The AA Film May Not Be Film
Original, and Similarities Between the
Cameraman's and Corso's Stories

The general concensus is the AA film Santilli has is a copy and not the original. The film used to make this copy is of 1947 vintage. Therefore , if this is a fake they could have used this old film to make a copy of something made much more recently. Unfortunately, without this original film or some other solid proof, we may never learn the truth.

You'll also note some similarities between Corso's and the Cameraman's stories in the following messages.


To: Dave Vetterick

We don't KNOW that this film(Autopsy) was shot in Dallas/Ft Worth area, but Jack (supposed cameraman)says it was.

No, we don't know if Ray bought all the film. It now seems that all of the film that Ray took delivery of was copy film, not camera original, which makes me wonder if Jack even HAS any of the original film. I always thought his story of how he got it was bogus, and so does Ray. I think he made copies of some rolls before sending ALL of the original to Washington. If that's the case, we'll never be able to prove any of this.

Jack is supposedly going to do some media interviews soon. He's been emboldened by Corso, who he said is an outright fraud. Sorta the pot calling the kettle black, if you ask me!!!!!



Date: 26 Aug 97 07:43:21 EDT
To: UFO UpDates - Toronto
Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Corso & AA-film

>Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 19:32:23 +0300
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto
>From: Jorgen Westman
>Subject: Re: Corso / AA-film

>Hi everyone.

>Has Col. Philip J. Corso, (Ret.) ever made >any statement, or said anything about, Ray >Santili's AA-film? Does it match his claimed >memory of the "being" he saw in a glass-tube >filled with blue liquid?

>The idea came as he also described the control- >gear of the spacecraft as hands plunged into >the direct "steel" of the crafts control panel, >as seen in the "debrise-film".

>Copycat or coincidence?

>Jorgen Westman / WUFOC

Hi Jorgen,

I don't know what Corso has said, if anything, about the film.

Corso can't make up his mind about how many fingers the aliens he saw had. In one place it's four, in another it's six. Personally, I found myself having a real sense of deja vu when I read Corso's book, since he was saying, practically word for word things which were posted over the last three years on the old Encounters forum on CompuServe. I think he, or more likely his co-author, hung out there and collected info which was later quilted into the fabric they were weaving. I think some of us who were heavy posters on that forum ought to be getting a percentage of the royalties on this book!!

I don't know what to make of Corso. I want to ask him who the AA cameraman is, since if he is who he says he is, he will know. But my attempts to get to him have been met with evasion so far.

For what it's worth, I asked Ray to ask "Jack" about Corso, and get him to read Corso's book. Ray says that "Jack" did read it. According to Ray, "Jack" responded that Corso is a complete fraud, and that there was no person by this name involved in the project, and that the book is complete nonsense. Of course this is sort of a case of an anonymous pot calling a questionable kettle black!



>Date: 26 Aug 97 07:43:21 EDT
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Corso & AA-film

>Hi Jorgen,


>For what it's worth, I asked Ray to ask "Jack" about Corso, and >get him to read Corso's book. Ray says that "Jack" did read it. >According to Ray, "Jack" responded that Corso is a complete fraud, >and that there was no person by this name involved in the >project, and that the book is complete nonsense. Of course >this is sort of a case of an anonymous pot calling a questionable >kettle black!


As far as Lt. Col. Corso is concerned, I encountered his name quite a while ago in connection with a Southern Calf. MIA-POW group headed up by 101st Airborne Div. veteran John Pagel. It was in connection with secret testimony before Congress with what was then a defector General Officer from the now defunct WARSAW Pact. They were testifying on the fate of over 900 American POW's never returned from the Korean Conflict.

Checking on Corso, I discovered what a highly placed guy he was. At that time mostly that he had been on President Eisenhower's National Security Council. Now of course we know much more. 54-57 on Ike's NSC, 57-61 commanded a NIKE nuclear missle group in West Germany, and in 61 being assigned to the Pentagon in Army R & D.

I guess the bottom line is .....SCREW 'JACK'...... One might ask just who in Hell is he? Hiding behind Ray Santilli sending cryptic messages every so often via Ray? The research community is supposed to buy that?

I orginally took the AA story to Bob Kiviat after finding out about it from British UFO researcher Philip Mantel. Kiviat, way back then, was supposed to speak to 'Jack' - it never happened. Mantle and Hesseman were supposed to speak to 'Jack' - NEVER HAPPENED. The only person to ever speak to 'Jack' was Santilli, and Ray is a proven liar. He lied to me personally. Who cares at this point?

Corso and his background can be checked and was checked. He is who he says he is. In the Sept/Oct issue of UFO Magazine, the mag. published in the U.S., has an extensive interview with Bill Birnes, Corso's co-author. The question of the 4 vs. 6 fingers is explored and explained. In the next issue we are getting together with Corso to hear and report, first-hand, his story. As I said months ago, if I had to buy anyone's story I would be more likely to warm up to Corso, just because of who he is.

There is a preview of the new issue of UFO Magazine going up on our website. Drop buy and take a peek.

Don Ecker
UFO Magazine


Date: 31 Aug 97 09:48:41 EDT
To: UFO UpDates - Toronto
Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: 'Santilli Releases Alien Autopsy Film Samples For Analysis'

>From: [Robert Gates]
>Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 19:51:36 -0400 (EDT)
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: 'Santilli Releases Alien Autopsy Film Samples For >Analysis'

Lat night I posted the truth, to the best of my knowledge, about this silliness.

All of the film that Ray has passed on to anyone for study has been pieces of copy film, and not demonstrably from the actual autopsy sequence, and therefore useless.

I have reached the conclusion, which I have passed on to Ray and he has not disputed, that Ray and his associates do not now have any camera original film. I do not know if they ever had or saw any.



Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 12:07:12 -0400
Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Sims, Leir and Santilli
To: UFO UpDates - Toronto

>To summerise, if the print(with AA image) can be verified as being of >1947 +-3 or 4 years, the film from which the image was taken MUST be >dated at or before the latest date the print film could be said to be >usable.

>So Bob what can be said for Kodak Safty Print film.

>Best Regards

Hi Neil,

There is one important point. In 1956-57 Kodak changed their film base material from a type of acetate which would not tolerate high- temperature processing (cellulose acetate propionate) to a type which could be used in a new chemical developing process which used much higher temperatures to shorten processing time. This newer acetate was a tri-acetate, essentially the same as still used today on most motion picture and still film.

All we know from Professor Malanga's tests, as I verified personally with him when I saw him in Italy earlier this year, is that this sample film from Santilli is on the older base. So it was made prior to 1957.

Now, this film could keep for many years because, as you note, it is very slow (insensitive) copy film, and this sort of film stores well for extended periods even without refrigeration.

However, after 1957, the chemical process for this older film was discontinued. So to expose and process this film at a later date would require not only finding pre-1957 copy film in usable condition, but also would require mixing up the older versions of the chemicals from scratch. This is not impossible, since the formulae and raw chemicals can be had, but makes the whole proposition more complicated. One could not simply expose the old print film and carry it in to an ordinary photo lab for processing.

Ray Santilli obviously has access to someone who can handle processing of such old film, since the unrelated roll that Mike Hesemann bought from a lady in Roswell was given by him to Ray for processing, and after processing was given to me for forwarding to Kodak who dated the film to 1945. Kodak noted that it had apparently been processed properly.

So, all that being said, testing of any sort performed on the copy film will be inconclusive, and will get us nowhere. Professor Malanga has already told us all that can be learned from this film.


Designed for the exclusive use of VJ Enterprises © 1997