Monday, February 27, 2006

Lovekin's Military Credentials in Question - No Longer! (Pt 4)

Stephen Lovekin
     The attraction to Stephen Lovekin as a possible insider witness to a UFO/ET event involving a President and or the White House etc., is most certainly enhanced by being packaged as a "high ranking military official." What is on the table (at present) is a declaration from an individual, an anecdote if you will. In a court of law, it would be considered eye witness testimony.

Obviously, the character of the witness can add or take away from the authenticity of a respective account. Certainly, it is far

Frank Warren
By Frank Warren
The UFO Chronicles
2-27-06
more impressive and more apt to be believed coming from a Brigadier General then a layperson etc. Sagan said, (and what I have come to call Sagan's Law) "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."

Kevin Randle wrote in part:

"This is important stuff, if it could be confirmed. A general officer, one who had once held the ear of the president and who could report on the president’s interest in UFOs, would make an impressive witness, especially if he could talk of a UFO crash and recovered debris. It should be relatively simple to verify Lovekin’s credentials as a general."

In that vein IMHO Kevin proceeded with some investigative research to vet the witness using his skills as a researcher along with his own personal experience in the military; he posted his progress on his blog; personally, I didn't take his exposé as slander or being libelous, and most importantly definitive. I believe it's important to note that people have come forward in the past, that at the present time seemed very credible, that later proved to be otherwise, and Kevin Randle has has had direct involvement/experience in these matters, henceforth his righteous skepticism is warranted.

Now all that said, what are we left with? In my view, having done some of my own research into Lovekin, with the exception of what was recently submitted to Greer for publication (in regards to Lovekin's military background) it is unclear what originated from him. Most importantly is there anything to date, that negatively affects the character of the man making the claim? I think not! His credentials, and the question of his Brigadier General status are to be commended whether they're regular military or some sort of state militia. The key point from my perspective is his tenure at WHASA, which he has provided documents in support thereof.

I have located other members of WHASA, and the common theme amongst them, is that they were culled from various military schools (at a very young age); they were vetted by the FBI; they were trained by the NSA; they held top secret clearances; rank was a non-issue, and they wore civvies; they worked with the Secret Service, and in close proximity to the President; they provided crypto secure communications and went everywhere it was needed, e.g., the White House basement, Camp David, Mt Weather etc.

Unfortunately, and is often the case, we UFO folks get into these pissing matches and that becomes the focus, rather then the important research that needs to be taken to task.

Might I suggest we take Kevin at his word, that he meant no malice towards Lovekin and get on with the research of the evidence, i.e., a credible witness with a incredible disclosure.

2 comments :

  1. Greetings Grant,

    You wrote:

    I would appreciate if you could elaborate about "other members" of WHASA that you have found, and what concrete evidence you have that they

    If your asking for "names," I'm not at liberty to say presently, (per my own research protocol); in addition I wrote, "I have located 'other members' of WHASA, and the common theme amongst them" in reference to the afore mentioned recruitment and operational methodologies; I didn't use the term, "concrete evidence." It is no more concrete then Lovekin's, which is anecdotal, and documental;however, like Lovekin, based on these men's character, supportive documents etc., it certainly lends credence to Lovekin's declaration.

    Randle I might add did "attempt" to make contact with Lovekin, as I did. Can "you elaborate" on your Lovekin interview?

    Cheers,
    Frank

    ReplyDelete
  2. Grant,

    Interesting to note that in the conversation with you he mentions Ike "talking about UFOs while at Camp David." I wonder if this is "opposed too" or "in addition too" what was said/witnessed in the White House basement. Did he say?

    Frank

    ReplyDelete

Dear Contributor,

Your comments are greatly appreciated, and coveted; however, blatant mis-use of this site's bandwidth will not be tolerated (e.g., SPAM etc).

Additionally, healthy debate is invited; however, ad hominem and or vitriolic attacks will not be published, nor will "anonymous" criticisms. Please keep your arguments "to the issues" and present them with civility and proper decorum. -FW

LIVE SIGHTING REPORTS BY MUFON

Mutual UFO Network Logo