#montevideo next on 4/6!! | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

stateofsport211 · 7 months

Text

NextGen Finals 2023: Challenger Frequents Making their Mark

An Introductory Post to the NextGen Finalists 2023

The NextGen ATP Finals 2023 logo (📸 ATP Tour)

The field for this year’s NextGen Finals, which will be held in Jeddah (Saudi Arabia) during the last weeks of November, has been set. Interestingly, just like parts of the field last year, all contenders made their mark in the ATP Challenger Tour throughout the year, which became part of the tennis Tour that showcased their potential even deeper.

This post will celebrate the next generation of tennis, serving as a recap of their season and what to expect before the Bootcamp, where everyone will get to know them better in a series of off-court challenges in one of the innovations of this year’s NextGen Finals. Furthermore, with an emphasis on the Challenger Tour, this would hopefully bring more exposure to the Challenger Tour, which became the intermediary between the rising players, those trying to rediscover their form, and those still trying to break even.

For this year, the NextGen Finals qualifying window was open until November 20, 2023, the day after the finals in 5 Challenger events this year were held. Eventually, it all came down to that week due to a possibly tight race between several players concurrently playing in several tournaments, especially Kobe and Montevideo. It took a while for the ATP to eventually finalize the finalists, and they officially announced the last 3 qualifiers earlier this Monday (November 20) despite the field looking set by the end of the second round of Kobe. They will be drawn into two groups on November 25, 2023, playing in the best-of-five mini-sets (first to 4 games).

Hereby introducing the NextGen Finalists:

1. Arthur Fils

Arthur Fils during the Montpellier (250) (📸 Next Gen ATP Finals via JB Autissier)

Arthur Fils' points to break 2-1 in the second set of the Oeiras 2 Challenger final against Joris de Loore (left), and to take the second set 7-5 in the Aix-en-Provence Challenger first round against Gregoire Barrere (right) (📸 ATP Challenger Livestream)

Starting this year one line below the Top 250, Fils’ meteoric rise commenced in Oeiras 2 Challenger, the start of his season, where he won the title against the previous week’s winner, Joris de Loore, 6-1, 7-6(4) through his predominantly working first serves and notably fiery passes, which often carried him until today. He continued the streak by being the Quimper Challenger runner-up to Gregoire Barrere 1-6, 4-6, which earned him the wild card to the Montpellier (250), where he became an eventual semifinalist to Jannik Sinner, as well as being a semifinalist of Marseille (250) to Benjamin Bonzi.

Since then, his potential flourished despite the rollercoaster clay season, with winning Lyon (250) as the pinnacle of his season (d. Francisco Cerundolo 6-3, 7-5), followed by a semifinal appearance in Hamburg (500) several weeks later, closing the season with a runner-up finish in Antwerp (250, l. Alexander Bublik). As a reward for his remarkable season, not only did he become the first qualifier for the NextGen Finals, but he also achieved a career-high ranking of 36 by the end of October.

2. Luca van Assche

Luca van Assche's reaction upon winning the longest Challenger final of the year in Pau Challenger (📸 Tennis.com)

Luca van Assche's point to create his match point to 5-3* 40-ad in the second set of the Sanremo Challenger final against Juan Pablo Varillas (left), and to 4-3* 15-0 in the second set of the Aix-en-Provence Challenger against Andy Murray (right) (📸 ATP Challenger Livestream)

After breaking through the Top 150 by the end of 2022, van Assche had a relatively slow start to the year until he became the runner-up of the Pau Challenger at the beginning of March, where he got defeated by a resurgent Ugo Humbert in a high-quality match that lasted almost 4 hours 7-6(5), 4-6, 7-6(6) in the finals. The form did not stop until he cracked the Top 100 for the first time upon advancing to the semifinals of the Sanremo Challenger but further confirmed it once he straightforwardly defeated Juan Pablo Varillas 6-1, 6-3 for the title.

After a different set of rollercoasters in the clay season, including a notable defeat to Andy Murray in the Aix-en-Provence Challenger, van Assche continued his season beyond Challengers, as he made it to the second round of Eastbourne (250) as a qualifier, got eliminated against J.J. Wolf 2-6, 7-6(5), 1-6. During the indoor season, he made more noise again in the Orleans Challenger, where he lost against the eventual runner-up Jack Draper 5-7, 3-6 in the semifinals. He then sealed his season with a quarterfinal loss against a comeback Pierre-Hugues Herbert 6-4, 3-6, 5-7, ranking 66th by the time of this writing right before the NextGen Finals.

3. Dominic Stricker

Dominic Stricker celebrated as he stunned Stefanos Tsitsipas in the US Open second round (📸 DAZN Germany via Getty Images)

Dominic Stricker's point to create one of his break points to 4-3* 40-ad in the second set of the finals of the first Prague Challenger against Sebastian Ofner (left, 📸 ATP Challenger Livestream) and also create one of his break points to *0-1 40-ad in the second set of the US Open third qualifying round against Thiago Agustin Tirante (right, 📸 Eurosport)

Despite his great potential being discovered last year (thus his NextGen Finals debut then), Stricker had to overcome several injuries and moments before he got to where he is today. Started the year straight to the Australian Open qualifying rounds, where he lost to Enzo Couacaud 7-6(2), 7-6(7) in one of the earliest Top 100 matches (when he was 18-19 lines away), he went on to win his second career Challenger title in Rovereto back in February (d. Giulio Zeppieri 7-6(8), 6-2), having won won his maiden Challenger title in Bergamo last year, followed by a home semifinal run in Lugano (l. Otto Virtanen). He then added Prague 1 Challenger to the list of the Challenger titles he won this year (d. Sebastian Ofner 7-6(7), 6-3), subsequently becoming a lucky loser in Roland Garros upon his third qualifying round loss against Thiago Agustin Tirante, which further asked the question on his ability to qualify for the Grand Slams due to the pressure moments he succumbed to during.

However, Stricker started steadily announcing himself on the bigger stage starting the grass season, steadily striking the ball more effectively and visibly improving during the pressure points/moments. Appeared competitive in the quarterfinals match of the Ilkley Challenger against Andy Murray despite the 6-7(5), 5-7 loss, and found himself qualified for Wimbledon after enduring a 4-set match against Mattia Bellucci in the third qualifying round. He then qualified for the US Open despite the subpar mini-clay season and build-up and asserted his revenge against Tirante (to whom he lost the final qualifying round in Roland Garros), successfully advancing to the fourth round in a competitive loss against Taylor Fritz after winning his third-round match against Benjamin Bonzi. Eventually, despite the end-of-season rollercoaster, his quarterfinal run in Basel (500) (l. Ugo Humbert) confirmed his Top 100 finish attained back in the US Open but unfortunately had to retire (for likely precautionary measures) in Ismaning Challenger at 7-6(2), 1-4 against Rudolf Molleker in hopes to be ready for his second NextGen Finals appearance.

4. Flavio Cobolli

Flavio Cobolli in action during Olbia Challenger (📸 OA Sport)

Flavio Cobolli's point to break 4-3 in the first set of the Roland Garros third qualifying round against Laurent Lokoli (left, 📸 France TV Sport), and to take the second set 6-4 during the Milan Challenger final against Facundo Diaz Acosta (right, 📸 ATP Challenger Livestream)

Trying to live up to his discovered potential last year thanks to his aggressive play (and often going deep on important occasions), Cobolli started his season with a second-round run in Pune (250), where he lost against Botic van de Zandschulp 5-7, 4-6. He then started to sparkle in Munich (250), where he ended up as a quarterfinalist (l. Christopher O’Connell), followed by a semifinal showing in Rome (Italy) Challenger (l. Jesper de Jong) and Milan Challenger (l. Facundo Diaz Acosta). In a similar timeframe (clay season, its extension, and Challenger’s own clay season), he also qualified for the Roland Garros, where he ended up being defeated by Carlos Alcaraz 0-6, 2-6, 5-7 in the first round. Fast-forward to the end of July, in almost the same tournament he finally got himself known in Umag (250), he became a quarterfinalist after the loss against Matteo Arnaldi in an all-Italian-NextGen showing.

He then continued his stellar showing in the clay Challengers, where he reached the semifinals in Tulln (l. Sumit Nagal) and won the title in a close encounter in Lisbon (d. Benjamin Hassan 7-5, 7-5), citing Cristiano Ronaldo as his title run inspiration during the post-finals press conference. Furthermore, outside of the clay-court Challengers, he still managed to maintain the streak in the Olbia Challenger, where he was out-paced by Titouan Droguet during the finals, hence his runner-up finish after a 3-6, 4-6 loss. After two early exits in Bergamo and Helsinki Challengers, both of which were indoor hard tournaments, Cobolli had a semifinal showing in Danderyd by defeating Gilles Arnaud Bailly in the first round 6-4, 6-1, advanced to the quarterfinals at the cost of Gauthier Onclin’s withdrawal before winning against Radu Albot 6-4, 7-6(5) in a close encounter that confirmed his NextGen Finals qualification, but was overwhelmed when dealing with eventual champion Maximilian Marterer’s serve+1s in the semifinal.

5. Alex Michelsen

Alex Michelsen in Newport, where he became the runner-up to Adrian Mannarino (📸 ATP Tour)

Alex Michelsen's point to break 2-0 in the second set of the Rome, GA Challenger quarterfinals against Edan Leshem (top left), to take the second set 6-1 in the second Cary Challenger second round against Strong Kirchheimer (top right), and to *2-3 30-30 in the first set of the Knoxville Challenger second round against Gabriel Debru (bottom) (📸 ATP Challenger Livestream).

Starting the year precisely at World No. 600, A. Michelsen’s rise started in the Rome, Georgia (USA) Challenger in February, where he became the runner-up to Jordan Thompson 4-6, 2-6 right after becoming the runner-up of the ITF M25 Malibu (Jan 2) and winning the ITF M15 Edmond, Oklahoma (Jan 23), followed by a semifinal showing in Waco Challenger a week after Rome, GA, which earned him the wild card to the Indian Wells M1000 qualifying (l. Leandro Riedi in Q1). After another solid showing in the ITFs (including a runner-up in M25 Calabasas-Mar 20), A. Michelsen started to get out of his comfort zone and tried the Nottingham Challenger in the grass courts of the United Kingdom (l. Gabriel Diallo in R2 6-3, 5-7, 2-6 as a qualifier) and had a competitive appearance in Mallorca (250) as a qualifier (l. Christopher Eubanks in R1 3-6, 7-6(5), 5-7) before winning his maiden Challenger title in Chicago (d. Yuta Shimizu 7-5, 6-2), further strengthening his explosive and intuitive play as the year progressed.

A week after his Chicago Challenger title, he became a runner-up in the grass courts of Newport (250), where Adrian Mannarino eventually won 6-2, 6-4 and after notably defeating Maxime Cressy, James Duckworth, Mackenzie McDonald, and John Isner from the first round until the semifinals. However, the next few tournaments became tricky with the Top 100 in sight, including a semifinal loss against eventual champion Zachary Svajda in the Cary 2 Challenger. He then got his rewards to finally enter the Top 100 for the first time after winning the Knoxville Challenger title, when he survived four three-setters in five rounds, defeating Denis Kudla 7-5, 4-6, 6-2 as the pinnacle, solidified his position by defeating Bernard Tomic 6-4, 6-0 in the Champaign Challenger’s first round in a rematch of their last week’s close encounter in Knoxville. Ultimately, A. Michelsen became the runner-up of the Champaign Challenger to Patrick Kypson, where he confirmed his NextGen Finals participation, as well as his Australian Open 2024 main draw direct entry likelihood thanks to his Top 100 year-end finish, landing at 94 live.

6. Hamad Medjedovic

Hamad Medjedovic celebrated after defeating Jiri Lehecka in Astana (250) for the biggest win in his career (by then) (📸 ATP Tour via Kazakhstan Tennis Federation)

Hamad Medjedovic's point to 6-5* 15-30 in the second set of the Bengaluru Challenger semifinal against Max Purcell (top left, 📸 ATP Challenger Livestream), to create the break point to *0-1 40-ad in the second qualifying round of Roland Garros against Juan Manuel Cerundolo (top right, 📸 France TV Sport), and to 6-5* 15-0 in the third set of the Danderyd Challenger second round against Jakub Mensik (bottom, 📸 ATP Challenger)

Medjedovic came a long way after his rise last year, winning the Luedenscheid Challenger 2022 by double-breadsticking Zhizhen Zhang, steadily answering the doubt on whether or not he’s breaking even, even if he has Novak Djokovic’s support. After having a slow start to the season (and an even slower second semester of 2022), he started having deep runs in the Bengaluru Challenger, where he was eliminated in the semifinal against eventual champion Max Purcell 2-6, 7-5, 6-7(4). However, he then started his stellar Challenger clay season with a title in Szekesfehervar Challenger (d. Nino Serdarusic 6-4, 6-3), followed by another title in Mauthausen (d. Filip Misolic 6-2, 6-7(5), 6-4) in a rain-ridden dramatic match. To top it off, he qualified for the Roland Garros and Wimbledon but got eliminated against Marcos Giron and Christopher O’Connell in the first round, respectively.

Trying to rise the ranks to the main Tour, he followed those up by having several great runs in the 250s and the Challengers in the second half of 2023, carried by his powerful serve and forehands when they are on (and occasionally, drop shots and volleys to add to his intuitive play). He started with a semifinal run in Gstaad as a qualifier (l. Pedro Cachin 3-6, 1-6, with a notable win against Dominic Thiem in the second round in a rematch of their Mauthausen Challenger semifinal encounter, as well as winning the Mallorca Challenger (d. Harold Mayot 6-2, 4-6, 6-2). He topped those runs off with a semifinal run in Astana (250) (l. Sebastian Korda, with some notable wins against Alexander Shevchenko and Jiri Lehecka in the second round and quarterfinals, respectively) despite the early exits in the last 3 250-level tournaments (Antwerp (250) R1, Basel (500) Q1, and Sofia (250) R1). Subsequently, after defeating Stefano Travaglia 6-4, 6-3 in a chaotic first-round match, he was defeated by fellow up-and-coming NextGen player Jakub Mensik 4-6, 7-6(2), 7-6(8) in the second round, having his 3 match points saved, 2 of them in the second set and one when he should have served for the match. Recognizing his tremendous potential through his aggressive gameplay and often reliable serves, while his usual rollercoaster could be expected, it all depended on his intuition in handling the point construction within the longer rallies if he could not keep it short.

7. Luca Nardi

Luca Nardi won the Porto Challenger title in August this year, gifting himself his birthday present after three hard-fought sets (📸 ATP Tour via Porto Open)

Luca Nardi's point to 6-5* 0-15 in the third set of the Pune Challenger semifinal against Dominik Palan (left) and to take the third set 7-5 in Kobe Challenger against August Holmgren (right) (📸 ATP Challenger Livestream)

Another name with potential being further discovered since last year is Luca Nardi, who answered the doubts coming from his sloppy start of the year by making strides toward the end of the year, thus rewarded with NextGen Finals qualification. He exited in early rounds in the first one-two months of the calendar before reaching the finals of the Pune Challenger, where he became the runner-up to a red-hot Max Purcell 3-6, 2-6. The rollercoaster then continued to the clay season, where he was remembered for being double-bageled by Lorenzo Musetti during the second round as a qualifier during the Monte Carlo M1000, as well as advancing to at least the quarterfinals in several Challengers, notably in Vicenza (l. Pablo Llamas Ruiz) and Milan (l. Matteo Gigante).

Realizing the whole rollercoaster, L. Nardi’s more offensive approach to complement his defenses and return depth started to pay off in Porto Challenger back in August, where he pulled a comeback win against Joao Sousa 5-7, 6-4, 6-1 as a sweet birthday present he gifted himself. Since then, his trajectory has gone back on track by being the semifinalist of the Bratislava 2 Challenger (l. Joris de Loore) and finally took the title in the Matsuyama Challenger in another comeback fashion (d. Taro Daniel 3-6, 6-4, 6-2), securing his NextGen Finals place after his second-round victory in the Kobe Challenger just to start the week (d. August Holmgren 6-3, 3-6, 7-5) before falling to Sho Shimabukuro to the semifinals, showing that his decision to partake in the Japanese Challenger swing paid off for his almost last-minute qualification.

8. Abdullah Shelbayh [WC]

Abdullah Shelbayh during his first-round match in Doha (250) (📸 The Hindu via Abdullah Shelbayh's Instagram post)

Abdullah Shelbayh's point to *5-2 40-40 (one of the break points saves) in the second set of the second-round Tenerife 3 Challenger match against Ryan Peniston (top left), to break 5-2 in the second set of the Manama Challenger semifinal against Salvatore Caruso (top right), and to *0-0 40-ad (second break point) in the Charleston Challenger final against Oliver Crawford (bottom) (📸 ATP Challenger Livestream)

Hailing from Jordan and training in Rafa Nadal Academy under Princess Lara Faisal’s Rise for Good Foundation, Shelbayh exceptionally started the season as a runner-up of the ITF M25 Manacor against Daniel Rincon (Jan 23) in a marathon match to start his positive semester after his remarkable rise kicked off in the second semester of 2022, from winning ITF M25 Monastir on two occasions (Jul 18 & Aug 22, 2022) before closing that year by winning ITF M15 Trnava (Dec 5) against Daniel Rincon, several months after securing his Challenger debut with a semifinal appearance (l. Zizou Bergs, but notably d. 1st seed Dominic Stricker in the first round). The only way was up, which he proved throughout the 2023 season by reaching the second round in Tenerife 3 Challenger as a qualifier (l. Ryan Peniston), ultimately becoming the runner-up in his maiden Challenger final in Manama (l. Thanasi Kokkinakis). He backed this up with his maiden ATP Tour main draw appearance in Doha as a wild card despite the first-round loss against Soonwoo Kwon.

He kept gaining experience as the year passed by from the aforementioned raw potential, making a last-minute decision to partake in the Banja Luka qualification rounds, stunning then-have not broken out (yet) Fabian Marozsan and Lukas Klein in both qualifying rounds before defeating Elias Ymer 6-1, 7-5 in the first round to record his maiden Tour-level victory (as well as becoming the first Jordanian to win a main Tour match) but was eliminated in the hands of Miomir Kecmanovic. He also qualified for the Mallorca (250) event on grass (l. Roman Safiullin in the first round) and went on to win his maiden Challenger title in Charleston (d. Oliver Crawford 6-2, 6-7(5), 6-3), also becoming the first Jordanian Challenger-level champion. His sparkling rise continued through Metz (250) as a qualifier (d. Dan Added & Gijs Brouwer in the qualifying rounds), shocking Hugo Gaston 7-6(5), 6-2 before Lorenzo Sonego defeated him 3-6, 5-7 despite his competitive efforts. Aided by his often impressive point construction (as displayed), when he is on, not only rewarded him his career-high ranking of 187 (attained Nov 20, 2023) but also a wild card to this year’s NextGen Finals as the regional (Middle Eastern) representative.

#atp tour #atp world tour #atp challenger #atp challenger tour #tennis news #tennis updates #nextgen finals #nextgen finals 2023 #introductory post #arthur fils #luca van assche #dominic stricker #flavio cobolli #alex michelsen #hamad medjedovic #luca nardi #abdullah shelbayh #WatchChallengersFolks #ChallengerMatters

9 notes · View notes

databasefrim765 · 8 months

Text

Uruguay Phone Numbers To Add To Your Contact List

Uruguay is a small South American nation with a rich culture and a diverse history. The country is home to some of the best beaches in the world, as well as a vibrant nightlife scene. With its convenient location and friendly people, Uruguay is a great place to visit or live. Uruguay's phone numbers are not always easy to remember, but they are easy to find. The country uses a seven-digit phone numbering system, with the first two digits always being '09.' The next three digits indicate the city or area code, and the last two digits indicate the specific phone number within that area. To make things easier, we've compiled a list of Uruguay phone numbers that you can add to your contact list. From the capital city of Montevideo to the popular tourist destination of Punta del Este, we've got you covered.

1. Uruguay is a small South American country with a population of just over 3 million people. 2. The country's phone numbers are divided into two parts: the area code and the subscriber's number. 3. The country's area codes range from 1 to 9, with 1 being the most populous and 9 being the least. 4. The subscriber's number is 7 digits long and is unique to each individual. 5. To call a Uruguayan number from abroad, you must first dial the country's exit code (00), followed by the area code and the subscriber's number. 6. Uruguayan phone numbers can be divided into two categories: mobile and landline. 7. Mobile numbers are typically 10 digits long and start with the digit 9, while landline numbers are typically 8 digits long and start with the digit 2.

1. Uruguay is a small South American country with a population of just over 3 million people.

Uruguay is a small South American country with a population of just over 3 million people. It is bordered by Argentina to the west and Brazil to the north, with the Atlantic Ocean to the east. The capital and largest city is Montevideo. Uruguay has a temperate climate, with hot summers and cold winters. The country is known for its beaches, as well as its capital city of Montevideo, which is a popular tourist destination. Uruguay is a developed country, with a high standard of living and a diversified economy. The main industries in the country are agriculture, forestry, fishing, livestock, manufacturing, and tourism. The official language of Uruguay is Spanish, but Portuguese is also spoken.

2. The country's phone numbers are divided into two parts: the area code and the subscriber's number.

Uruguay phone numbers are divided into two parts: the area code and the subscriber's number. The country's area codes are determined by the location of the phone number, with each code corresponding to a specific area or city. Uruguay's subscriber numbers are eight digits long, and are used to route calls to specific phone lines. Uruguay's phone numbers are unique in that they are not assigned to phone lines by a central authority. Instead, they are chose by the phone line's owner. This system was put in place to prevent fraud and abuse of the country's phone lines. Uruguay's area codes are two digits long, with the first digit corresponding to the region of the country. The second digit corresponds to the specific area or city within that region. For example, the area code for Montevideo, Uruguay's capital, is 19. To call a phone number in Uruguay, dial 0 + the area code + the subscriber's number. For example, to call the Montevideo number 1234-5678, you would dial 011-598-1234-5678.

3. The country's area codes range from 1 to 9, with 1 being the most populous and 9 being the least.

Uruguay is a small South American nation located between Argentina and Brazil. Its area codes range from 1 to 9, with 1 being the most populous and 9 being the least. 1 is the area code for the capital city of Montevideo and its metropolitan area. 2 is the area code for the rest of Uruguay's cities and towns. 3 is the area code for the rural areas of the country. 4 is the area code for Uruguay's mobile networks. 5 is the area code for the country's VoIP networks. 6 is the area code for the country's toll-free numbers. 7 is the area code for Uruguay's premium-rate numbers. 8 is the area code for the country's personal numbers. 9 is the area code for the country's pager services.

4. The subscriber's number is 7 digits long and is unique to each individual.

The subscriber's number is 7 digits long and is unique to each individual. This means that if you are given a Uruguay phone number, you can be sure that it belongs to that specific person and no one else. This can be useful information to have if you are trying to get in touch with someone in Uruguay, as it can help to ensure that you have the correct number.

5. To call a Uruguayan number from abroad, you must first dial the country's exit code (00), followed by the area code and the subscriber's number.

When calling a Uruguayan number from abroad, you must first dial the country's exit code (00), followed by the area code and the subscriber's number. For example, to call a Montevideo number from abroad, you would dial 00 + 598 + the 7-digit subscriber's number.

6. Uruguayan phone numbers can be divided into two categories: mobile and landline.

Uruguay phone numbers can be divided into two categories: mobile and landline. Mobile numbers typically start with the digits "09" followed by eight other digits, while landline numbers start with the area code followed by six to seven other digits. To make a call to Uruguay from another country, you must first dial the exit code for your country, followed by the Uruguay country code ("598"), and then the full phone number including the area code. If you're looking to add some Uruguayan contacts to your phone, here are some numbers you can start with: -Mobile: 099 999 9999 098 888 8888 -Landline: +598 2 123 4567 +598 3 456 7890 Uruguay is a small country in South America, located between Argentina and Brazil. Its Atlantic Coast is dotted with sandy beaches, and its capital, Montevideo, is a lively city with a rich cultural scene. Uruguay is a great place to visit, and if you have friends or family there, it's always useful to have a few local phone numbers on hand in case you need to get in touch.

7. Mobile numbers are typically 10 digits long and start with the digit 9, while landline numbers are typically 8 digits long and start with the digit 2.

Assuming you would like 7 tips for adding Uruguayan phone numbers to your contact list: 1. A mobile number in Uruguay typically consists of 10 digits, starting with the digit 9. A landline number typically consists of 8 digits, starting with the digit 2. 2. When adding a Uruguayan phone number to your contact list, it is important to include the country code (+598), as well as the appropriate area code. 3. Uruguayan mobile phone numbers typically have 9-digit subscriber numbers, as opposed to the 8-digit numbers found on landlines. 4. The number 1 is used as both a country code and an area code when dialing from abroad. 5. When making a call within Uruguay, the area code must always be prefixed with 0. 6. There are no fixed-line area codes in Uruguay. The area code corresponds to the location of the mobile phone operator's base station. 7. It is not necessary to dial the Uruguay country code when making a call within the country.

If you are looking for a new country to add to your contact list, consider Uruguay. The people are friendly and the country is beautiful. The phone numbers are easy to remember and the country code is easy to find. You will not be disappointed if you add Uruguay to your contact list.

0 notes

crispyturtlepainter · 2 years

Text

WWE RAW October 24, 2022 Live results

WWE RAW October 24, 2022 Live results: Home » RAW » WWE RAW en Español October 24, 2022 Live Results:

Tonight WWE Raw live, broadcast on Monday, October 24, 10/24/2022 replay, Karl Anderson will face Finn Bálor, in addition, Bobby Lashley and Brock Lesnar will face each other prior to their meeting at Crown Jewel 2022, in addition , Bianca Belair will battle Bayley, in a non-title match, also, Baron Corbin, AJ Styles, Dexter Lumis and The Miz in action. V I D E O R E R E P E T I T I O N If you want to see it, you must enter the following button to access the content of the title. CLICK HERE AND ACCESS Schedule: Now we will present the start time of this show, grouped by countries and start time. Remember, that if your country of origin is not on the list, you can go to https://luchaonline.com/horario/ to check the schedule. 6:00 pm – 6:00 pm Guatemala City (Guatemala), Managua (Nicaragua), San José (Costa Rica), San Salvador (El Salvador), Tegucigalpa (Honduras). 7:00 pm – 7:00 pm Mexico City (Mexico), Bogotá (Colombia), Lima (Peru), Panama, Quito (Ecuador). 8:00 p.m. – 8:00 p.m. New York (United States), Santiago (Chile), Caracas (Venezuela), La Paz (Bolivia), Puerto Rico, Dominican Republic, Asunción (Paraguay). 9:00 p.m. – 9:00 p.m. Buenos Aires (Argentina), Montevideo (Uruguay). 02:00 (early morning of the next day): Spain. Live RAW Results: The Judgment Day is in the ring, Rhea Ripley says that last week AJ Styles discovered what she has known for a long time, that The Judgment Day wins on Monday Night Raw. Damian Priest asks everyone to stop and pay respect to Dominik Mysterio, the latter says "Last week I showed that those who hate me and doubt me were wrong when I cleanly beat AJ Styles in the ring", he also claims to be the Eddie Guerrero of this generation. Hand to hand fight: Finn Balor defeats Karl Anderson, by count of three, after Rhea Ripley hit Karl between the legs. The Miz is in the ring, he says that Johnny Gargano is accusing him of keeping a secret with Dexter Lumis, he accuses Lumis of being jealous of Tommaso Ciampa, that's why he kidnapped him and disappeared. Gargano says that Tommaso is not missing, he is injured, so you are a liar. R-Truth interrupts and a meeting is agreed. R-Truth defeated The Miz: So R-Truth defeated The Miz, by a count of three, after Miz was distracted by the supposed presence of Dexter Lumis, but it was Johnny Gargano disguised as Dexter. From backstage, Candice LeRae is interviewed, she says Alexa Bliss, Bianca Belair and Asuka as fighters who helped her. Damage CTRL interrupts, Bayley argues with Candice and ends up attacking her, along with Dakota and Iyo Sky. Austin Theory defeated Mustafa Ali: Austin Theory defeated Mustafa Ali, by count of three, after he received an A-Town. After the match, Seth Rollins who was at the Commentators Table, attacks Mustafa Ali. Fight in Disadvantage 1 vs 4 Omos defeats four local fighters. hand to hand fight: Elias defeats Chad Gable, by a count of three, after he received a Knee Strike. After the match, Otis joins Gable to attack Elias, Matt Riddle comes out to save him. From the infirmary, AJ Styles, Karl Anderson and Luke Gallows argue, AJ says that Rhea Ripley is her problem, Luke Gallows claims to be good with women and therefore he will take care of her. Luke comes back grabbing his crotch and saying that Rhea is indeed his problem. Hand to hand fight: Baron Corbin defeats Johnny Gargano, by count of three, after he received an End of Days. After the match, The Miz wants to talk to Johnny Gargano to get out of his problem. Johnny says that if Miz doesn't reveal the truth next week, he will. hand to hand fight: Bayley prevails over Bianca Belair, by a count of three, after Nikki Cross attacked Bianca, thus achieving victory for Bayley. After the match, Nikki Cross attacks Bayley too, leaving her in the ring very furious. She thus ends this show. V I D E O R E R E P E T I T I O N If you want to see it, you must enter the following button to access the content of the title. CLICK HERE AND ACCESS For More Information Visit These Articles: - Results CMLL Tuesday Arena Mexico October 25 - Booker T talks about a possible return of CM Punk to WWE - Return of ex-NXT Fighter – WWE Wrestling - Kevin Owens shows his excitement for the changes in WWE - Shawn Michaels talks about his relationship with The Rock in WWE - Wrestling Nation Results October 22 – WWE Wrestling - Results STARDOM IWGP Women Tournament 1st Round - WWE would be planning the return of King of the Ring as PPV - Results CMLL Saturday of the Coliseum October 22 - Results NJPW Battle Autumn 2022 Night 7 Read the full article

#2022Liveresults #2022Liveresults:Home»RAW»WWERAWenEspañolOctober24 #WWERAWOctober24

0 notes

we11101 · 3 years

Text

U.S. Invasion of Dominican Republic Stirs World-Wide Anger

The White House decision to pull a blitzkrieg on the Dominican Republic and occupy the small, poverty-stricken, dictator-cursed country with 30,000 marines and paratroopers, touched off the greatest wave of anger against American imperialism since 1958-60. At that time, it will be recalled, Vice-President Nixon was received with stones and curses by angry crowds throughout his “good will” tour of Latin America; while President Eisenhower was forced to cancel a projected trip to Japan because of the explosive point reached in the pent-up wrath of the Japanese people.

Today Johnson would do well not to venture into Latin America, Japan, or almost anywhere outside the United States. He has become the most hated man in the world.

Here are some samples of reactions in various cities:

Santiago de Chile: Hundreds of young people, mostly students, demonstrated in the streets May 5, particularly in the area of the U.S. embassy and on Avenida O'Higgins, the main street of the capital, demanding that the U.S. get out of Santo Domingo.

All the political parties, including the governing Christian-Democrats and the next biggest party, the Radicals, published resolutions condemning the U.S. occupation of’ the Dominican Republic.

The chamber of deputies called a special session which denounced the U.S. aggression” and demanded the withdrawal of U.S. troops from the island.

Lima: Crowds of students demonstrated angrily against the U.S. They stoned the U.S. embassy.

Quito: An estimated 200 students demonstrated here. At Guayaquil an automobile parked in front of the American consulate was blown up. The resulting fire burned other vehicles.

Barranquilla and Cartagena: Demonstrations in these two Colombian cities included the stoning of the facade of a U.S. Colombian center and the burning of an American flag in Barranquilla.

Police succeeded in blocking the burning of a second American flag in Cartagena.

Caracas: In full daylight a group machine-gunned the U.S. embassy. Other assaults were made against American business firms and cultural institutions. In scuffles with the police, 18 were wounded. Demonstrations were reported in many other towns in Venezuela.

Rio de Janeiro: Despite the brutal military-police dictatorship of General Castelo Branco, [1] 500 students staged a demonstration May 7 clearly aimed at the U.S. invasion of the Dominican Republic. They did it by parading before the French embassy to demonstrate approval of de Gaulle’s criticism of the U.S. occupation of the island. Heavy contingents of military police kept a watchful eye on the students.

Montevideo: Demonstrations of increasing violence broke out against the U.S. On May 6 a bomb exploded in the local office of an American cable company.

Buenos Aires: Some thousands of students began demonstrating May 5 in front of the Congress against the landing of U.S. troops in Santo Domingo. They chanted anti-American slogans, broke windows, set fire to tables on terraces in the streets, and-threw Molotov cocktails at the police. The demonstrations continued on following days, growing in volume and spreading to other towns.

Madrid: Franco’s fascist dictatorship could not keep order in face of the anger over the U.S. troop landings in Santo Domingo. Several hundred students demonstrated in front of the Dominican embassy shouting such slogans as “Yankee murderers!”; “Yankees, Get Out.”

The Madrid cops finally succeeded in breaking up the demonstration, making a number of arrests. The controlled Madrid press, which had hailed Johnson’s moves from the very first day, began to change its tone by May 8, striking a critical note over Johnson’s unilateral action.

Vienna: Some 300 students mobilized in the Austrian capital. They demonstrated in front of the American embassy, denouncing U.S. actions in the Dominican Republic.

Berlin: Hundreds of students demonstrated at Potsdam and sent a declaration to the American military mission protesting the U.S. aggression against the Dominican Republic.

While such actions, coupled with innumerable resolutions and declarations by all kinds of organizations, indicated the feelings of the overwhelming mass of humanity about Johnson’s espousal or the “Big Stick” policy or Theodore Roosevelt, American reporters round themselves with no choice but to reluctantly expose the monstrous lies which Johnson used to cover up and justify the invasion.

A typical example is provided by the dispatch sent by Barnard L. Collier May to the New York Herald Tribune. He could find no similarity between the facts in Santo Domingo and the stories issued in Washington. In his opinion this was not the fault of the local information services of the U.S. troops or State Department. “But these officers are finding themselves in an impossible position with correspondents who get around in the U.S.-controlled and rebel zones, and eyewitness events which are vigorously denied or papered over.”

These local officials are told little and the little they are told is “often false or misleading in the extreme.”

In Washington, for instance, on May 3, Johnson said, “Today there are between 1,000 and 1,500 dead people whose bodies are in the streets of Santo Domingo...”

“That statement,” said Collier, “even if it were made during-any time in the whole crisis – even in the worst and most blood-bathed part of it – was patently false. Reporters, including myself, who have been through the worst parts of the rebel districts, have seen no more than six to ten bodies, which is bad enough.

“The very idea of lf, 1000 to 1,500 corpses rotting under this tropical sun is repelling.”

Collier offered the opinion that Johnson used that figure in “good conscience,” but the reporter found this as “disturbing as the unprecedented misinformation system here.” [2]

Some other U.S. lies exposed by Collier: On the night before the U.S. marines were sent in, the U.S. embassy told a group of correspondents “that 12 anti-rebel Dominicans were lined up against a wall and, to cries of ‘Paredon,’ were personally machine-gunned to death by the present rebel leader, Col. Francisco Caamaño.”

The truth: “Not a single reporter has found concrete evidence of the ‘paredon’ episode, and there are now reports that one of the key men said to have been killed in that incident, is alive, although wounded.”

The U.S. embassy also told correspondents at the same time that there were 53 hard-core Communists directing the rebellion, and a list of them was passed out by the embassy.

The truth: “But as of nine days later, no hard proof has been provided by any official sources here, although reporters who know the Dominican situation have personally found that, indeed, several of the listed are Reds and active here.”

The U.S. military told correspondents May 4 that a “small fishing trawler-type boat had sneaked into the harbor and sailed up the Ozama River, to fire with machine guns on forces of the 82nd Airborne, dug in on the eastern edge of the river.”

The truth: A freighter had been in the harbor for several days. “It also turned out that the rebels were trying to start a fire aboard, but each time firemen tried to reach the ship, they came under heavy barrages from the opposite shore.”

On May 5 a military press officer told correspondents that no U.S. patrols were going into rebel territory. That same day a patrol penetrated rebel territory for ten blocks. At first the U.S. military denied the story; then they said the patrol had merely become lost.

The truth: “After the briefing, a major admitted off the record that the U.S. troops were under orders to pursue snipers anywhere in the city – even into the deepest part of the rebel territory – if that would secure the area. This order, he said, was in effect, despite the cease-fire arranged by the Organization of American States.”

Whatever the source of these lies and dozens like them, whether they originated in the Pentagon, the State Department, the White House or the Central Intelligence Agency, they were obviously what is known in these circles as “psychological warfare.” They followed the same pattern as the flood of- lies that poured out of Washington at the time of the invasion of Cuba. The aim of this lying propaganda was quite simple. It constituted the verbal smoke screen required for the military and political operation ordered by Johnson.

In Santo Domingo itself, the counterrevolutionary American forces moved according to the standard’ rules to be found in the Pentagon’s textbooks.

The excuse for the first move was to protect American lives and property, although not a single American had been so much as touched and the aim of the revolutionists was the limited one of restoring a democratic constitutional government that had been overthrown by a coup d'état. This excuse, which was advanced by Johnson himself, was sufficient to cover the first landings.

As additional thousands of troops were airlifted, the thin original excuse was dropped and a different one, again mouthed by Johnson, was offered. This was the hoary one about the “Communist danger."The real reason, of course, was to protect the holdings of two American sugar companies against the potential threat inherent in the revolution and to safeguard the Trujillo dynasty which has performed so heroically for American imperialism these many decades.

The build up of troops was fantastically large – at the last count, some 30,000; and they have brought in the most modern and deadly equipment, including tanks and bombers.

This monstrous military power dug in rapidly, obviously preparing to submit the population of Santo Domingo to a bloodbath such as would be recorded for all time, transmitting the name of Johnson in this way to generations yet unborn.

Against such military power, even the most heroic revolutionists would have little chance in view of the lack of opportunity to get the people properly organized and to secure the means of defense from other countries.

The wielders of the Big Stick proceeded methodically to the next step – to demand that civilians give up the guns that had been handed out in the first days of the revolution. The distribution of arms was supreme evidence of the democratic character of the movement, for it placed final control of the Dominican revolution in the hands of the people.

How well this move succeeds remains to be seen. If the arms are surrendered, then the Dominican people will undergo violent suppression, perhaps lasting for many years, as happened in the case of Greece at the end of World War II. [3]

Along with this move, the U.S. embassy is seeking to divide the leaders of the popular upsurge through apparent concessions (resignations of the worst butchers among the Trujillo forces) and efforts to lure the main figure, Caamaño, into a trap or into capitulation.

These maneuvers appear to be having some success. The men subjected to these blandishments are not really communists or revolutionary socialists. They are exactly what they said they were followers of Juan Bosch, people who have deep illusions about the nature of bourgeois democracy. Given the opportunity, they will of course come to terms with Washington. But then this is no surprise. This was precisely the program of Juan Bosch.

What Bosch and those like him fail to appreciate is that American imperialism no longer has any confidence in their capacity to contain a revolution within the limits of bourgeois democracy. The imperialists are profoundly convinced that once begun, a popular revolution in the world today tends by its own inner logic to become converted into a socialist revolution.

And that is why, nowhere in the world today do they place much confidence in the capacities of bourgeois democratic regimes, particularly those following decades of dictatorship such as that suffered by the Dominican people. If they have any choice at all they will inevitably take the Chiang Kai-sheks, the Syngman Rhees, the Diems, the Batistas, the Castelo Brancos, the Somosas and the Francos. In the Dominican Republic they will concentrate the same way in finding another Trujillo and they will do their utmost to keep him in power if they have to sit him on twice or four times 30,000 U.S. bayonets.

This policy, however, demonstrates not the power of American capitalism but its weakness. The trend toward revolution on a worldwide scale is becoming irrepressible. The people want democracy; they want socialism. Counter-revolutionary troops can contain them only for a brief time. American imperialism is nearing the final question – shall it accept defeat or perish in the hell of nuclear war?

0 notes

retroufo58 · 4 years

Text

NICAP Special Bulletin, November, 1958

Hoo boy. This was a long one.

Transcribed below:

NEW WAVE OF UFO SIGHTINGS CRACKS CENSORSHIP WALL

A Sudden increase in UFO sightings, here and abroad, is new under intensive investigation by AF intelligence. As we go to press, a new Baltimore UFO case has just lead to the revelation of a dramatic AF sighting withheld for three years.

The Baltimore sighting, new being investigated by AF scientists as well as Intelligence teams, occurred early on Oct. 27, near Lock Raven Reservoir. About midnight, Phillip Small and Alvin Cohen, Baltimore residents, sighted an enormous "egg-shaped" object hovering above a bridge. They estimated its length to be at least 100 feet. As they neared toe bridge, they reported, their car lights went out, then their engine stopped.

As the men climbed out, they felt an intense heat from the object. They watched it 45 seconds, then it shot straight up, with "a thunderous noise." They notified Baltimore County police, who immediately called the AF Office of Special Investigation. Because of the reported electrical interference ,and a burned area on Cohen's face, Air Research and Development experts were also called in. This ARDC development was uncovered by NICAP Special Adviser Lou Corbin, who is News Director of Station WFBR. Checking with nearby Andrews AF Base, Corbin also was given the long-withheld 1955 UFO case by a veteran AF pilot who believes the facts should be told. (Though his name and rank are known to NICAP, we have promised Adviser Corbin not to disclose the officer's identity.)In 1955, stated this AF pilot, while flying in Alabama, he and five competent witnesses chased a UFO similar to the one seen at Baltimore. Amon the witnesses as a Lockheed Aircraft representative and a jet engineering expert. All five drew up reports agreeing they hand pursued a solid object of "considerable size" which they believed was intelligently controlled.

"Don't let anyone fool you," the officer told Corbin. "That object did not come from earth. The case has never been solved by the Air Force. And I've every reason to believe it was the same kind as in the Baltimore case.

"Though Mr. Cohen has not admitted taking a radiation-exposure test, NCIAP has reason to believe the AF has arranged such a test.

The heating effects described in the Baltimore Oct. 27 case lend special interest to an earlier report just sent us from South America, which follows.

UNCONFIRMED NEWSCASTS LINK UFO WITH MOON ROCKET

In at least two radio newscasts, an unidentified flying object was reported as hovering over Cape Canaveral just before the ill-fated moon rocket "Pioneer" was launched on Oct. 10. In one broadcast, reported by several NICAP members in Washington, the announcer was quoted as saying "maybe the moon rocket will have company." A similar broadcast was reported by members in the Baltimore area.

NICAP is till checking, though it has found no confirmation of the broadcast reports. If other members heard such newscasts, or read similar news reports, please write us. It is important to prove these reports true or false. There are increasing rumors that UFOs have destroyed some of our rockets, or forced them off course. If such claims have any foundation, this will vitally affect the UFO situation. If they are false, they should be vigorously denied to prevent new ridicule of UFO investigations.

PILOT FEELS INTENSE HEAT FROM HOVERING UFOA bright silvery UFO, hovering over Uruguay on May 5, 1958, created such intense heat in the cabin of a plane that the pilot was forced to open the windows and door, and remove his jacket.

Carlos Alejo Rodriguez, flying his Piper aircraft from San Carlos to Montevideo, saw the brilliant object approach on an easterly course and apparently stop, wobbling slightly. Rodriguez, an experienced pilot and parachute instructor, closed to within 800 yards and saw a metallic-appearing "top-shaped" object, its form symmetrical above and below. Then, as the object took off at fantastic speed south toward the sea, intense heat filled the cabin of the plane. A slight vapor-like trail was noted though both the UFO and the plane were only at about 3000 feet altitude. A team of investigators for C.I.O.V.I. UFO group in Uruguay, who submitted this report to NICAP, said that Rodriguez had always been skeptical about UFOs. After this experience, however, he reported the incident to the Director of Aeronautics and Air Force authorities. Later he described it publicly over the radio.

Rodriguez said that the head from the object caused him to "sweat profusely." The outside temperature was only about 77° F. He estimated that the object, which was hovering in the vicinity of a Naval Air Base was about 50-60 feet in diameter.

The current sighting increase coincides with Mars' 1958 approach to Earth, though it does not prove a definite connection. Beginning with '48, every Mars opposition (at 26-month intervals) has been accompanied by increased UFO sightings, usually noted two or more months before and after the opposition. This time, the first spurt of sightings, in August, came in our northeast states, with a later concentration in the midwest. (Mars will be closest in early November.) Here is a digest of several sightings during the present "flap".

Aug. 11, Chautauqua Lake, N.Y. Between 9:15 and 10:30 pm Dr. Fred C. Fair, a retired professor of engineering, observed several inexplicable lights in the sky. On two occasions he saw groups of lights in roughly geometrical patterns. In the last of these sightings, Dr. Fair noted a white light rapidly moving north. Through a transit telescope the object appeared as five white lights spaced "as though on circumference of an oval." A red light was visible above and slightly to the rear of the white lights. Dr. Fair followed the object with the telescope until it disappeared behind some nearby trees.

Aug. 24, Brook, Ind. Theater manager Henry Hermansen and his cashier, Mrs. Ethel Tinder, at about 6:45 pm saw a brightly-lighted object "like a pie plate sailing through the air on its rim." It moved "very fast" toward the NE, then suddenly changed direction and disappeared toward the SE. Mr. Hermansen's description of the object recalls the 1947 reports which gave rise to the name "flying saucer."

Sept. 8; Omaha, Nebr. A NICAP member who is an Air Force Reserve officer has reported that he and several high-ranking officers sighted a huge "pencil-shaped" UFO in the western sky at 6:40 pm. They watched it for about 20 minutes. More details are expected. Observers in California next day reported a long, rocket-like object with an orange flame-tail.

Sept. 21; Sheffield Lake, Ohio. A brilliant light at 3:00 am attracted Mrs. Wm. Fitzgerald and her son Johnto their windows. From separate rooms they watched a disc-shaped object descend, with a slight side-to-side oscillation, low over a neighbor's lot. The object, flat and circular with a dome in the center, was illuminated by glowing gas which came out of "tubes" on one edge. Both witnesses heard a humming and whirring noise. After maneuvering around above the lot, the object ascended vertically.

We are indebted to Robert J. Durant, NICAP member in Lorain, Ohio, for his report of the incident.

Oct. 3; Stephensberg, Ky. Four Hardin County residents - Mrs. Harvey DeVore, Miss Ella Sutzer, Mr. Leslie Sutzer, and Mr. Alvin Duncan - reported seeing a UFO at about 6 am in a field 500 yards away. It was silvery, and had stubby protrusions which were seen to move. As Mr. Sutzer approached, the object took off, moved and hovered about 4 feet off the ground, then flew away. In the air, it appeared cone-shaped. It made no sound. Where the object had touched, the grass was said to be mashed, with markings visible. Fort Knox said that it knew of no military equipment in the area. The U.S. Weather Bureau could not account for the object.

Oct. 8; Newark, Ohio. For the second time in less than a month, formations of odd lights maneuvering over Newark were reported by police officers H. E. Sherburn and T. H. Francis. In mid-September, they reported similar white, red, and green lights hovering and performing erratically over the city. Sherburn, an Air Force veteran, said the lights were arranged in a crescent. (See the Aug. 11 report by Dr. Fair.) Sherburn was "certain" the lights were not on conventional aircraft.

Oct. 12; Aurora Ill. Between 9:50 and 10:15 pm DuPage County police officers saw brightly-lighted golden UFOs from several viewpoints in the Aurora area. Shortly thereafter, a patrol car in Lisle spotted the objects moving southeast over DuPage County. The patrol-men said the objects were well-lighted and had "spotlights" turned toward the ground. Other patrol cars confirmed the report. At 10:10 pm the Aurora police called the sheriff's office to report seeing similar objects headed southeast over Batavia. DuPage County Deputy Sheriff Jack Adams said he saw three objects near Batavia, one brighter than the others. Officials at O'Hare AFB were then notified, and jets apparently in pursuit, were heard shortly afterward. When questioned by the Aurora Beacon-News O'Hare officials refused comment.

Oct. 14; Aurora, Ill. For three consecutive nights, residents in Aurora, Wheaton, and Glen Ellyn watched brilliantly lighted objects maneuvering through the skies. Many witnesses, including police officers, saw four "incredibly bright" objects over Aurora between 8:39 and 8:45 pm. The objects then took off eastward over DuPage county in perfect formation. As the UFOs moved, their color changed from intense white to a dazzling gold.

DuPage County Deputy Louis Parreant attempted to follow one of the objects in a squad car near Downers Grove, but it soon left him behind. Another deputy, Melvin Lowe, said he saw one of the UFOs rise straight up and vanish after hovering about 1000 feet off the ground. (Allan Etzler, a former Army radar operator for guided missiles, recently told NICAP investigators that on Oct. 10 he had seen a large round glowing object hover about 60 feet over a field in Laytonsville Md. He said the watched it about 8-10 seconds when it suddenly shot straight up.)

NICAP ANNOUNCES NEW PROGRAMA new plan to speed of UFO investigations, through local committees of scientists, engineers, pilots and other experts, is now being set up by NICAP. With such committees established throughout the U.S. and all countries outside the Iron Curtain, a mass of scientifically evaluated headquarters for release to our members and Congress.

The new system, suggested by Associate Editor Richard H. Hall, will not only offset the scarcity of UFO reports in the press, but should make possible valid conclusions about several points including:

Any correlation with A-bomb tests.

Sighting cycles linked with Mars or Venus approaches to the earth.

Specific areas apparently under special UFO observation.

Any correlation with launchings of satellites, moon probes or other space rockets.

The question of possible UFO links with certain aircraft accidents and disappearances.

Reports of strange radio signals, suggested as linked with space craft.

Reports of UFO interference with radio, television, engine ignitions and other electrical systems.

Here is how the plan will work. Let's say a UFO sighting occurs near City A, in the midwest. The report may be published or broadcast locally, with no national pickup. The chairman of the local NICAP subcommittee will arrange for interviews (taped if possible) with key witnesses. If a photo was taken, the subcommittee will ask to examine the negative. Information will be collected on the time, weather, lighting conditions, UFO maneuvers, other aircraft involved (as in a jet chase) etc.

The group's astronomer will see if there is any astronomical answer, and its meterologist will check such "weather answers" as temperature inversions or sundogs. A subcommittee pilot, or other aviation expert, will check possible mistaken identification of a plane or balloon. If no conventional answer is found, the group will evaluate the evidence, reach a conclusion if possible, and forward a report to NICAP.

Where there is no conclusion, or there are unsettled questions, final evaluation will be made by NICAP Special Advisers or Board Members or both. Final conclusions and key points will then be given to the membership and appropriate groups in Congress. In press releases, the full credit will be given to the subcommittees; also, local publicity by subcommittees will be recommended, via newspapers and broadcasts.

This system requires that highly trained NCIAP members volunteer their services -- men and women expert in astronomy, photography, aviation (including aviation medicine), electronics, rocketry, meterology etc. Fortunately, NCIAP has members in all these fields, also analysis specialists, researchers, detectives and former Intelligence men. Some have already volunteered, and probably many others, both American and foreign, will help if the working time involved is not too great.

Where enough specially trained members are not available, subcommittees may secure the help of non-member experts interested in the UFO problem. A subcommittee member can keep such service confidential, though the use of the experts' names will be of value when the reports are made public. Special subcommittees may analyze individual problems, such as propulsion methods, artificial gravity and the "angels hair" reports. The system may be broadened to cover non-technical questions such as religious aspects, general publicity, approaches to Congress, etc., in which members without technical training could participate.

Meantime, all NICAP members can help by reporting sightings and other technical UFO information to local subcommittees. (Names, addresses, to be listed.) The Washington, D.C. subcommittee is already partly formed, and we are working to start others quickly. Whether you live in the U.S. or abroad, if you have special training, as indicated, we hope you will help form a local subcommittee. The only other provision is that you accept NICAP's policy of factual approach. If you volunteer, please list your special qualifications and whether you have access to a laboratory or other analysis equipment. We will be glad to have suggestions from all members regarding this new plan.

---------

Note: The Chicago Daily News said on October 14th that Air Force B-47 jet bombers in a 3:00 am SAC exercise were responsible for at least one "flying saucer" report in Chicago. No explanation was offered for the sightings of the previous nights.

Oct. 14; Indiana. Residents in south-central Indiana reported sighting UFOs in pre-dawn hours. Police discussed the reports on police radio and confirmed sightings in Columbus, Franklin, Greensburg, Greenwood, and Indianapolis.

Oct. 15; Southeast U.S. The Civil Aeronautics Administration control office in Atlanta, Ga., asked if the AF to investigate a "strange flying object" seen over several southeaster states. the CAA said airline pilots had seen the object, one estimating its altitude at 65,000 feet. Citizens in North and South Carolina, and other states, said the object was very large and appeared triangular in shape.

Early on the morning of Sept. 29, 1958, a UFO sighting was officially reported at the Army's Nike missile base, dear Derwood, Md. Later, news and radio reports from Maryland and other states indicated that a firey object seen by hundreds at the same time was a disintegrating meteor. On-the-spot investigations by a NICAP team confirm this. But because of the contradictory official answers given the press - one of them known to be false at the time, as NICAP can prove - a detailed account will be given. The Nike story, kept quiet for a week, broke on Oct. 6 in the Jersey Journal, which ran an interview with Pvt. Jerome Scanlon, one of the Nike base witnesses. According to the news story, Scanlon and a Sgt. Riney Farris had seen a "cigar-shaped craft" land and take off near the base. A scorched strip a half-mile long was said to have been found where the object landed.

An Associated Press query led to an Army news release at Ft. Meade, Md., confirming the two soldiers' report and adding that 12 investigatiors (later revealed as AF) had quizzed them and searched the area.

A NICAP team - Assoc. Ed. Richard Hall and Washington members Richard Lechaux and Samuel Coe - made three trips to Derwood, interviewed Sgt. Farris, two other Army witnesses, the Nike duty officer, and area citizens. The team also mapped and photographed the area. No scorched area or signs or a landing were found, though the rough, hilly terrain prevented a complete search.

In addition, NY member Ted Bloecher (a CSI officers) reached Pvt. Scanlon, on leave at Jersey City, quizzed him for 45 minutes. Scanlon had not seen the object take off, or even land, but merely saw it pass behind trees. This tallied with Sgt. Farris' statement to NICAP; he had merely seen the object flash overhead. But it added a puzzle: why had the Ft. Meade news release gone along with the landing and take-off story?

Soon after, a new puzzle was added by NICAP Adviser Lou Corbin, radio news director at Baltimore, in an exclusive interview with Lt. Richard Platt, Nike base duty officer who also saw the fiery object. Platt did not see a landing, but insisted he saw a strange glow where the object was supposed to have landed. He said he watched it 45 minutes, saw the pulsating glow alternate from greenish white to orange. (the AF later said a helicopter search found no trace of such an object's presence.) Reports from astronomers and others in states as far as Ohio and Kentucky, and an analysis by NICAP Adviser Jas. C. Bartlett, Jr., strongly backed the meteor answer. But instead of using this answer, the AF hastily rushed out a typical debunking story, claiming solution of over 98% of UFO sightings. (This may have been caused by uneasiness over the sightings increase and the possible Mars link.)

Immediately afterward, the AF put out a news story "solving" the Nike report. The Nike men, it said, had been misled by the reflection of arc-welders' torches as Potomac Electric Power Co. (PEPCO) men worked on nearby high-tension lines. A NICAP check proved this untrue, and obviously known to be false when released. At PEPCO, a spokesman told NICAP this was impossible and the AF knew it. A Capt. Maxwell at Andrews Field, said the PEPCO official, had tried to establish this answer; he had been told that no PEPCO men worked at that hour (5:30 am) and none had been in the area. A NICAP call to Capt. Maxwell resulted in a prompt refusal to comment, because of Air Force Reg. 200-2.The PEPCO spokesman also told NICAP that Newsweek had called and had been given the facts. (Later, Newsweek cited an AF explaination that the Nike men had seen a 200-watt lamp on a distant barn; no mention was made of the false arc-welder answer. Lt. Platt, informed of the barn-lamp story, flatly said it was impossible.)

What Platt saw is unknown. One suggestion is that there was another object beside the meteor, or that a fragment of the meteor fell from the meteor and started a fire. Lt. Platt denies the glow as an ordinary flame. Regardless of this unexplained angle, the case is important. Again, the AF UFO policy is clearly revealed: hurried debunking of any news report, even to planting of a false answer - and, simultaneously, serious investigation by Intelligence teams, behind the scenes.

Reprint of Issue No. 1

In response to frequent requests, we have arranged to reprint Issue 1 of the UFO INVESTIGATOR. This contains 32 pages of still timely information, including several unexplained UFO cases: A CAA radar report of UFOs flying at 3600 mph., two important sightings by former Navy pilots, the Pan American Airways UFO incident of March, 1957, which the Civil Aeronautics Board says is still unsolved, and other authentic UFO reports. Issue NO. 1 also contains a flying saucer history installment, options by Board members, an 8-point cooperation plan offered the Air Force and full details of NCIAP's policy on "contact" claims. If you wish Issue No. 1, please send your check for $1.00 and it will be mailed postpaid in a 9 by 11 inch manila envelope. Also please indicate whether you are interested in ordering copies of Issues 2 and 3 (each containing 32 pages of important information). If there are enough requests, we shall reprint either issue or both, at the same price of $1.00 each.

MAJORITY BACKS NICAP

Though the ballots are still coming in, the votes received indicate that over 90% of our members back NCIAP's policies, as stated in the Aug.-Sept. issue.

Question 1. Should NICAP keep trying to end secrecy about UFOs? Yes, 98.9%. Yes, 1.1%

Question 2. Do you think NICAP is a smokescreen, an AF cover-up? No, 99%. Yes, 1%

Question 3. Do you agree with NICAP's policy on contact stories? Yes. 89.14%. No, 10.86% Apparently, from comments on several ballots, some voting "no" believed NICAP meant to ignore all contact reports. This is not correct; NICAP is steadily collecting such reports and will evaluate them after its stated first goals are reached. (See discussion of p. 7, Aug.-Sept. issue.) Possibly the new NICAP committee system (which see) will expedite examination of contact claims.

Question 4. Do you vote for re-election of the Board of Governors until Oct. 1, 1959? Yes, 98.32%. No, 1.68%

Question 5. Will you do everything possible to promote NICAP, secure new members and end the financial crisis? Yes, 99.3%. No, .07%

We greatly appreciate our members' vote of confidence, also ballot suggestions indicating a majority desire for:

1. More UFO sighting reports.

2. Digest treatment of news items, to cover more subjects.

3. More discussion of possible UFO sources, motives, types of beings.

4. A question-and-answer section in the magazine.

These ideas will be carried out as fully as space permits.If you have not yet voted, please mail your ballot - and your suggestions for improving our publications.

Several members have suggested NICAP memberships as Christmas gifts. If you wish, we will enclose your personal Christmas card with a NICAP memebership card and the current publication - or we will forward a NCIAP signed Christmas gift notice, if you prefer.

----Washington Meeting Scheduled

A meeting of NICAP members in the Washington area has been set for 7:45 pm, Saturday Nov. 15 at the auditorium of the Washington Post and Times Herald Building, 1515 L St. NW. After a 10 minute report by NICAP's Director, the meeting will be thrown open for questions and answers and general discussion of the UFO problem and NCIAP's operations. Out-of-town members in Washington at the time are cordially invited to attend. Please show your NICAP card at the door.----

If by error you receive NICAP literature for prospective members, please pass it on to a friend or to your local library.

JUSTICE DEPT. HUNTING

"Straith" Hoaxer

The State Dept. has informed NICAP that the Dept. of Justice is investigating the so-called "Straith Case," in which a hoax letter on State Dept. letterhead was written to Mr. George Adamski. NICAP believes it knows the identity of the hoaxer and has given the State Dept. another letter apparently written on the same typewriter and maliciously aimed at an officer of Civilian Saucer Intelligence, N.Y. Mr. Lonzo Dove, a NICAP member, also has loaned Government investigators several letters written to him on the same typewriter and signed by the supposed hoaxer, a man well known in UFO investigation.

The "Straith" letter, widely publicized by Adamski, implied State Dept. endorsement of his claims to contact with spacemen. NICAP has been given an official copy of a State Dept. letter sent Adamski by Acting Depty Ass't. Secretary Jameson Parker, which flatly denies Adamski's claims about the hoax document.

"As you have been told orally, this is a spurious letter," Secretary Parker wrote Adamski. "Neither is there an R.E. Straith connected with the Department of State nor is there any record of any person of that name having been an employee of the Department.

"Secretary Parker also said there never has been a "Cultural Exchange Committee" in the Department, as the "Straith" hoaxer claimed. Referring to the Department letterhead used by the hoaxer, Secretary Parker added:

"This stationery has the seal impressed at the time of manufacture, not at the time of mailing. That is, the seal is placed on blank paper, and any person who had access to supplies of this paper would be in a position to misappropriate it and to write an unauthorized letter such as the one in your possession."

Secretary Parker then officially cautioned Adamski not to keep on claiming the "Straith" letter was genuine:

"I should appreciate your informing all who inquire about this letter that is spurious, and request that you cease distributing copies of it."

If Adamski persists, legal action may be taken.

NICAP hopes the State or Justice Dept. will publicly expose the hoaxer and remove one of the troublemakers in UFO investigation. IF not, NICAP will do everything legally possible to reveal his identity.

FRY WITHHOLDS DATA ASKED FOR NICAP ANALYSIS

To date, Mr. Daniel Fry has failed to send the data requested by NICAP regarding a small round object Fry offered for analysis. No UFO link is claimed by Fry, nor does he reveal where he got it.

NICAP PROGRESS REPORT

Thanks to those members who quickly renewed, or who generously sent us contributions, the danger of suspending operations has been averted. We have tried to thank all of these members personally; if anyone was overlooked, please forgive the error.

Thus far, this life-saving help has been limited to about 9% of the members. However, we have not had time to hear from all areas, because of the slower third-class mail delivery of Issue 5. Not everyone can make donations, of course. But everyone can try to get us new members. We must have continued support, through renewals or new memberships every month, to operate on schedule. We urgently need more full-time office workers; though several Washington members have kindly volunteered to help in their spare time, our correspondence and editorial work are still accumulating.

Prompt help by 9% of NICAP's membership has kept us from disaster. If each of the others - or most of them - will get us one new member, our financial problem will be licked. Investigations, editing and other work will be speeded up, along with liaison with Congress and other important projects. More information will reach NICAP members; publications can be enlarged, or printed more frequently.

Please do all you can do promote NCIAP. Urge your public libraries to subscribe to NCIAP publications. Send us the names of interested friends. Send us the names of interested friends - or write us for membership blanks. Another helpful step is to ask your local broadcasting stations and newspapers to mention NICAP's work; many are glad to interview NICAP members. You can write letters to editors, quoting key items from our publications, names of Board members and Advisers, and giving NICAP's address.

A new NICAP, operating at full speed, is bound to have a strong impact on Congress, press and public. We believe we can end the secrecy, given full membership backing. Please help us reach this goal.

CORRECTION OF MOSELEY STATEMENT

In his latest UFO publication, James W. Moseley quote NICAP's director as saying he had "fired" Mrs. R. H. Campbell and Mrs. Bessie M. Clark. As Associate Editor Richard Hall will testify, Mr. Moseley was told specifically that Mrs. Campbell had resigned and had planned to have Mrs. Clark assist her in other work. Mr. Moseley has been asked to retract this statement.

Mr. D. W. Opperman, editor, the Olympic Review, says he will gladly correct the NICAP membership statement he attributed to Mrs. Campbell, that we had 35,000 members. We wish this were true. She evidently said NICAP had about 3500 members, and the actual number is some 3200. We thank Mr. Opperman for the correction.

FOUR HUGE UFOS PACE FREIGHT TRAINA freight train southbound on the Monon Railroad in Clinton County, central Indiana, was paced by four glowing UFOs for over an hour early Friday October 3, 1958. All five of the crew saw the objects, which stayed with the train for 40 miles between Rossville and Kirklin. The objects, glowing white at high speeds and red-orange at lower speeds, dipped low over the train and maeuvered in formation.

Fireman Cecil Bridge, a former Air Force bomber crewman, and Engineer Harry Eckman first spotted a formation of 4 odd white lights crossing the tracks ahead of them at about 3:10 am. The lights turned down to about 200-300 feet, and traversed the full length of the train (about one-half mile.) The crew in the caboose, notified by the intercom, then saw the objects wheel east in formation and turn back to follow the train.

Conductor Ed Robinson at one point shone a powerful flashlight on the objects, which immediately flew away, returning a few minutes later. Finally, after maneuvering around the train for an hour and ten minutes, the UFOs moved off to the northeast and disappeared.

Robinson said the UFOs flew and tree-top level part of the time, and appeared to be about 40 feet in diameter and 8 to 10 feet thick. At times, they flew in a vertical position, and occasionally sped up approaching the caboose. No definite configuration could be discerned through the bright glow.

That night, on WTTV, Bridge and Robinson described the incident to Frank Edwards, NICAP Board Member in Indianapolis, who relayed it to NICAP. Brakeman Morris Ott and Flagman Paul Soshey also saw the objects and agreed with the descriptions given by other crew members.

About 50-60 miles west of the Monon Line, a New York Central Railroad engineer in the railroad yard near Danville, Illinois, reported seeing blinding blue-white objects in the eastern sky between 3:00 and 5:00 am that same morning.

REASONS FOR FIRST CLASS MAILING

Though it is considerably more expensive, we are sending this bulletin by first class mail. We hope this will make up for the unexpected delay, in some areas, of issue No. 5, which went third-class. Also, this should speed up organization of the new local subcommittees, and prompt news of the current sighting "flap" may help members interest other persons in joining NICAP. Even though we will have to go back to third-class mailing for the next issue (an approximate saving of $150 in postage, envelope, and stuffing costs) the interval will not be so great because of this special first class mailing.

#NICAP #MUFON #UFOS #UFO sighting #aliens

0 notes

ladystylestores · 4 years

Text

Russia coronavirus: Ahead of Victory Day, nation reopens — but threat remains