Q: (L) Okay, that takes care of my short questions. Now, we have a problem here with Roswell. I just finished reading Kal Korff's book "Roswell: What they don't want you to know," and it is pretty much a bashing expose of lies and confusions spread, supposedly, by the many witnesses who have come forward over the years. He takes Jesse Marcel apart, he takes the fireman's daughter's story apart; he rips the undertaker's story to pieces; he takes Phil Corso's story apart; you name it, he bashes it to bits. Pretty effectively, too, in my opinion. He seems to have located the origin of the "little sticks" with hieroglyphics on them" seen by several of the so-called witnesses.

This is a SERIOUS problem with this whole story. The problem is that, despite the fact that all the stories have been dissected by this guy so effectively, there ARE things he cannot account for, and explanations that he makes that simply don't fit his thesis. On the one hand, he claims that the Roswell base people instituted a cover up of a top secret balloon project, and on the other hand, he says that the Roswell base did not KNOW about the top secret balloon project because it was so secret! That is completely irreconcilable. Then he quotes a general's written statement that something WAS going on that had something to do with alien interactions, and dismisses this signed statement as "hearsay."

The thing that occurs to me is that a) either we have somebody going back and forth in time, tweaking the facts, such as Marcel's military records and such things including any records of the nurse that the undertaker claims to have talked to, or b) we have something that did happen and either they went back in time to set a situation up so that people would start remembering something OTHER than what happened, so as to cover up the real event with more or less "false memories" that could be not stand scrutiny; or c) they are just feeding disinformation through all of these people, and have produced a whole scenario with all kinds of witnesses and weird stuff to cover up something that happened. Could you comment on this? You have already said that the actual crash did not occur at Roswell that it occurred on the Plains of San Augustin...
A: Try scenario 3.
Q: (L) So, they are feeding disinformation through all the so-called "Roswell witnesses."
A: Close.
Q: (L) To cover up something that really did happen?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) And they are feeding the disinformation through the people so that they will come out with this whole story, make all this big splash, so that it can THEN be proven false, so that everybody will think that the whole thing was a crock of kaflooey. Is that it?
A: Not quite. Confusing stories and fabrications are used to muddy the waters in anticipation of future disclosures. And beware of authors who cast one stone and hit multiple targets. As with any conspiratorial mystery, keep focused on the earliest entries in the evidentiary train, i.e. "RAAF recovers flying disk in Roswell region."
Q: (L) Oh, the newspaper headlines. Yes. Hmmmm... T*** was saying that he thought the Roswell business was a cover-up for space-time travel by some secret U.S. group.
A: No.
Q: (L) So, the other information you have already given on Roswell still stands. Is there any other comments you want to add to this information at this time?
A: Roswell did involve evidence of non-human intelligence.
Q: (L) I just can't understand some things. When these researchers get out there and they start digging into things, and this happens over and over again, they don't dig deep enough...

Q: Okay, let's get to the main subject. We have a serious problem here. In this series of sessions we had over a period of years about Roswell, on October 7, 1994, we were discussion Roswell, the question was asked about the number of bodies recovered by the government. The answer you gave was "three dead, one still in operation." Then, you said it was a "robotic, biogenetic being rather than a soul-encompassing physical existence." On September 2, 1995, again we have a body count of 4, who were described as hybrids, and this was in relation to the alien autopsy video. So, we have four hybrids, composed of human and Grey Alien genetic combination.

On October 21, 1995, I was reciting the story from the alien autopsy video, and the camera man was quoted as having stated that there were four beings, and one was dead, and three were standing outside the craft crying and clutching boxes of some sort. I asked if this was accurate, and you said yes. So, in this case, which must also be the case of the four hybrids mentioned above, we have a count of four beings, with one dead, and three living. Next: we talked about it further, and we asked about how many beings were in a particular crash, and you said 21.

I asked how come the reports said that there were only four, and you said the reports were suppressed and fragmented because fewer individuals witnessed the interior of the craft. So, now we have 17 more beings on the inside. However, on this occasion, what we were talking about was the fact that this was a mission to retrieve dead bodies for study. Five of the bodies inside were human, and two were bigfoot types. Before, you had said that the craft that crashed were on a "highly specialized mission" of reconnaissance and testing of environmental conditions of the area as a result of the nuclear testing that had taken place there.

But this particular mission seems to have been otherwise. But, I know that one mission profile does not negate the other. Yet, it seems to be contradictory. But, the biggest contradiction we have seems to be where it states that there were four bodies. On the one occasion, three were dead and one was alive, then three were living, and one was dead, and now, suddenly, we have 21 and a whole different ballgame. Now, I understand that the way our questions are framed, and what awareness we have, are factors that can vary the response. But I have to deal with this because I am writing about it and there is confusion here.
A: There was more than one "crash in the vicinity" of Roswell, and at different times. The four body scenario refers to the incident most frequently cited.
Q: Now, when we say the "four body incident most frequently cited," how many were living?
A: Three dead, one living.
Q: So, what about the incident where there were three living and one dead?
A: Yes, in early June and approximately 100 miles further west of the Roswell area.
Q: So, in early June there were three living and one dead. And this is the one that the camera man was talking about?
A: Yes.
Q: And then there was an incident in July where there were three dead and one living, and that is the one that most of the Roswell witnesses are talking about?
A: One more.
Q: One more crash?
A: Yes.
Q: Okay, so there were two crashes at the same time?
A: Three.
Q: There were three in the July period?
A: June/July.
Q: Two in June, and one in July?
A: June 4th, July 1st, and July 4th.
Q: The one in June occurred 100 miles further west?
A: Yes.
Q: The July 1st, incident, where did that occur?
A: 67 miles southeast of White Sands.
Q: And the third crash was the Plains of San Augistin crash that you have already given figures on, correct?
A: Yes.
Q: Which one of these crashes had the 21 bodies?
A: Second. This explains the famous news release because the base was abuzz due to all these occurrences.
Q: It seems to me that if the base was already abuzz with these occurrences, they would already have had their cover organized and their stories straight! In such a case, the famous news release would never have happened.
A: No.
Q: Previously, I asked about this Kal Korff book, and essentially you said that my scenario about the different stories, the various witnesses, whoever is behind the cover-up is just feeding disinformation through all of these people. They are capitalizing on all kinds of witnesses and so forth that then get "exposed as frauds," are just part of the cover up. You said that this was correct. So, I said that "they are feeding disinformation through all of the so-called "Roswell Witnesses," and you said "close." I would like to know how close, and just how they are feeding disinformation through all of these witnesses. Obviously, these people believe what they are saying.
A: They do.
Q: They believe. Why do they believe?
A: They are telling what they remember, but it is soaked in twisting parallels.
Q: Are the people doing this themselves?
A: No. Event mixture.
Q: But they all seem to remember this July 4th crash, or so they say.
A: Yes.
Q: I don't get what you are saying here.
A: Events were intertwined.
Q: So, some may have witnessed different events?
A: Parts of...
Q: Have they also been tampered with in terms of abduction or having implanted memories or screen memories?
A: No.
Q: Have they, in any way, been exposed to something that was falsely staged by the government in order to make them think....
A: No.
Q: So, they are all sincere and honest witnesses, but they are witnesses to different events, and they all think that they are witnesses to the same event?
A: The so-called suspicious circumstances are merely a patchwork, cleverly used by those who wish to conceal.
Q: For example: did the fireman actually go to a crash site and witness what his daughter claims he witnessed?
A: Yes.
Q: Was it an alien craft crash site?
A: Yes.
Q: Did Jesse Marcel witness a crashed UFO?
A: Pieces of one.
Q: Did Glen Dennis really talk with a nurse who later disappeared?
A: Yes.
Q: How did this woman disappear? Kal Korff could find no record of her existence.
A: Transferred, discharged, records expunged.
Q: Is she dead, so that she doesn't know all the stories about her experience?
A: Yes.
Q: Did she die under suspicious circumstances?
A: No.
Q: Did the little balsa wood piece actually come from a toy company as Korff suggests?
A: No. Kal Korff was paid to mislead, but it is now moot as the military changed its story yet again after his book was published.
Q: One of the things that Kal Korff did was to dig into Jesse Marcel's background, and he claims that Marcel never had any of the background that he claimed, and that Jesse Marcel is basically a liar. He has the military records to back him up on this. Were Marcel's records altered?
A: Jesse Marcel never claimed to be a military pilot. He was an intelligence officer who held a private pilot's license
Q: That's not what Kal Korff says. He quotes Stanton Friedman, and William Moore and all those guys who wrote about Roswell, as quoting Marcel to have said he was a military pilot. Korff quotes from their books, and says they wrote these things and didn't check to find out that Jesse was a liar.
A: Jesse did not lie.
Q: Okay. Well. You also said "Roswell did involve evidence of non-human intelligence." Did this just mean basic information about the reality of alien visitation, or was there some other implied meaning here?
A: No implied meaning.
Q: Now, in this second crash where you said that there were two big foot types: were the big foot types also dead?
A: Yes.
Q: You also said that some of the beings went into 4th density, sort of, at the time of one of these crashes. What exactly DID happen?
A: It is complex, but suffice it to say that they re-transited to 4th density.
Q: You said that there were five dead humans inside that were retrieval and study specimens. Where did they get these bodies?
A: Mexico and South America.
Q: Now, on two or three occasions you said I should be researching a modern-day connection between the Roswell event and the underground zones and the Canary Islands. What is the connection of the Roswell incident to the Canary Islands, other than the names? Are the Canaries a sort of headquarters?
A: Clue is that similar energies are employed.