Copyright 1995 by Linda Moulton Howe
P. O. Box 538, Huntingdon Valley, PA 19006
FAX: 215-491-9842 E-Mail: LMH333@aol.com
Book & Video Information: Toll-Free 800-707-9993
INTERVIEW WITH FILM ANALYST BOB SHELL
After The Dusseldorf, Germany Conference
[November 30, 1995] -- At the end of October, Magazine 2000 Publisher Michael Hesemann hosted a conference in Dusseldorf, Germany to present more information about the controversial humanoid autopsy footage. An unedited 14-minute sequence was screened publicly for the first time. The location might be inside a tent, where medical people work over the body of an injured being.
Other film surfaced in Dusseldorf from a Romanian connection which also showed an autopsy very similar to the [Santilli] film. And an Italian surprised everyone with black and white film of a silver disk inside a hangar which former Air Force Colonel Wendelle Stevens said looked like Wright Field in Dayton, Ohio back in the 1940s.
Bob Shell, Editor of Shutterbug Magazine, saw some of the new film screened at Dusseldorf. I interviewed him in New York on Saturday, November 4.
BOB SHELL: The most significant thing that happened in Dusseldorf was that the complete tent footage was shown publicly for the first time. Ray Santilli has had it for some time. And what you can see is a being that looks similar to the one seen in the (Socorro) autopsy lying on a table -- maybe it's a cot -- in a dimly lighted area which might be inside a tent. You can't really tell it's a tent. It's just a dark area. There's an emergency lantern hanging directly over the table that the creature is on. There are two people behind the table. And for convenience, I'm just going to call them medical technicians because it seems to be what they are. They are wearing white lab coats like a medical technician would wear. The creature is not moving, at least not visibly moving. I want to have someone look at this on a computer and see if any chest movement can be detected.
LINDA HOWE: DOES THE HEAD SEEM THE SAME? DOES THE SIZE SEEM THE SAME?
The head -- again, it's not very clearly lighted, but the head does seem to be the same kind of a creature. Based on the height of the two people behind the table, it looks like this creature is larger than the ones we have seen in the one that is out on video.
Taller, longer, that's right.
DO THE FEET STICK OUT?
The feet stick out from the bottom. It's covered by a sheet, or a white piece of cloth, anyway. The feet stick out at the bottom. The head sticks out at the top. And the right hand and part of the right arm sticks out on the side.
AND HOW MANY FINGERS AND TOES?
Now, the tape that we saw wasn't clear enough to count the toes. The feet are fairly well shadowed anyway. The fingers are hard to see, but I'd say that I'm 95% sure that there are six of them. I tried several times counting them and it always looked like there were six of them. The head does have the big, black eye covers like we've seen in the autopsy, so it appears to be the same kind of creature. But it appears to be a taller member of the same type of creature.
According to British UFO Researcher Philip Mantle and Ray Santilli, the creatures in both autopsies appear to be about the same size. But the one (in the tent) appears to be larger, taller. So, we do have on film three out of the four creatures that were supposed to have been at the Socorro crash site.
It's really impossible to tell exactly what the medical technicians are doing to the creature (in the tent sequence), but it looks like what they are doing is removing a fairly large quantity of wet, dark cloth. It could be surgical gauze saturated with a dark fluid like blood. It could be some other kind of cloth that's already dark in color. But if you assume they are medical technicians doing some kind of medical procedure, then it looks like they are removing a wound dressing, preparatory to perhaps replacing it with fresh dressing. And if they are in fact removing a wound dressing as saturated as the material appears to be by the way it flops around when they lift it up, I would say the creature had lost a considerable amount of fluid. But this is really speculation because we don't know exactly what they are doing. This is just an impression of what they are doing.
WHAT IS THE LATEST AS OF THIS DATE ABOUT WHETHER THE CAMERAMAN IS ALIVE? [WHAT ABOUT] THE LOS ANGELES MAN WHO DIED IN AUGUST?
Oh, the Los Angeles man who died in August -- I'm quite confident that this was not the cameraman. An associate of mine talked to the widow and we are quite convinced that she knows nothing about this and it's the wrong man. It turns out that even though he was a member of the Motion Picture Machine Operator's Union, he was not in fact a cameraman. He was a grip. And it was apparently just a false trail. He just happened to have a name similar to the name that had been thrown around as the cameraman's name. The real cameraman, according to Ray Santilli who assured me of this in London, is still very much alive and will come forward at some point in the future, although I don't know when that will be. It will be on his time table, not anybody else's proposed time table.
IN LONDON IN SEPTEMBER, RAY SANTILLI MENTIONED TO ME THAT HE WAS BEING APPROACHED BY OTHER PEOPLE ABOUT OTHER FILMS OF OTHER AUTOPSIES OF OTHER BEINGS SEPARATE FROM WHAT HE HAS. CAN YOU DESCRIBE WHAT WAS DISCUSSED IN DUSSELDORF CONCERNING OTHER AUTOPSY FILM AND WHAT IS THE STATUS WITH VOLKER SPIELBERG HAVING THE OTHER AUTOPSY AND RELEASING IT?
Unfortunately, I could only be at the Dusseldorf conference for one day and had to come back to the U. S. for a photographic conference in New York. And the day after I left, a young German couple came to the conference with a 16mm film of a different alien autopsy. This film was taken by a Romanian who was in some way associated with Romanian intelligence. It was filmed on East German brand of film and shows a creature. Now this is purely what I've been told verbally. I have not seen the film yet.
WHO TOLD YOU THIS?
Mike Hesemann told me this. It shows a creature "similar to what's seen in Ray Santilli's film" undergoing a procedure again similar to what is seen on Ray Santilli's film. The doctors or medical technicians performing the procedure are wearing protective suits, again similar to the ones seen in Ray Santilli's film. At the moment that's all I know about this film. I will be getting the film or pieces of the film to look at and should be able through the German film company to find out what their date coding is and determine the dating on this film.
WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER AUTOPSY THAT IS UNDER THE CONTROL OF RAY SANTILLI'S GERMAN PARTNER?
I can't comment too much on that because I don't want to interfere with discussions that are going on. But I do believe the other autopsy sequence will be made public fairly soon. Ray is certainly attempting to convince his German partner to let that film be put on video for public distribution and to have that film be authenticated further by Kodak.
AND TO AUTHENTICATE IT, WHAT DOES KODAK IN ROCHESTER NEED?
Kodak needs a strip of film at least 50 frames in length. They are not going to destroy that strip of film. They are only going to destroy one small section of one frame of that film. The reason they need 50 frames is that in 1960 the way perforations -- holes punched in the film -- were punched was changed from one kind of machinery to another kind of machinery. And the difference in spacing is so small that you can't measure it just on a small section of film. But if you measure it on 50 frames, you can tell conclusively whether this film was perforated before or after this change in equipment (in 1960). Kodak considers that a very important test. And it cannot be done on a shorter piece of film which has been one of the hang-ups we've had. We've had some shorter pieces of film, but they aren't long enough to measure the perforations. Kodak wants to measure that before they commit to doing chemical tests because the chemical tests are quite expensive. And unless they establish to their own satisfaction the film is pre-1960, they see no point in doing the other tests.
WHAT HAS CONVINCED YOU THE MOST THAT THESE HUMANOIDS ARE MOST LIKELY NON-HUMAN?
Well, what's convinced me the most that what's on the film is likely to be real creatures is my own knowledge of biology, because I was trained as a zoologist -- plus the comments made by so many highly respected pathologists, surgeons, doctors, and medical consultants. Almost every single one has said this is a real body of a real creature being dissected. It's not a dummy. But at the same time they have been equally emphatic that it's not human. The internal organs are not those of a human being. It's not a deformed human either which is an explanation which should have been thrown out early on, but it keeps coming up at this late date.
IN ADDITION TO THE FORMER CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY COLLEAGUE OF YOURS AND A MAN HE REFERRED YOU TO, HAS ANYONE ELSE IN THE GOVERNMENT COME TO YOU OFF THE RECORD FOR BACKGROUND AND SAID THIS FOOTAGE IS REAL?
No one has come to me voluntarily. I have approached people I know and asked them. And most of them have denied any knowledge of the film. Most of them have also expressed no surprise at the film. So if the film is real, it's not going to surprise them. But I don't think they have any advance knowledge of it.
AND THEY WOULDN'T BE SURPRISED BECAUSE THEY ALREADY HAVE SOME WORKING KNOWLEDGE THAT WE ARE MONITORING OR INVOLVED WITH SOMETHING THAT APPEARS TO BE NON-HUMAN INTERACTING WITH THE PLANET?
They either know or strongly suspect -- and I'd say that most of them probably know and that the U. S. government knows a lot more about this subject than is being made public.
NOW WHY DO YOU THINK, EVEN IF SPECULATIVE, THERE IS A POLICY OF SILENCE?
The best explanation for that is if you look at large governments with a very cynical and jaundiced eye and ask: What are governments? They are basically protection rackets. They take tax money from us and promise us protection. And if they were forced to admit that something is happening that they can't protect us from, can't control, can't even predict -- a lot of their credibility goes right out the window. On the other hand, if the rumors are true that our government is in fact cooperating with the aliens -- if they admit this, then they are admitting doing something that is not only unethical but at least under the U. S. Constitution, totally illegal: making major treaties without the knowledge of the American public.
BUT A GOVERNMENT THAT WOULD GO ALONG WITH IT IS ESSENTIALLY THROWING IN WITH THE ALIEN AGENDA. WHAT WOULD THE REASON BE?
Maybe they have no choice. Maybe they are being dictated to.
AND THEY ARE OVER A BARREL IN BUYING TIME?
It could very well be. Of course, this is all speculation. I have no knowledge of any of this.
AND THERE ARE OTHER FILM SEQUENCES OF OTHER HUMANOID AUTOPSIES THAT SEEM TO BE EMERGING FROM OTHER PLACES?
There are two more that have surfaced here in the U. S. in the last week and a half. I haven't seen either one myself yet. But I understand that one of them is a grainy B & W and the other is in color. And one of the two does have a sound track, but I haven't seen either of them yet.
ANY IDEA ABOUT THE SOURCE?
These are supposedly coming from leaks in the U. S. government.
PROVOKED BY THE RELEASE OF THE SANTILLI FILM?
Yeah. My speculation would be that the cameraman who sold the film to Santilli is not the only person who has squirreled away film and other evidence over the years. And maybe these other people who have got this stuff hidden away are being emboldened by the cameraman coming out with his stuff. They think, "Well, he came out with this and he's still alive. If I come out with it, nothing is likely to happen to me." If enough people come out, then it's too late.
WHAT ARE THE CONSEQUENCES OF ALL THESE LEAKS FROM PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN SERVING IN THE GOVERNMENT OR MILITARY IN SOME CAPACITY AND WHO LEAK OUT THROUGH MEDIA WITHOUT THE GOVERNMENT MAKING ANY OFFICIAL POLICY STATEMENTS?
So far, to my knowledge, the government has been completely silent about the Santilli film. I've not heard a hint of any statement about this film. I'm not sure exactly what this does mean. It either means that it's out and it's too late and they know it and they don't see any point in commenting. Or maybe they are just hoping that it will go away. Or, maybe they want it out. Maybe this is a controlled release of some sort.
IN ALL YOUR CONVERSATIONS WITH PEOPLE OFF THE RECORD, HAS ANYBODY BROUGHT UP WITH YOU AN EARTH'S SECRET WAR WITH SOMETHING OFF PLANET?
I've heard this rumored around for a long time that there is a war between two or more groups of aliens. And that the earth is contested real estate in this war. I have no direct knowledge of any of that, though. I've just heard about it for years before the Santilli film.
SO NOTHING HAS SURFACED TO YOU FROM WASHINGTON?
Nothing that I could put a finger on and say it was reliable.
WHAT OTHER FILM OR PHOTOGRAPHS WERE PRESENTED IN GERMANY?
The other piece of film that surfaced at Dusseldorf that I did see was brought by an Italian man named Bongiovani. Mr. Bongiovani received this film from a friend of his in Brazil. And this film shows a crashed disk type flying saucer on top of a military flatbed truck. Wendelle Stevens, who was at the conference, said this was a standard issue military flatbed from the 1940s and that the bed of the truck measures 40 feet long. In which case, the saucer's diameter is about half the length of the trailer, or roughly 20 feet in diameter.
The first sequence on this film shows the saucer on the back of the truck, being supported vertically by some scaffolding. The second sequence shows it inside of a hangar, and again Wendelle says the hangar has every resemblance to being a hangar at Wright Patterson from his days of being there. And the third part of the sequence shows some large object being hoisted out from inside the saucer by chains. And this large strange looking object is identified as the power plant of the saucer. All I could say about this film is that it looks good. If it's a fake, it's an extremely well done fake. Mr. Bongiovani says that he can get the original film. What he had with him in Dusseldorf was a videotape made from the film. And if he can in fact get the original film, then we can go to work on verification of that also.
CAN YOU GIVE MORE DETAILS ABOUT THE OBJECT THAT IS ON THE FILM? SHAPE? COLOR?
It's the traditional saucer-shaped flying saucer, the one that looks like two saucers placed together. It's very shiny metal. It's B & W film, so you can't tell color, but very shiny metal. It is smashed in on one side apparently from an impact. It has a rip in the surface skin on it also.
CAN YOU SEE ANYTHING HANGING OUT OF WHERE IT'S RIPPED?
The area where it's smashed in -- you can see quite clearly the internal structure which is a lattice work of what looks like metal I-beams. The I-beams look like they are similar to the ones we have seen in the Santilli film in the debris sequence. A very complex lattice work of I-beams and a metal skin stretched tightly over it. That's my impression from looking at it. You can't really see inside the saucer because it's quite dark . You can see the opening into it. And you can't see any physical external features -- there's no doors visible, no landing gear, nothing of this sort. But the landing gear could be on the other side. This could be the top we are seeing.
There are some close-ups of the lattice work structure and then again there is a sequence of this very strange looking object being hoisted up in the chain hoist.
WHAT DID [THE OBJECT] LOOK LIKE?
I really don't know how to describe it. It's rounded in contours, dark in color, and very complex-looking. It has lots of different little surface structures and veins, cooling fins and all sorts of stuff on it. It doesn't look like anything I've ever seen before. Bongiovani said that he thought what was being lifted out was the power source. But how he knows this, I don't know. It might be a speculation on his part.
The film has a story board at the beginning of it saying that it is from Wright Field and was filmed in 1947. I don't know who put the story board on -- whether Bongiovani did, or his friend, or whether that is an original military story board.
WERE THERE ANY SYMBOLS ON THE I-BEAMS OR ON THE CRAFT?
There are no symbols or markings on the outside of the craft at all. There may be symbols on the I-beams, but the video we saw wasn't clear enough to tell. If we can get some of the original film we can do some computer enhancement and see if there are markings on the I-beams similar to what we've seen on the Santilli film.
HOW LONG DOES HE FEEL IT WILL BE BEFORE THAT CAN BE RELEASED PUBLICLY?
When I talked to them in Dusseldorf, there wasn't any real clear idea on that. But there was no intent to keep it secret. It was just a matter of arranging some way for it to be made public.
[NOTE: Both Bob Shell and Michael Hesemann spoke at the International UFO Congress in Mesquite, Nevada, during the week of Nov 25 - Dec 3, 1995. CNI News correspondant Rebecca Schatte attended both of their lectures but says that no additional film footage was displayed, only four still photos said to have been taken from the new footage. Both Shell and Hesemann appear convinced that the Santilli footage is authentic. However, Schatte now says that after careful investigation, Bob Shell's positive evaluation of the film does not hold up.]
Original file name: .CNI - Howe on autopsy.4
This file was converted with TextToHTML - (c) Logic n.v.