Hereinafter is a consideration of a report prepared by the Center for the Study of Intelligence – Central Intelligence Agency, “CIA’s Role in the Study of UFOs, 1947-90,” Studies in Intelligence, Volume 40, No. 5, Semiannual Edition, 1997, No. 1, authored by Gerald K. Haines. You will find endnote numbers along the way but I will reproduce all end notes even the ones to statements I do not quote for the sake of anyone who want to follow up in more depth.
And you gotta love it when the CIA investigates the CIA.
This investigation goes from a consideration of the UFOs themselves to public relations to psychological warfare and much more.
Many are convinced that the US Government, and particularly CIA, are engaged in a massive conspiracy and coverup of the issue. The idea that CIA has secretly concealed its research into UFOs has been a major theme of UFO buffs since the modern UFO phenomena emerged in the late 1940s.
CIA records compiled from the late 1993 DCI R. James Woolsey review of all Agency files on UFOs from the late 1940s to 1990
What emerges from this examination is that, while Agency concern over UFOs was substantial until the early 1950s, CIA has since paid only limited and peripheral attention to the phenomena.
“the first wave of UFO sightings. The first report of a ‘flying saucer’ over the United States came on 24 June 1947” by Kenneth Arnold, near Mt. Rainier, Washington. This was “followed by a flood of additional sightings, including reports from military and civilian pilots and air traffic controllers all over the
“In 1948, Air Force Gen. Nathan Twining, head of the Air Technical Service Command, established Project SIGN (initially named Project SAUCER) to collect, collate, evaluate, and distribute within the government all information relating to such sightings, on the premise that UFOs might be real and of national security concern.”
The Technical Intelligence Division of the Air Material Command (AMC) at Wright Field (later Wright-Patterson Air Force Base) in Dayton, Ohio, assumed control of Project SIGN and began its work on 23 January 1948. Although at first fearful that the objects might be Soviet secret weapons, the Air Force soon concluded that UFOs were real but easily explained and not extraordinary.
The Air Force report found that almost all sightings stemmed from one or more of three causes: mass hysteria and hallucination, hoax, or misinterpretation of known objects. Nevertheless, the report recommended continued military intelligence control over the investigation of all sightings and did not rule out the possibility of extraterrestrial phenomena.
Shifting to weaponized public relations, we are told that “in the late 1940s…a new project, GRUDGE…tried to alleviate public anxiety over UFOs via a public relations campaign designed to persuade the public that UFOs constituted nothing unusual or extraordinary.” The statement following directly is that “UFO sightings were explained as balloons, conventional aircraft, planets, meteors, optical illusions, solar reflections, or even ‘large hailstones.’” Certainly, UFO sightings could be any of these however, this is being stated within the context of biasedly seeking to “alleviate public anxiety” so as to “persuade the public” so that there is a difference between “UFO sightings were explained as…” and “UFO sightings were explained away as…”
Thus, when “GRUDGE officials found no evidence in UFO sightings of advanced foreign weapons design or development, and they concluded that UFOs did not threaten US security” so that we have to wonder if “found no evidence” means “found no evidence” or whether “found no evidence” means claimed to have “found no evidence” due to the goal of alleviating public anxiety via persuading the public that they “found no evidence.”
“USAF Director of Intelligence Maj. Gen. Charles P. Cabell ordered a new UFO project in 1952. Project BLUE BOOK became the major Air Force effort to study the UFO phenomenon throughout the 1950s and 1960s.”
Admitting bias again, and I will emphasize for emphasis, “the Air Technical Intelligence Center (ATIC) tried to persuade the public that UFOs were not extraordinary.”
And, actually, “Projects SIGN, GRUDGE, and BLUE BOOK set the tone for the official US Government position regarding UFOs for the next 30 years.”
And so we come to “Early CIA Concerns, 1947-52.”
CIA “officials accepted the Air Force’s conclusions about UFO reports, although they concluded that ‘since there is a remote possibility that they may be interplanetary aircraft, it is necessary to investigate each sighting.’”
Image from the CIA report
On 19 and 20 July, radar scopes at Washington National Airport and Andrews Air Force Base tracked mysterious blips. On 27 July, the blips reappeared. The Air Force scrambled interceptor aircraft to investigate, but they found nothing…a Civil Aeronautics Administration investigation confirmed that such radar blips were quite common and were caused by temperature inversions.
The CIA established the Office of Scientific Intelligence (OSI) and the Office of Current Intelligence (OCI) sometime after deciding to investigate each sighting which makes sense but we cannot discount the fact that this would be a way for government employees to gets lots of funding for a long range project.
Indeed and of course, discussions ensued regarding “how much more money and manpower would be necessary to determine the cause of the small percentage of unexplained flying saucers.”
Nothing to see here continued with “Edward Tauss, acting chief of OSI’s Weapons and Equipment Division, reported for the group that most UFO sightings could be easily explained” which, again, may be perfectly accurate but cannot be removed from the above referenced PR context.
In any case, (follow even more money) “he recommended that the Agency continue monitoring the problem, in coordination with ATIC” and “urged that CIA conceal its interest from the media and the public, ‘in view of their probable alarmist tendencies’ to accept such interest as confirming the existence of UFOs” yet, “This concealment of CIA interest contributed greatly to later charges of a CIA conspiracy and coverup.”
Then “Deputy Director for Intelligence (DDI) Robert Amory, Jr. assigned responsibility for the UFO investigations to OSI’s Physics and Electronics Division, with A. Ray Gordon as the officer in charge…Amory, who asked the group to focus on the national security implications of UFOs, was relaying DCI Walter Bedell Smith’s concerns…Smith believed ‘there was only one chance in 10,000 that the phenomenon posed a threat to the security of the country.’”[14 & 17]
A most interesting aspect of all of this is that “Smith also wanted to know what use could be made of the UFO phenomenon in connection with US psychological warfare efforts.”
Also in terms of PSYOPS, the CIA found no Soviet press reports of UFOs which led them to “conclude that the absence of reports had to have been the result of deliberate Soviet Government policy” and the CIA “envisioned the USSR’s possible use of UFOs as a psychological warfare tool.”
Thus, this goes from aliens to practical warfare as the CIA “believed that the Soviets could use UFO reports to touch off mass hysteria and panic in the
United States. The group also believed that the Soviets might use UFO sightings to overload the US air warning system so that it could not distinguish real targets from phantom UFOs.”
With regards to the aforementioned “the small percentage,” the Air Force claimed that “90 percent of the reported sightings were easily accounted for. The other 10 percent were characterized as ‘a number of incredible reports from credible observers.’ The Air Force rejected the theories that the sightings involved US or Soviet secret weapons development or that they involved ‘men from Mars’; there was no evidence to support these concepts.”
However, that people began reporting black triangular UFOs and then the existence of the Stealth Fighter was disclosed is evidence for reports of UFOs crossing over into the issue of US secret weapons—but the US gov would not want to reveal this, of course.
Thus, “The Air Force briefers sought to explain these UFO reports as the misinterpretation of known objects or little understood natural phenomena” which, again and again, is reasonable but may also be diversionary.
However, H. Marshall Chadwell, Assistant Director of OSI “briefed DCI Smith on the subject of UFOs in December 1952” wherein he urged “immediate attention” due to that “sightings of unexplained objects at great altitudes and traveling at high speeds in the vicinity of major US defense installations are of such nature that they are not attributable to natural phenomena or known types of aerial vehicles.”
Ultimately, this led to “The Robertson Panel, 1952-53” whereby “Maj. Gen. John A. Samford, Director of Air Force Intelligence, offered full cooperation” with regards that “selected scientists to review and appraise the available evidence in the light of pertinent scientific theories.”
In the meanwhile, Chadwell also found out that “the British also were active in studying the UFO phenomena. An eminent British scientist, R. V. Jones, headed a standing committee created in June 1951 on flying saucers…conclusions on UFOs were similar to those of Agency officials: the sightings were not enemy aircraft but misrepresentations of natural phenomena.”
Yet, “RAF pilots and senior military officials had observed a ‘perfect flying saucer.’”
“In January 1953…a distinguished panel of nonmilitary scientists” concluded after “spending 12 hours studying the phenomena”—wow, almost two entire workdays! ;o)—that “that reasonable explanations could be suggested for most, if not all, sightings.”
But what, you ask, are “reasonable explanations”? Well, from a Tremonton, Utah video of a UFO from July 2, 1952 “the panel concluded that the images on the Tremonton film were caused by sun light reflecting off seagulls.”
The overall conclusion was that they found no “evidence that the objects sighted might be extraterrestrials.” But on a socio-political note they “did find that continued emphasis on UFO reporting might threaten ‘the orderly functioning’ of the government by clogging the channels of communication with irrelevant reports and by inducing ‘hysterical mass behavior’ harmful to constituted authority.” Along the lines of the appealing to the phenomena, there was concern that “enemies contemplating an attack on the United States might exploit the UFO phenomena and use them to disrupt US air defenses.”
Another instance of bias come in to play when “To meet these problems, the panel recommended that the National Security Council debunk UFO reports and institute a policy of public education to reassure the public of the lack of evidence behind UFOs.” Specifically, we are told that the group “suggested using the mass media, advertising, business clubs, schools, and even the Disney corporation to get the message across.”
The CIA report then notes that “All investigative groups found that UFO reports indicated no direct threat to national security and no evidence of visits by extraterrestrials” but they fail to emphasize that part of why the latter conclusion is the case was PR and PSYOPS bias propaganda.
At this point, I will point out that I personally do not hold to a view that alien extraterrestrials are visiting us from other parts of the universe. My point has been that statements such as the latter above were, in part, due to putting forth the argument from authority to the affect that well, since really smart people say there’s nothing to see here then, I believe it, that settles it, and anyone who disagrees is wacky.
Following the timeline: the CIA “abandoned efforts to draft an NSCID [national security council intelligence directive] on UFOs.”
The Robertson “Scientific Advisory Panel” “submitted its report to the IAG, the Secretary of Defense, the Director of the Federal Civil Defense Administration, and the Chairman of the National Security Resources Board” to the affect that “no further consideration of the subject appeared warranted.”
“Philip Strong and Fred Durant from OSI also briefed the Office of National Estimates on the findings.”
They also took the concept of there’s nothing to see here literally and proved that the aforementioned view that the CIA “are engaged in a massive conspiracy and coverup” is not a mere conspiracy theory but a conspiracy fact as the report notes, “CIA officials wanted knowledge of any Agency interest in the subject of flying saucers carefully restricted, noting not only that the Robertson panel report was classified but also that any mention of CIA sponsorship of the panel was forbidden.” Not surprisingly, “This attitude would later cause the Agency major problems relating to its credibility.”
Following that Robertson panel report, Chadwell passed the UFO buck to OSI’s Physics and Electronic Division (in May 1953), then Todos M. Odarenko, chief of the Physics and Electronics Division “did not want to take on the problem” citing that it would take up “too much of his division’s analytic and clerical time,” and “Neither the Navy nor the Army showed much interest in UFOs, according to Odarenko” who by 1955 wanted “the entire project be terminated.”
However, something else was afoot at this time and Chadwell, et al., and other Agency officials were concerns due to “overseas [“over eastern Europe and Afghanistan”] reports of UFO sightings and claims that German engineers held by the Soviets were developing a ‘flying saucer’ as a future weapon of war…the
British and Canadians were already experimenting with ‘flying saucers.’”
But so was the US, “Project Y was a Canadian-British-US developmental operation to produce a nonconventional flying-saucer-type aircraft.”
US Senator Richard Russell personally had a “flying saucer sighting…while traveling on a train in the USSR in October 1955…however, CIA officials concluded that Russell’s sighting did not support the theory that the Soviets had developed saucerlike or unconventional aircraft.”
Back to the US’s own project, November 1954 saw the emergence of the CIA “U-2 overhead reconnaissance project. Working with Lockheed’s Advanced Development facility in Burbank, California, known as the Skunk Works, and Kelly Johnson, an eminent aeronautical engineer.”
At the time, “most commercial airliners flew between 10,000 feet and 20,000 feet” but the U-2 “could fly at 60,000 feet.”
These secret tests led to that “in the mid-1950s…commercial pilots and air traffic controllers began reporting a large increase in UFO sightings. The early U-2s were silver (they were later painted black) and reflected the rays from the sun, especially at sunrise sun rise and sunset. They often appeared as fiery objects to observers below.”
Well, at least it was not a flock of seagulls this time. However, recall that at one time “The Air Force rejected the theories that the sightings involved US or Soviet secret weapons development.”
And this brings us back to biased PR propaganda as “Air Force BLUE BOOK investigators aware of the secret U-2 flights” would not, or could not due to secrecy, admit as much and so “tried to explain away such sightings by linking them to natural phenomena such as ice crystals and temperature inversions.”
Yet, “By checking with the Agency’s U-2 Project Staff in Washington, BLUE BOOK investigators were able to attribute many UFO sightings to U-2 flights. They were careful, however, not to reveal the true cause of the sighting to the public.” Thus, in this case, true sightings of true UFOs (literally flying objects that were unidentifiable by the general public) were dismissing as natural phenomena.
The conclusion is that “According to later estimates from CIA officials who worked on the U-2 project and the OXCART (SR-71, or Blackbird) project, over half of all UFO reports from the late 1950s through the I 960s were accounted for by manned reconnaissance flights.”
At least the CIA is honest enough at this point to not only admit this but emphasize it, “This led the Air Force to make misleading and deceptive statements to the public in order to allay public fears and to protect an extraordinarily sensitive national security project. While perhaps justified, this deception added fuel to the later conspiracy theories and the coverup controversy of the 1970s.”
By 1955 “The percentage of what the Air Force considered unexplained UFO sightings fell to 5.9…and to 4 percent in 1956.” But without being told how many reports this refers to we do not know how many sighting is represented by 5.9 or 4 percent.
Then, “In 1956, Edward Ruppelt, former head of the Air Force BLUE BOOK project, publicly revealed the existence of the panel. A best-selling book by UFOlogist Donald Keyhoe, a retired Marine Corps major, advocated release of all government information relating to UFOs.”
But the Robertson panel report had not yet been released and the Philip Strong, Deputy Assistant Director of OSI, “refused to declassify the report and declined to disclose CIA sponsorship of the panel” so the CIA “prepared a sanitized version of the report which deleted any reference to CIA and avoided mention of any psychological warfare potential in the UFO controversy.”
It is noted that “Dr. Leon Davidson, a chemical engineer and UFOlogist…had convinced himself that the Agency, not the Air Force, carried most of the responsibility for UFO analysis and that ‘the activities of the US Government are responsible for the flying saucer sightings of the last decade.’ Indeed, because of the undisclosed U-2 and OXCART flights, Davidson was closer to the truth than he suspected.”
Two examples are offered as to why the 1950s saw “a growing sense of public distrust of CIA with regard to UFOs.”
One was “reported to have been a tape recording of a radio signal [“radio code”] from a flying saucer; the other on reported photographs of a flying saucer.”
The former pertained to “two elderly sisters in Chicago, Mildred and Marie Maier” who in 1955 “reported in the Journal of Space Flight their experiences with UFOs…OSI became interested” and sought “a copy of the recording.”[52 & 53]
The field officers “reported that they had stumbled upon a scene from Arsenic and Old Lace” referring to a 1944 dark comedy film directed by Frank Capra “The plot revolves around the Brewster family of Brooklyn, New York, descended from the Mayflower and composed of illustrious ancestors whose portraits line the walls of the ancestral home. The religious theme is repeatedly mentioned, and Elaine is the daughter of the minister who lives next door, with some scenes held in its ancient cemetery. Today the Brewster clan comprises insane murderers.”[fn]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arsenic_and_Old_Lace_%28film%29[/fn]
Well, whatever the case may be, the agents set about “reviewing the sisters’ scrapbook of clippings from their days on the stage” which means they were used to PR stunts, and “OSI analyzed the tape and found it was nothing more than Morse code from a US radio station.”
Yet, in 1957, UFOlogist Leon Davidson was “demanding to learn what the coded message revealed” and an Air Force letter “confirmed that the recording contained only identifiable Morse code which came from a known US licensed radio station.”
A lot of shenanigans surrounded this otherwise simple issue due to that “The Agency had previously denied that it had actually analyzed the tape. The Air Force had also denied analyzing the tape and claimed that Walker was an Air Force officer” while he was really CIA and the CIA had “a CIA officer, again under cover and wearing his Air Force uniform” contacting Davidson the result of which, after much more of a run around, was that “the tape and the notes made at the time had been destroyed to conserve file space” which led to the report’s conclusion that “a minor, rather bizarre incident, handled poorly by both CIA and the Air Force, turned into a major flap that added fuel to the growing mystery surrounding UFOs and CIA’s role in their investigation.”
The latter case “added to the growing questions surrounding the Agency’s true role with regard to flying saucers. CIA’s concern over secrecy again made matters worse” when “In 1958, Major Keyhoe charged that the Agency was deliberately asking eyewitnesses of UFOs not to make their sightings public.”
This “stemmed from a November 1957 request from OSI to the CD to obtain from Ralph C. Mayher, a photographer for KYW TV in Cleveland, Ohio, certain photographs he took in 1952 of an unidentified flying object.”
Mayher supplied the photos to CD officer John Hazen, who ended up returning the photos “without comment,” so that Mayher requested follow up and the reply was that “Hazen stated that Mayher was a US citizen and would have to make his own decision as to what to do” which is a get away from me kid, you’re bother me tactic.
“Although CIA had a declining interest in UFO cases, it continued to monitor UFO sightings. Agency officials felt the need to keep informed on UFOs if only to alert the DCI to the more sensational UFO reports and flaps.”
During the 1960s, Davidson claimed that the CIA “was solely responsible for creating the Flying Saucer furor as a tool for cold war psychological warfare since 1951” which, in part, is accurate. By 1964 there were “high-level White House discussions on what to do if an alien intelligence was discovered.”
DCI John McCotie prompted “an updated CIA evaluation of UFOs” which led to the OSI asking the CD to gather recent sighting report from NICAP and Richard H. Hall, the NICAP’s then acting director, provided them. and Donald F. Chamberlain, OSI Assistant Director, “assured McCone that little had changed” with “still no evidence that UFOs were a threat to the security of the United States or that they were of ‘foreign origin’” even though there was some evidence of this.
It was established that the “OSI still monitored UFO reports, including the official Air Force investigation, Project BLUE BOOK” which, around that time, underwent an internal review by “a special ad hoc committee…Chaired by Dr. Brian O’Brien, a member of the Air Force Scientific Advisory Board, the panel included Carl Sagan…Its report offered nothing new.”
The conclusions were that “UFOs did not threaten the national security and that it could find ‘no UFO case which represented technological or scientific advances outside of a terrestrial framework’” which is being stated by people in the know: that is, people with knowledge of conventional and secret tech.
Yet, the committee recommend that a leading university coordinate a project so that “UFOs be studied intensively.”
In 1966, the House Armed Services Committee held “brief hearings on UFOs that produced similar results” with Harold Brown, Secretary of the Air Force, assuring “the committee that most sightings were easily explained and that there was no evidence that ‘strangers from outer space’ had been visiting Earth.”
Yet, yet again, this nothing to see here assurance was followed up with that “the Air Force would keep an open mind and continue to investigate all UFO reports.”
“The Agency again refused to budge” (and in did not fund) when in 1966 the Air Force “approached” the CIA “for declassification of the entire Robertson panel report of 1953 and the full Durant report on the Robertson panel deliberations and findings.” This followed upon the “O’Brien Committee, the House hearings on UFOs, and Dr. Robertson’s disclosure on a CBS Reports program that CIA indeed had been involved in UFO analysis.”
Note that “One of the agency’s excuses for not releasing the information was it could not cope with printing costs, but when journalist Michael Best started a Kickstarter campaign to raise money to manually print off the documents, the CIA was forced to act.”[fn]Patrick Christys, “The truth IS out there – CIA documents on ALIENS and state-funded MIND CONTROL released,” Jan 18, 2017[/fn]
Karl H. Weber, Deputy Director of OSI, wrote “We are most anxious” that the public not be made aware that “the panel was sponsored by the CIA” and that “there was already a sanitized version available to the public.” The CIA report notes that “Weber’s response was rather shortsighted and ill considered” since it only succeeded in reminding people of the “13-year-old Robertson panel report and CIA’s role in the investigation of UFOs.” Indeed, this led The Saturday Review’s science editor to direct “nationwide attention” both, to the CIA investigating UFOs and the sanitized Robertson report.
Another PR disaster took place when Dr. James E. McDonald, noted atmospheric physicist from the University of Arizona, “publicly claimed that the CIA was behind the Air Force secrecy policies and coverup” and “demanded the release of the full Robertson panel report and the Durant report.”
He “had already seen the Durant report on the Robertson panel proceedings at Wright-Patterson on 6 June 1966. When McDonald returned to Wright-Patterson on 30 June to copy the report, however, the Air Force refused to let him see it again, stating that it was a CIA classified document”—McDonald ended up being viewed as “a UFO authority.”
In 1966, the Air Force once again passed the buck to a university the University of Colorado, “Bowing to public pressure and the recommendation of its own O’Brien Committee” as a means “to blunt continuing charges that the US Government had concealed what it knew about UFOs.
“Brig. Gen. Edward Giller, USAF, and Dr. Thomas Ratchford from the Air Force Research and Development Office became the Air Force coordinators for the project” and “Physicist Dr. Edward U. Condon, headed the program and was “agnostic” regarding the issue but “thought that possible extraterritorial origins were ‘improbable but not impossible.’”
“They wanted the CIA and NPIC to…take no part in writing any conclusions for the committee” and that “NPIC work to assist the committee must not be identified as CIA work.”
In 1967, the Condon Committee met so as to have Arthur C. Lundahl, Director of CIA’s National Photographic Interpretation Center (NPIC), analyze “UFO photographs taken at Zanesville, Ohio…The committee was again impressed with the technical work performed, and Condon remarked that for the first time a scientific analysis of a UFO would stand up to investigation.”
Moreover, “The group also discussed the committee’s plans to call on US citizens for additional photographs and to issue guidelines for taking useful
“CIA officials agreed that the Condon Committee could release the full Durant report with only minor deletions.” In 1969, the Condon Committee released their report on wherein they “concluded that little, if anything, had come from the study of UFOs in the past 21 years and that further extensive study of UFO sightings was unwarranted” and “recommended that the Air Force special unit, Project BLUE BOOK, be discontinued” which it was in 1969.
Then “A special panel established by the National Academy of Sciences reviewed the Condon report and concurred with its conclusion that ‘no high priority in UFO investigations is warranted by data of the past two decades’” concluding that “On the basis of present knowledge, the least likely explanation of UFOs is the hypothesis of extraterrestrial visitations by intelligent beings.”
Being “convinced that the Agency was withholding major files on UFOs,” in 1975, William Spaulding, head of a small UFO group, Ground Saucer Watch
(GSW), contacted the CIA requesting “a copy of the Robertson panel report and all records relating to UFOs.”
The Robertson and Durant reports were provided to him but he questioned their authenticity and again alleged a coverup. Gene Wilson, CIA’s Information and Privacy Coordinator, sought to satisfy Spaulding stating, that “At no time prior to the formation of the Robertson Panel and subsequent to the issuance of the panel’s report has CIA engaged in the study of the UFO phenomena” and “inferred that there were no additional documents in CIA’s possession that related to UFOs.”
Some back and forth led to Wilson filing a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the CIA in 1977 along with the CIA being “Deluged by similar FOIA requests” which led to the CIA conducting a “reasonable search” of its files.
Launie Ziebell, from the Office of General Counsel, “conducted a thorough search…scoured the Agency. They even turned up an old UFO file under a secretary’s desk” resulting in 355 documents/circa 900 pages….On 14 December 1978, the Agency released all but 57 documents of about 100 pages to GSW” with the omissions being based “on national security grounds and to protect sources and methods.”
The CIA report notes that these “produced no smoking gun” but that “the press treated the release in a sensational manner.” Spaulding filed a lawsuit, which was dismissed in 1980, for the release of the withheld docs and the CIA report comments that “No matter how much material the Agency released and no matter how dull and prosaic the information, people continued to believe in a Agency coverup and conspiracy” in part due to Agency coverups and conspiracies.
Don Wortman, Deputy Director for Administration, reported to DCI Stansfield Turner that “no organized Agency effort to do research in connection with UFO phenomena nor has there been an organized effort to collect intelligence on UFOs since the 1950s” but only “sporadic instances of correspondence dealing with the subject” and coordinating with the Air Force, universities, etc.
By the 1970s-1980s the CIA had “low-key interest in UFOs…Agency analysts from the Life Science Division of OSI and OSWR officially devoted a small amount of their time to issues relating to UFOs.” Yet, “some in the Agency and in the Intelligence Community shifted their interest to studying parapsychology and psychic phenomena associated with UFO sightings…CIA also maintained Intelligence Community coordination with other agencies regarding their work in para psychology, psychic phenomena, and ‘remote viewing’ experiments.”
The CIA “also looked at the UFO problem to determine what UFO sightings might tell them about Soviet progress in rockets and missiles” after concluding that UFOs were not the work of Soviets and also after concluding that some were Soviet.
Yet, some of this pertained to “concerns that the Soviets and the KGB were using US citizens and UFO groups to obtain information on sensitive US weapons development programs (such as the Stealth aircraft), the vulnerability of the US air-defense network to penetration by foreign missiles mimicking UFOs, and evidence of Soviet advanced technology associated with UFO sightings.”
“Agency officials purposely kept files on UFOs to a minimum to avoid creating records that might mislead the public if released.” I wonder of keeping files to a minimum means that the reports they investigated were minimal of if they just kept filing to a minimum?
During the 1980s pressure mounted against the CIA regarding the 1947 Roswell, New Mexico incident. The reply was that “In September 1994, the US Air Force released a new report on the Roswell incident that concluded that the debris found in New Mexico in 1947 probably came from a once top secret balloon operation, Project MOGUL, designed to monitor the atmosphere for evidence of Soviet nuclear tests.” You gotta love the precise and definitive nature of “probably.”
Then “Circa 1984, a series of documents surfaced which some UFOlogists said proved that President Truman created a top secret committee in 1947, Majestic-12, to secure the recovery of UFO wreckage from Roswell,” et al. but “Most if not all of these documents have proved to be fabrications.”
The CIA report concludes by stating that this issue will not go away no matter what because it is “too emotionally appealing and the distrust of our government is too pervasive.”
1. See the 1973 Gallup Poll results printed in The New York Times, 29 November 1973, p. 45 and Philip J. Klass, UFOs: The Public Deceived (New York: Prometheus Books, 1983), p. 3.
2. See Klass, UFOs, p. 3; James S. Gordon, “The UFO Experience,” Atlantic
Monthly (August 1991), pp. 82-92; David Michael Jacobs, The UFO Controversy in America (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1975); Howard Blum, Out There: The Government’s Secret Quest for Extraterrestrials (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1990); Timothy Good, Above Top Secret: The Worldwide UFO Cover-Up (New York: William Morrow, 1987); and Whitley Strieber, Communion: The True Story (New York: Morrow, 1987).
3. In September 1993 John Peterson, an acquaintance of Woolsey’s, first approached the DCI with a package of heavily sanitized CIA material on UFOs released to UFOlogist Stanton T. Friedman. Peterson and Friedman wanted to know the reasons for the redactions.
Woolsey agreed to look into the matter. See Richard J. Warshaw, Executive Assistant, note to author, 1 November 1994; Warshaw, note to John H. Wright, Information and Privacy Coordinator, 31 January 1994; and Wright, memorandum to Executive Secretariat, 2 March 1994. (Except where noted, all citations to CIA records in this article are to the records collected for the 1994 Agency-wide search that are held by the Executive Assistant to the DCI).
4. See Hector Quintanilla, Jr., “The Investigation of UFOs,” Vol. 10, No. 4, Studies in Intelligence (fall 1966): pp. 95-110 and CIA, unsigned memorandum, “Flying Saucers,” 14 August 1952. See also Good, Above Top Secret, p. 253.
During World War II, US pilots reported “foo fighters” (bright lights trailing US aircraft). Fearing they might be Japanese or German secret weapons, OSS investigated but could find no concrete evidence of enemy weapons and often filed such reports in the “crackpot” category. The OSS also investigated possible sightings of German V-i and V-2 rockets before their operational use during the war.
See Jacobs, UFO Controversy, p. 33. The Central Intelligence Group, the predecessor of the CIA, also monitored reports of “ghost rockets” in Sweden in 1946. See CIG, Intelligence Report, 9 April 1947.
5. Jacobs, The UFO Controversy, p. 156 and Quintanilla, “The Investigation of UFOs,” p. 97.
6. See US Air Force, Air Material Command, “Unidentified Aerial Objects: Project SIGN, no. F-TR 2274, IA, February 1949, Records of the US Air Force Commands, Activities and Organizations, Record Group 341, National Archives, Washington, DC.
7. See US Air Force, Projects GRUDGE and BLUEBOOK Reports 1-12 (Washington, DC; National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena, 1968) and Jacobs, The UFO Controversy, pp. 50-54.
8. See Cabell, memorandum to Commanding Generals Major Air Commands, “Reporting of Information on Unconventional Aircraft,” 8 September 1950 and Jacobs, The UFO Controversy, p. 65.
9. See Air Force, Projects GRUDGE and BLUE BOOK and Jacobs, The UFO Controversy, p. 67.
10. (S) See Edward Tauss, memorandum for Deputy Assistant Director, SI, “Flying Saucers,” 1 August 1952. See also United Kingdom, Report by the
“Flying Saucer” Working Party, “Unidentified Flying Objects,” no date (approximately 1950).
11. See Dr. Stone, OSI, memorandum to Dr. Willard Machle, OSI, 15 March 1949 and Ralph L. Clark, Acting Assistant Director, OSI, memorandum for DDI, “Recent Sightings 0f Unexplained Objects,” 29 July 1952.
12. Stone, memorandum to Machle. See also Clark, memorandum for DDI, 29 July 1952.
13. See Klass, UFOs, p. 15. For a brief review of the Washington sightings see
Good, Above Top Secret, pp. 269-27 1.
14. See Ralph L. Clark, Acting Assistant Director, OSI, memorandum to DDI
Robert Amory, Jr., 29 July 1952. OSI and OCT were in the Directorate of Intelligence. Established in 1948, OSI served as the CIA’s focal point for the analysis of foreign scientific and technological developments.
In 1980, OSI was merged into the Office of Science and Weapons Research. The Office of Current Intelligence (OCI), established on 15 January 1951 was to provide all-source current intelligence to the President and the National Security Council.
15. Tauss, memorandum for Deputy Assistant Director, SI (Philip Strong), 1 August 1952.
16. On 2 January 1952, DCI Walter Bedell Smith created a Deputy Directorate for Intelligence (DDI) composed of six overt CIA organizations—OSI,
OCI, Office of Collection and Dissemination, Office National Estimates, Office of Research and Reports, and the Office of Intelligence Coordination—to produce intelligence analysis for US policymakers.
17. See Minutes of Branch Chief’s Meeting, 11 August 1952.
18. Smith expressed his opinions at a meeting in the DCI Conference Room attended by his top officers. See Deputy Chief, Requirements Staff, PT, memorandum for Deputy Director, Plans, “Flying Saucers,” 20 August 1952, Directorate of Operations Records, Information Management Staff, Job 86-00538R, Box 1. (S)
19. See CIA memorandum, unsigned, “Flying Saucers,” 11 August 1952.
20. See CIA, memorandum, unsigned, “Flying Saucers,” 14 August 1952.
21. See CIA, memorandum, unsigned, “Flying Saucers,” 19 August 1952.
22. See Chadwell, memorandum for Smith, 17 September 1952 and 24 September 1952, “Flying Saucers.” See also Chadwell, memorandum for
DCI Smith, 2 October 1952 and Klass, UFOs, pp. 23-26.
23. Chadwell, memorandum for DCI with attachments, 2 December 1952. See also Kiass, UFOs, pp. 26-27 and Chadwell, memorandum, 25 November 1952.
24. See Chadwell, memorandum, 25 November 1952 and Chadwell, memorandum, “Approval in Principle – External Research Project Concerned with Unidentified Flying Objects,” no date. See also Philip G. Strong, OSI, memorandum for the record, “Meeting with Dr. Julius A. Stratton, Executive Vice President and Provost, MIT and Dr. Max Millikan, Director of CENTS.” Strong believed that in order to undertake such a review they would need the full backing and support of DCI Smith.
25. See Chadwell, memorandum for DCI,” Unidentified Flying Objects,” 2 December 1952. See also Chadwell, memorandum for Amory, DDI, “Approval in Principle – External Research Project Concerned with Unidentified Flying Objects,” no date.
26. The IAC was created in 1947 to serve as a coordinating body in establishing intelligence requirements. Chaired by the DCI, the IAC included representatives from the Department of State, the Army, the Air Force, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the FBI, and the AEC.
27. See Kiass, UFOs, p. 27.
28. See Richard D. Drain, Acting Secretary, JAC, “Minutes of Meeting held in Director’s Conference Room, Administration Building, CIA,” 4 December 1952.
29. (S) See Chadwell, memorandum for the record, “British Activity in the Field of UFOs,” 18 December 1952.
30. See Chadwell, memorandum for DCI, “Consultants for Advisory Panel on Unidentified Flying Objects,” 9 January 1953; Curtis Peebles, Watch the Skies! A Chronicle of the Flying Saucer Myth (Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1994), pp. 73-90; and Jacobs, The UFO Controversy, pp. 91-92.
31. See Fred C. Durant III, Report on the Robertson Panel Meeting, January
1953. Durant, on contract with OSI and a past president of the American Rocket Society, attended the Robert son panel meetings and wrote a summary of the proceedings.
32. See Report of the Scientific Panel on Unidentified Flying Objects (the Robertson Report), 17 January 1953 and the Durant report on the panel discussions.
33. See Robertson Report and Durant Report. See also Good, Above Top Secret, pp. 337-38, Jacobs, The UFO Controversy, p. 95, and Klass, UFO’s, pp. 28-29.
34. See Rebet, memorandum to IAC, 18 February 1953.
35. See Chadwell, memorandum for DDI, “Unidentified Flying Objects,” 10 February 1953; Chadwell, letter to Robertson, 28 January 1953; and Reber, memorandum for JAG, “Unidentified Flying Objects,” 18 February 1953. On briefing the ONE, see Durant, memorandum for the record, “Briefing of ONE Board on Unidentified Flying Objects,” 30 January 1953 and CIA Summary disseminated to the field, “Unidentified Flying Objects,” 6 February 1953.
36. See Chadwell, letter to Julius A. Stratton, Provost MIT, 27 January 1953.
37. See Chadwell, memorandum for Chief, Physics and Electronics Division/OSI (Todos M. Odarenko), “Unidentified Flying Objects,” 27 May 1953.
38. See Odarenko, memorandum to Chadwell, “Unidentified Flying Objects,” 3 July 1953. See also Odarenko, memorandum to Chadwell, “Current Status of Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOB) Project,” 17 December 1953.
39. See Odarenko, memorandum, “Unidentified Flying Objects,” 8 August
40. See FBIS, report, “Military Unconventional Aircraft,” 18 August 1953 and various reports, “Military-Air, Unconventional Aircraft,” 1953, 1954, 1955.
41. Developed by the Canadian affiliate of Britain’s A. V. Roe, Ltd., Project Y did produce a small-scale model that hovered a few feet off the ground. See Odarenko, memorandum to Chad we!!, “Flying Saucer Type of Planes” 25 May 1954; Frederic C. E. Oder, memorandum to Odarenko, “USAF Project Y,” 21 May 1954; and Odarenko, T. M. Nordbeck, Ops/SI, and Sidney Graybeal, ASD/SI, memo randum for the record, “Intelligence Responsibilities for Non-Conventional Types of Air Vehicles,” 14 June 1954.
42. See Reuben Efron, memorandum, “Observation of Flying Object Near
Baku,” 13 October 1955; Scoville, memorandum for the record, “Interview with Senator Richard B. Russell,” 27 October 1955; and Wilton E. Lexow, memorandum for information, “Reported Sighting of Unconventional Aircraft,” 19 October 1955.
43. See Lexow, memorandum for information, “Reported Sighting of Unconventional Aircraft,” 19 October 1955. See also Frank C. Bolser, memorandum for George C. Miller, Deputy Chief, SAD/SI, “Possible Soviet Flying Saucers, Check On;” Lexow, memorandum, “Possible Soviet Flying Saucers, Follow Up On,” 17 December 1954; Lexow, memorandum, “Possible Soviet Flying Saucers,” 1 December 1954; and A. H. Sullivan, Jr., memorandum, “Possible Soviet Flying Saucers,” 24 November 1954.
44. See Gregory W. Pedlow and Donald E. Welzenbach, The Central Intelligence Agency and Overhead Reconnaissance. The U-2 and OXCART Programs, 1954-1974 (Washington, DC: CIA History Staff, 1992), pp. 72-73.
45. See Pedlow and Welzenbach, Overhead Reconnaissance, pp. 72-73. This also was confirmed in a telephone interview between the author and John Parongosky, 26 July 1994. Parongosky oversaw the day-to-day affairs of the OXCART program.
46. See Jacobs, The UFO Controversy, p. 135.
47. See Peebles, Watch the Skies, pp. 128-146; Ruppelt, The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects (New York: Doubleday, 1956); Keyhoe, The Flying Saucer Conspiracy (New York:
Holt, 1955); and Jacobs, The UFO Controversy, pp. 347-49.
48. See Strong, letter to Lloyd W. Berkner; Strong, letter to Thorton Page; Strong, letter to Robertson; Strong, letter to Samuel Goudsmit; Strong, letter to
Luis Alvarez, 20 December 1957; and Strong, memorandum for Major James
F. Byrne, Assistant Chief of Staff, Intelligence Department of the Air Force, “Declassification of the ‘Report of the Scientific Panel on Unidentified Flying Objects,” 20 December 1957.
See also Berkner, letter to Strong, 20 November 1957 and Page, letter to Strong, 4 December 1957. The panel members were also reluctant to have their association with the Agency released.
49. See Wilton E. Lexow, memorandum for the record, “Comments on Letters Dealing with Unidentified Flying Objects,” 4 April 1958; J. S. Earman, letter to Major Lawrence J. Tacker, Office of the Secretary of the Air Force, Information Service, 4 April 1958; Davidson, letter to Berkner, 8 April 1958; Berkner, letter to David son, 18 April 1958; Berkner, letter to Strong, 21 April 1958; Davidson, letter to Tacker, 27 April 1958; Davidson, letter to Allen Dulles, 27 April 1958; Ruppelt, letter to David son, 7 May 1958; Strong, letter to Berkner, 8 May 1958; Davidson, letter to Berkner, 8 May 1958; Davidson, letter to Earman, 16 May 1958; Davidson, letter to Goudsmit, 18 May 1958; Davidson, letter to Page, 18 May 1958; and Tacker, letter to Davidson, 20 May 1958.
50. See Lexow, memorandum for Chapin, 28 July 1958.
51. See Good, Above Top Secret, pp. 346-47; Lexow, memorandum for the record, “Meeting with the Air Force Personnel Concerning Scientific Advisory Panel Report on Unidentified Flying Objects, dated 17 January 1953 (S),” 16 May 1958. See also La Rae L. Tee!, Deputy Division Chief, ASD, memorandum for the record, “Meeting with Mr. Chapin on Replying to Leon Davidson’s UFO Letter and Subsequent Telephone Conversation with Major Thacker, [sic]” 22
52. See Edwin M. Ashcraft, Chief, Contact Division (Scientific), memorandum to Chief, Chicago Office, “Radio Code Recording,” 4 March 1955 and Ashcraft, memorandum to Chief, Support Branch, OSI, 17 March 1955.
53. The Contact Division was created to collect foreign intelligence information from sources within the United States. See the Directorate of Intelligence Historical Series, The Origin and Development of Contact Division, 11 July 1946—i July 1965 (Washing ton, DC; CIA Historical Staff, June 1969).
54. See George 0. Forrest, Chief, Chicago Office, memorandum to Chief, Contact Division for Science, 11 March 1955.
55. See Support Division (Connell), memorandum to Dewelt E. Walker, 25 April 1957.
56. See J. Arnold Shaw, Assistant to the Director, letter to Davidson, 10 May 1957.
57. See Support (Connell) memorandum to Lt. Col. V. Skakich, 27 August 1957 and Lamountain, memorandum to Support (Connell), 20 December 1957.
58. See Lamounrain, cable to Support (Connell), 31 July 1958.
59. See Support (Connell) cable to Skakich, 3 October 1957 and Skakich, cable to Connell, 9 October 1957.
60. See Skakich, cable to Connell, 9 October 1957.
61. See R. P. B. Lohmann, memorandum for Chief, Contact Division, DO, 9 January 1958.
62. See Support, cable to Skakich, 20 February 1958 and Connell (Support) cable to Lamountain, 19 December 1957.
63. See Edwin M. Ashcraft, Chief, Contact Division, Office of Operations, memorandum for Austin Bricker, Jr., Assistant to the Director, “Inquiry by Major Donald E. Keyhoe on John Hazen’s Association with the Agency,” 22 January 1959.
64. See John T. Hazen, memorandum to Chief, Contact Division, 12 December 1957. See also Ashcraft, memorandum to Cleveland Resident Agent, “Ralph E. Mayher,” 20 December 1957. According to this memorandum, the photographs were viewed at “a high level and returned to us without comment.” The Air Force held the original negatives. The CIA records were probably destroyed.
65. The issue would resurface in the 1970s with the GSW FOJA court case. See also F. J. Sheridan, Chief, Washington Office, memorandum to Chief, Contact Division, “National Investigation Committee on Aerial Phenomena (NICAP),” 25 January 1965.
69. Chamberlain, memorandum for DCI, “Evaluation of UFOs,” 26 January
70. See Jacobs, The UFO Controversy, p. 199 and US Air Force, Scientific Advisory Board, Ad Hoc Committee (O’Brien Committee) to Review Project BLUE BOOK, Special Report (Washington, DC: 1966). See also The New York Times, 14 August 1966, p. 70.
71. See “Congress Reassured on Space Visits,” The New York Times, 6 April 1966.
72. Weber, letter to Col, Gerald E. Jorgensen, Chief, Community Relations
Division, Office of Information, US Air Force, 15 August 1966. The Durant report was a detailed summary of the Robertson panel proceedings.
73. See John Lear, “The Disputed CIA Document on UFOs,” Saturday Review (September 3, 1966), p. 45. The Lear article was otherwise unsympathetic to UFO sightings and the possibility that extraterritorial were involved. The Air Force had been eager to provide Lear with the full report.
See Walter L. Mackey, Executive Officer, memorandum for DCI, “Air Force Request to Declassify CIA Material on Unidentified Flying Objects (UFO),” 1 September 1966.
74. See Klass, UFOs, p. 40, Jacobs, The UFO Controversy, p. 214 and Everer Clark, “Physicist Scores ‘Saucer Status,” The New York Times, 21 October 1966. See also James E. McDonald, “Statement on Unidentified Flying Objects,” submitted to the House Committee on Science and Astronautics, 29 July 1968.
75. Condon is quoted in Walter Sullivan, “3 Aides Selected in Saucer Inquiry,” The New York Times, 8 October 1966. See also “An Outspoken Scientist, Edward Uhler Condon,” The New York Times, 8 October 1966. Condon, an outgoing, gruff scientist, had earlier become embroiled in a controversy with the House Unamerican Activities Committee that claimed Condon was “one of the weakest links in our atomic security.” See also Peebles, Watch the Skies, pp. 169-195.
76. See Lundahl, memorandum for DDI, 7 February 1967.
77. See memorandum for the record, “Visit of Dr. Condon to NPIC, 20 February 1967,” 23 February 1967. See also the analysis of the photographs in memorandum for Lundahi, “Photo Analysis of UFO Photography,” 17 February 1967.
78. See memorandum for the record, “UFO Briefing for Dr. Edward Condon, 5 May 1967,” 8 May 1967 and attached “Guidelines to UFO Photographers and UFO Photographic Information Sheet.” See also Condon Committee, Press Release, 1 May 1967 and Klass, UFOs, p. 41. The Zaneville photographs turned out to be a hoax.
79. See Edward U. Condon, Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying Objects (New York: Bantam Books, 1969) and Klass, UFOs, p. 41. The report contained the Durant report with only minor deletions.
80. See Office of Assistant Secretary of Defense, News Release, “Air Force to Terminate Project BLUEBOOK,” 17 December 1969. The Air Force retired BLUEBOOK records to the USAF Archives at Maxwell Air Force Base in Alabama.
In 1976 the Air Force turned over all BLUEBOOK files to the National Archives and Records Administration, which made them available to the public without major restrictions. Some names have been withheld from the documents. See Kiass, UFOs, p. 6.
81. GSW was a small group of UFO buffs based in Phoenix, Arizona, and headed by William H. Spaulding.
82. See Klass, UFOs, p. 8.
83. See Wilson, letter to Spaulding, 26 March 1976 and GSWv. CIA Civil
Action Case 78-859.
84. GSW v. CIA Civil Action Case 78-859, p. 2.
85. Author [Gerald K. Haines] interview with Launie Ziebell, 23 June 1994 and author interview with OSI analyst, 21 July 1994. See also affidavits of George Owens, CIA Information and Privacy Act Coordinator; Karl H. Weber, OSI; Sidney D. Stembridge, Office of Security; and Rutledge P. Hazzard, DS&T; GSW CIA Civil Action Case 78-859 and Sayre Stevens, Deputy Director for
National Foreign Assessment, memorandum for Thomas H. White, Assistant for Information, Information Review Committee, “FOIA Litigation Ground Saucer Watch,” no date.
86. See “CIA Papers Detail UFO Surveillance,” The New York Times, 13 January 1979; Patrick Huyghe, “UFO Files: The Untold Story,” The New York Times Magazine, 14 October 1979, p. 106; and Jerome Clark, “UFO Update,” UFO Report, August 1979.
87. Jerome Clark, “Latest UFO News Briefs From Around the World,” UFO Update, August 1979 and GSW v. CIA Civil Action No. 78-859.
88. See Wortman, memorandum for DCI Turner, “Your Question, ‘Are we in
UFOs?’ Annotated to The New York Times News Release Article,” 18 January 1979.
89. See GSW v. CIA Civil Action 78-859. See also Klass, UFOs, pp. 10-12.
90. (S) See John Brennan, memorandum for Richard Warshaw, Executive Assistant, DCI, “Requested Information on UFOs,” 30 September 1993; Author interviews with OSWR analyst, 14 June 1994 and OSI analyst, 21 July 1994. This author found almost no documentation on Agency involvement with UFOs in the 1980s.
There is a DIA Psychic Center and the NSA studies parapsychology, that branch of psychology that deals with the investigation of such psychic phenomena as clairvoyance, extrasensory perception, and telepathy. The CIA reportedly is also a member of an Incident Response Team to investigate UFO landings, if one should occur. This team has never met. The lack of solid CIA documentation on Agency UFO-related activities in the 1980s leaves the entire issue somewhat murky for this period. Much of the UFO literature presently focuses on contactees and abductees.
See John E. Mack, Abduction, Human Encounters with Aliens (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1994) and
Howard Blum, Out There (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1990).
91. See Charles Berlitz and William L. Moore, The Roswell Incident (New York: Berkeley Books, 1988); Moore, “The Roswell Incident: New Evidence in the Search for a Crashed UFO,” (Burbank, California: Fair Witness Project, 1982), Publication Number 1201; and Kiass, UFOs, pp. 280-28 1.
In 1994 Congressman Steven H. Schiff (R-NM) called for an official study of the Roswell incident. The GAO is conducting a separate investigation of the incident. The CIA is not involved in the investigation. See Kiass, UFOs, pp. 279-28 1; John H. Wright, Information and Privacy Coordinator, letter to Derek Skreen, 20 September 1993; and OSWR analyst Interview. See also the made-for-TV film, Roswell, which appeared on cable TV on 31 July 1994 and Peebles, Watch the Skies, pp. 245-251.
92. See John Diamond, “Air Force Probes 1947 UFO Claim Findings Are Down to Earth,” 9 September 1994, Associated Press release; William J. Broad, “Wreckage of a ‘Spaceship’: Of This Earth (and U.S.),” The New York Times, 18 September 1994, p. 1; and USAF Col. Richard L. Weaver and 1st Lt. James McAndrew, The Roswell Report, Fact Versus Fiction in New Mexico Desert (Washington, DC: GPO, 1995).
93. See Good, Above Top Secret; Moore and 5. 1. Friedman, “Philip Klass and MJ-12: What are the Facts,” (Bur bank California: Fair-Witness Project, 1988), Publication Number 1290; Klass, “New Evidence of MJ-12 Hoax,” Skeptical Inquirer, vol. 14 (Winter 1990); and Moore and Jaime H. Shandera, The MJ-12 Documents: An Analytical Report (Burbank, California: Fair-Witness Project, 1990), Publication Number 1500. Walter Bedell Smith supposedly replaced Forrestal on 1 August 1950 following Forrestal’s death. All members listed were deceased when the MJ-12 “documents” surfaced in 1984.
See Peebles, Watch the Skies, pp. 25 8-268. Dr. Larry Bland, editor of The George C. Marshall Papers, discovered that one of the so-called Majestic-12 documents was a complete fraud. It contained the exact same language as a letter from Marshall to Presidential candidate Thomas Dewey regarding the “Magic” intercepts in 1944.
The dates and names had been altered and “Magic” changed to “Majic.” Moreover, it was a photocopy, not an original. No original MJ-12 documents have ever surfaced. Telephone conversation between the author and Bland, 29 August 1994.
A plea: I have to pay for server usage and have made all content on this website free and always will. I support my family on one income and do research, writing, videos, etc. as a hobby. If you can even spare $1.00 as a donation, please do so: it may not seem like much but if each person reading this would do so, even every now and then, it would add up and really, really help. Here is my donate/paypal page.