleblower, and assess whether Corso's critics cross
the
line between objective criticism and debunking. First I will describe the
difference between objective criticism and debunking to establish some
guideline for determining when Corso's critics cross the Rubicon and become
debunkers.


[DELETED]

The above three critics of Lt Col Philip Corso has willfully hampered an
objective examination of Corso's substantive views concerning his role in
disseminating UFOs information by deliberately focusing on minor details,
inconsistencies or mistakes in his testimony.

Furthermore, these veteran UFO researchers with collectively over 100 years
of UFO field work experience, have deliberately ignored evidence that
supported Corso's claims as exemplified in Thurmond preface issue. Each of
these researchers deserves to be censored for their willful debunking of
Philip Corso, and for the great harm they have done to his reputation, and
to setting back UFO research for years by ignoring the important testimony
offered by Corso.

While seeking to cast doubt on Corso's integrity, what these critics have
instead achieved is casting doubt on their own integrity as objective
researchers of the UFO phenomenon.

Corso's credentials have been well documented. All UFO researchers would
concede he is a vitally important whistleblower, without necessarily
accepting all his claims. Nevertheless, given the available documentation
substantiating many of Corso's claims in terms of his career positions and
responsibilities, there is good reason to suppose that much of his
testimony
concerning extraterrestrial technology and EBEs is based on real events.

While there are certainly inconsistencies and mistakes in Corso's
testimony,
these largely concern details that have little to do with the substance of
his claims that he was in charge of a covert Pentagon project to seed
civilian industries with extraterrestrial technologies, and that he
witnessed an EBE from the 1947 Roswell crash.

Corso's documented background inspires confidence in the credibility of his
testimony. In attempting to debunk Corso in an effort to discredit his
testimony, Corso's critics deserve to be admonished for distracting UFO
researchers from the task of identifying the truth in Col Corso's
remarkable
testimony. What remains to be done is a truly objective and impartial
analysis of Corso's testimony, and its implications concerning a high level
governmental cover up of UFO and EBE information.

I look forward to collaborating with other researchers in this monumental
task.


************************************************** ************************************************

Bert ( A W RvB )
bert@rjrsnvbrn.nl
www.rjrsnvbrn.nl