Customer Reviews

Roswell UFO Crash

5 star:		(11)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(10)

 

 

Too bad I can't give a "minus star" rating.

Kal Korff's book "Roswell: What they don't want you to know," is pretty much a bashing expose of alleged lies and confusions spread, supposedly, by the many witnesses to the legendary Roswell UFO crash 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. He even claims to have located the origin of the "little sticks" with hieroglyphics on them" seen by several of the so-called witnesses never mind that this "find" is contradicted by his "balloon theory" as well as the fact that the military changed its story yet again, even after Korff's book.

The problem is that, despite the fact that all the stories have been dissected by this guy apparently so effectively, there ARE still 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.

Dealing with the crafty twisting and distorting of the work of other people that contaminates nearly everything in this book would be a labor of Hercules. (Cleaning the Augean Stables comes to mind.) For but one example, the way Korff treats the testimony of the late Brigadier General Arthur Exon provids an interesting insight into not only Korff's book, but his deviant mind. Korff writes:

"There is no excuse for how Exon's 'testimony' is misrepresented in the Randle-Schmitt book. It is blatant fiction on the part of the authors...Randle and Schmitt were deceptive in their presentation of both Exon's recollections and his supposed 'involvement' in the Roswell affair."

The indictment rests, as it happens, on the accusation that Kevin Randle and Donald Schmitt presented Exon's remarks as if he were relating first-hand testimony, when actually he was only reporting things he'd heard from others.

The question is, of course, what did Exon say?

As Kal himself tells us (see p. 93), Exon talks about Roswell debris being flown to Wright-Patterson. "The boys who tested it," Exon says, "said it was very unusual....It had them pretty puzzled."

Now, is that "first-hand", "second-hand" or what?

The fact is that Exon, an Air Force general, is telling what he's heard about Roswell. More than this, what Exon says about the Roswell debris are the same kinds of things that many of the first-hand witnesses say! If you put any weight on Exon's testimony (as a General), the Mogul theory [the glorified weather balloon explanation offered by the Air Force in 1994] is pretty much dead in the water.

Let's take a look at what the well-known music critic, Greg Sandow, wrote about this matter:

Even the passage Kal quotes doesn't support his view. Here's how Kal presents it: "To read the Randle-Schmitt book, it appears that Exon corroborates the Roswell UFO recovery by providing impressive-sounding testimony that appears to be firsthand. 'We heard the material was coming to Wright Field....It was brought into our material evaluation labs. I don't know how it arrived but the boys who tested it said it was very unusual.' Exon described the material: '[Some of it] could be easily ripped or changed....there were other parts of it that were very thin but awfully strong and couldn't be dented with very heavy hammers....It was flexible to a degree,' and, according to Exon, 'some of it was flimsy and was tougher than hell and almost like foil but strong. It had them pretty puzzled.'"

"To almost anyone reading this," Kal writes, "it would appear that...[Exon] was a firsthand source who was present and personally saw what he describes." But I don't see it that way at all. Consider these statements: "We heard the material was coming....I don't know how it arrived, but the boys who tested it said...It had them pretty puzzled." Isn't it clear that Exon isn't speaking of first hand knowledge? Who wouldn't understand that Exon didn't handle this debris himself?

A page later in the Randle-Schmitt book comes another Exon quote, which Kal doesn't reprint: "The metal and material was unknown to anyone I talked to. Whatever they found, I never heard what the results were. A couple of guys thought it might be Russian but the overall consensus was that the pieces were from space."

Again, it's perfectly clear that Exon didn't handle or analyze the material himself, and even that his knowledge was limited. But he appears to think he'd spoken to people who knew at least something about what the analysis had shown. How sure was he of this knowledge? Let me quote a few suggestive passages. First, an Exon quote from Randle's book: "I know [my emphasis] that...[General Ramey] along with the people out at Roswell decided to change the story while they got their act together and got the information into the Pentagon." (UFO Crash at Roswell, paperback, p. 111.) Another Exon quote from Randle: "I just know [again my emphasis] there was a top intelligence echelon represented and the President's office was represented and the Secretary of Defense's office was represented..." (He's talking about the secret UFO committee that he's sure existed; UFO Crash, p. 232.)

And here's something Exon said on the tape, which wasn't quoted in Randle's book. Kevin asks, referring to stories we've all heard about alien corpses at Wright-Patterson: "You've heard the rumors about the little bodies, haven't you?" "Yes, I have," answers Exon. "In fact, I know people that were involved in photographing some of the residue from the New Mexico affair near Roswell." Here's something else, about how Exon knows that there were alien bodies from Roswell at Wright-Patterson: "People I have known who were involved with that" told him so. [Sandow's emphasis.]

Look back at the quote Kal thinks is so damning: 'We heard the material was coming to Wright Field....It was brought into our material evaluation labs. I don't know how it arrived but the boys who tested it said it was very unusual.' Exon described the material: '[Some of it] could be easily ripped or changed....there were other parts of it that were very thin but awfully strong and couldn't be dented with very heavy hammers....It was flexible to a degree,' and, according to Exon, 'some of it was flimsy and was tougher than hell and almost like foil but strong. It had them pretty puzzled.'"

Given the full context of Exon's remarks...and bearing in mind everything I've quoted from Kevin's interview with him....isn't it clear (a) that Exon certainly thought he knew quite a bit (even if not first hand) about the subjects he was quoted on, that (b) he says quite clearly that he'd talked to people who were involved first-hand, and (c) that therefore the passage Kal quotes from Kevin's book is really quite reasonable in both its tone and content? I don't think it misrepresents Exon at all. (Here's another quote from Exon, from the tape: "Most of the people you're talking to are a little bit like me. Close enough to know that there was something happening. They had no direct responsibility for any of it." Anyone who reads the complete sections on Exon from Randle's books will, I think, form exactly that impression.)"

Kal Korff has made his career out of exposing the allegedly false, or exaggerated claims, of others. But what about ole Kal himself?

On his website, Korff claims, among many, many other things, to have been "a key, expert witness in the O.J. Simpson murder trial CIVIL lawsuit".

If you check the list of witnesses, from Court TV's website, you will not find Kal Korff's name. His misleading claim to have been an "expert witness" in the Simpson trial is apparently supposed to make him sound more credible.

As Kevin Randle (Roswell Ufo Crash Update: Exposing the Military Cover-Up of the Century) reports, Kal Korff also claims to be a captain in an Israeli organization that he describes as a "`meta-organization' so there won't be some fancy building that can be targeted." He says that you can't "Google" it because the English version of the name isn't quite accurate and you need the Hebrew name. Randle asks, quite reasonably, "why not supply that as some have requested? The only things you can learn about this secret organization that Korff insists on naming only in the loose English translation takes you back to Korff driven documents. If another researcher attempted to pull off something like this, Korff would be all over him."

In short, this book consists mainly of Korff slinging allegations, but providing no evidence to make his case. If you want to waste your money to take a look, go for it, but I think that Korff is probably already well-paid to disseminate this twisted nonsense. I'm sorry I contributed to his support even if it was a good lesson in seeing how a deviant mind operates.

Kal K. Korff (a name that presents one of the more regrettable monograms in authordom) is the sort of person who very much enjoys being right, and in "The Roswell UFO Crash," he is certainly right. He is most likely correct in his evaluation of the "eyewitness" testimony presented by those who would have us believe that an alien spacecraft crashed in the New Mexico desert (unreliable at best, fraudulent at worst), in his presentation of the formerly top-secret balloons of Project Mogul as the prosaic explanation for what actually crashed on Mac Brazel's farm in 1947, in his strident debunking of Philip Corso's "Day After Roswell" fiction, in his exposing of the "Alien Autopsy" video as a clumsy hoax, and in his overall assessment of the scientific validity of the existing evidence for extraterrestrial visitation of our planet (nonexistent, that is).

All of this doesn't make Korff's presentation more palatable. He is by turns egotistical, pedantic and condescending. His prose is uninspired, usually tending toward a breathless, overheated style exemplified by the crass overuse of exclamation points and italics for emphasis. If you ever wondered what a skeptic would sound like if he wrote in the same infantile manner that commonly characterizes the true UFO believers, this book provides the answer.

Beyond issues of style, however, Korff's logic is prone to harboring rather wide gaps, so all too often when he states that an assertion of the UFO believers has been proven untrue, he's not entirely correct. Furthermore, the more substantive contributions to debunking the Roswell myth appear to be derived from the work of others, most notably Robert Todd. After reading the extensive quotes from Todd's work in this book, I rather wished that he had written "The Roswell UFO Crash" rather than Korff. As it is, Philip Klass' "The Real Roswell Crashed Saucer Cover-Up," while failing to cover as much ground as this book, is a much more satisfying read.

One final note: the packaging of the mass-market paperback version of this book is downright deceptive. One could read both covers and the introduction without realizing that this represented the work of a skeptic/debunker. I suppose this might be a useful way of roping in readers who would otherwise pass it over, but coupled with Korff's style of writing it contributes to the overall sordid feel of the whole affair.

Read Corso's The Day After Roswell and also Jim Marrs Alien Agenda after this one.

This reads like disinformation from the 50's. For those who wish it to all go away and to not have to think any longer, this is your book folks.

Just another voice who asks you not to look behind the curtain is all.

Writing style was not all that great either.

Kal Korff's book "The Roswell UFO Crash: What They Don't Want You to Know" is a wriiten monument to the starved ego of Kal Korff. First, let me say that I bought this book at a used bookstore where they had 20 BRAND NEW copies of the book marked down to $1. The $1 I paid for it was about the right price as I can't really buy quality kindling for a fire at that discounted price.

Korff's claim that this book is the culmination of 16 years of research is laughable as Kal leans heavily on previous research by others, and the few original thoughts provided by Korff seem to all come from a handful of telephone conversations from the fall of 1996. The book is mostly composed of the research of others that Kal then comments on such as one might do in a blog. The research that Kal believes props up his argument is taken at the authors word, yet research from authors one might think of as "Pro-Roswell" is given short shrift, and Korff personally attacks both the people who have provided testimony on the Roswell matter and, when he feels that is not sufficient, attacks the writers who do, in fact, take said evidence seriously. Korff's basic strategy in discounting testimony from people personally involved with the incident is to call them liars or, where applicable, call into question their character.

Kal's accusations that the majority of the witnesses are fabricating events is especially laughable as Kal, himself, has been caught in many lies in his feeble attempt to remain relevant. Kal has been caught time and time again in his tangled web of deception but still expects the public to take him at his word. His work for a secret Israeli based/Saudi funded (yes, the Saudis, Israel's long time enemy, are now financing private Israeli counter-terrorism firms. At least that's how Kal tells it) has been mentioned by other reviewers, but his claims to be both the CTO and CIO of a Czech company have not. Kal was hired to teach English to the employees of Vojtek on a freelance basis but then claimed to have the aforementioned titles bestowed upon him and has gone so far to claim he was an expert witness in the OJ Simpson civil case (of which he states that his assistance resulted in a "conviction" of Simpson by way of a "guilty verdict" even though civil matters do not determine guilt but rather liability and convictions are only handed out in criminal court). Kal's flights of mental fancy, something he time and time again derided in the witnesses who have spoken out about their knowledge of the Roswell event, are the stuff of legend. 500 book publishing deals, secret meetings at the US Embassy in Prague, and a host of other of Kal's fabrications would take too long to list here, but they are easily attained by Googling "Kal Korff".

As the title of this review indicates, Korff accuses many others of what Kal himself does on a daily basis. This book adds absolutely nothing in the way of credible content concerning whatever crashed in the New Mexico desert some 60 years ago, and the author is a habitual offender of the crime he accuses others to be guilty of. If the people who have spoken about this incident to other authors are the kettle then Kal is certainly the pot.

If Korf is, as he claims, not a disinformation agent, he should be--because he can "spin doctor" like a pro. This book is riddled with mammoth logic gaps and outright distortions of fact. First off, Korff has the audacity to use Marcel's performance report as proof that he was a known liar. But the report says no such thing--rather, it states he has a tendency to "magnify problems he is confronted with," and nowhere does it use the word "exaggerate." And then it calls him a man of "superior moral qualities." Does this sound like a liar? Not in my book! In fact, what it says is that this highly rated intelligence officer's "only known weakness" is a tendency to make mountains out of mole hills, to worry too much, to be something of a perfectionist/control freak. I have this tendency myself, does that make me a liar too? Shame on you, Mr. Korf for this bald-faced distortion. Beyond this, we have Cavitt's signed statement that he knew it was a weather balloon right away, and yet although in the recovery team with Marcel, was unable to dissuade him from going off the deep end. And then this known liar, Marcel, was able to run off and involve his superiors and certain townsfolk in his manic delusion. Yeah, right! He even had Santa and the Easter Bunny believing it for a time. And all for a balloon project that was so top secret that often no effort was made to retrieve the balloons. So Marcel lied and the townies lied (the same lie, told independently I might add) and then stopped the lie, waited thirty years and plotted to begin the lie again. Lastly, it seems this book is full of statements taken out of context and "spun" to Mr. Korff's advantage. Like rancher Mac Brazel being quoted as saying that all he found was a bunch of foil and sticks, as backed up by his daughter's similar statement. But did these words arise before or after these folks were pressured by the Air Force (if such was the case)? Words are cheap! Truth is priceless, Mr. Korff. And while I remain unwilling to swear that a ufo crashed at Roswell, I am certain that this book fails miserably to present a reasonable alternative. In fact, I think it should be retitled...Case Closed: Part 2.

Reviewers seem to love or hate this book, depending on which side of the UFO controversy they take. On the positive side, the author, a confirmed skeptic, does make many valid criticisms of various witness stories, other books, and, of course, of the Alien Autopsy film (does anybody really still believe that one?).

Two major negatives reduce the book's value however. The first is its writing, which is disorganized, amateurish, and just plain bad. The second, and more important negative, is that the author goes overboard in not just critiquing, but bashing any and all witnesses or writers who present evidence or arguments supporting an extraterrestrial explanation for the Roswell Incident.

Biased is biased, no matter what side you are on. While it is important for a thinking individual to understand the arguments for and against "believing" in the Roswell UFO crash, this book is not a pleasant way to gain that knowledge.

-Lynn Michelsohn, author of Roswell, Your Travel Guide to the UFO Capital of the World!

(Sigh.) It sure would be nice if for once we could get a truly open-minded, evenhanded book on any paranormal topic. The problem is that knee-jerk reactions tend to be the rule. On the one hand there are the True Believers, those who uncritically and unthinkingly accept the existence of extraterrestrials whizzing through our skies, occasionally abducting folks when the fancy takes them. On the other hand there are those who portray themselves as sensible, level-headed skeptics. But often these debunkers are just the other side of the coin. True Unbelievers, I call them. If the True Believers have a blinkered view of things, ignoring or giving short shrift to evidence that runs contrary to their beliefs, the same can often be said for people like James Randi and the whole CSICOP crowd in general. And Kal Korff particularly. In fact Korff's book, with its smugly juvenile writing characterized by overheated prose filled to the brim with eccentric punctuation, especially extreme overuse of exclamation points, is remarkably similar in style to what you see in True Believer crackpot literature. Look, I can understand the need to approach such a sensational story as the Roswell incident with a good dose of healthy skepticism, but you really have to be kidding yourself at some level if you claim to find most of Korff's arguments at all convincing. Basically, his explanation for the stories told by approximately 100 or so first- and second-hand witnesses is that they're all liars. Now which idea is more far-fetched, the crash of a craft of unknown origin or a town that inexplicably breeds and/or attracts pathological liars? Especially where the liars' stories all basically gibe. Either one sounds like the basis of a Stephen King novel to me. "Ah-ha!!!" exclaims Korff, saliva spraying from his mouth. "Perhaps the stories DO gibe *basically*, but that's the problem!! When it comes to details there are any number of contradictions between them!!! How can you possibly explain such a thing, eh??!!!! Case closed!!! Ha!!!!" Well, Kal, I don't know where you get the idea that human memory acts as an objective recording device like a video camera. It's well known that if you gather together a group of people who have witnessed a traffic accident and interview them separately, you will get plenty of contradictions in their stories. Korff expects absolute perfect agreement between scores of people, all of whom are elderly folks describing their recollections years after the fact. I'm not saying that Korff doesn't have a few good points, but he doesn't come close to demolishing the Roswell "myth." If you're looking for a better-reasoned, better-written anti-Roswell book, you should probably check out Philip Klass's. But also read one of Kevin Randle's books. You'll see that good arguments can be made both pro and con on Roswell if you truly look at it with an open mind.

This Reviewer states up front that he has not read every word of this new book (and that he expected more "evidence" of further cover-up of a real E.T. event).

The book is very readable and manages to induce some conspiracy contrariness - though I find the approach to be more dim than enlightening. Just like many anti-conspiracy works (i.e. on 11-22-63), the writers spend all their time "building a case", rather than objectively sorting through soft evidence - if it ain't hard, don't fix it...or something like that.

So we learn (?) that Jesse Marcel, Sr., did his share of bloviating about his military career; we learn that some guy sent "New Age" Radio King Art Bell some aluminum foil, as scientific proof of an other worldly encounter. We learn that the "Alien Autopsy" TV show was suspect from the git-go. All points which do not slam-dunk Korff's theory that there is no theory. A person can "bs" another person about an experience but that does not nullify the experience. Something happened, whetrher or not the *report* is shaky.

I found nothing here in the "interesting but unproven" department: why was such a top secret, prolonged operation carried on at the retreival site, involving job titles not far removed from The President's? Why were so many vehicles needed to cart away parts of a freaking radar detector balloon? Why would officials threaten the lives of witnesses if those witnesses only found *terra-firma* material?

Photo section is not much. Why in the world use that same ol' shot of Marcel crouched down examining the stuff from the prop department?

I do lean towards an extra-terrestrial visitation/crash - but have no use for "balsa wood" and "pink hyroglyphics" details. I'm still drawn to Friedman's idea because crash dummy debris can conceivably be intermingled with space matter!

*** is a marginal ***.

I've always believed that truth is more interesting than fiction, and far more interesting than lies. Over the past 20 years numerous books, articles, movies, and television shows have convinced millions of Americans that a flying saucer crashed in the desert near Roswell, New Mexico, in the summer of 1947. I once believed it myself. Now, veteran researcher Kal Korff has painstakingly dismantled the elaborate construction of lies and misconceptions that have fed this modern myth, and presented for the first time a lucid and coherent account of what was really going on in the New Mexico desert back in the summer of 1947.

And there WERE things going on out there, but they had nothing to do with flying saucers and everything to do with the Cold War and with America's need to monitor the Soviet Union's nuclear weapons program. But read the book. Good research is something that there is not enough of in the field of UFO's, and Korff has done his job. I for one believe that there is nothing at all disappointing about the truth, even if it turns out to be of the down-to-earth variety.

Korff makes a very nice detailed destruction of the UFO myths around Roswell. He neatly skewers a lot of the best "witnesses" and his discussion of Mogul is first rate. There's almost no doubt that Mogul is what some folks saw of the wreckage. The laughable Alien Autopsy film is like shotting fish in a barrel.

The problems with the book is how it is written. There is preciously little organization to the work. Discussions of witnesses are randomly tossed together by all appearances. The writing is certainly not top notch and at times reads like a cookbook author. Perhaps the worst flaw is the self-congratulatory tone Korff has almost throughout. The book gives the impression that the UFO "research" community is small enough that he knows most of these folks personally and he's really sticking it to them with this book. It gets to be so annoying at some points you almost wish he was wrong. The tinfoil hat types think this guy is a government disinformation agent but if he is the best the government can toss out to cover up Roswell then the government isn't competent enough to cover up a UFO for 50 years.

Still, the book is very useful to getting the most succinct not-crazy view of Roswell out there and also one that deals with a lot of the "evidence" for the UFO crash.